cuz analyzing those whose profession it is to analyze is fun!

i really like marc savlov. hilarious. look up his pokemon 4ever review, or just search his low scorers.
i also tend to be most in sync with his perspective, but that's not a criteria for critical appreciation...
...as honorable mention goes to ebert, with whom i disagree a large part of the time, and yet respect.
christian science monitor is pretty hot too. idk if they have a single resident film critic, but they seem to be pretty objective.

bump

Peter Travers has always been favorite, but I really do enjoy Joe Morgenstern's (spelling?) reviews. Ebert is also an excellent critic. Another honorable mention to any of the Philadelphia Inquierer (spelling?) critics.

Mike D'Angelo, hands down.

He used to write for Tim Out New York, then did some stuff for Variety, and now I think he writes for verve.

Anyways, the guy knows his stuff, writes VERY intelligently without being pretentious, and injects a lot of humor into his stuff. He's great.

I also like Manohla Dargis a lot as well and have followed her criticism from the LA Weekly to the LA Times and now to the NY Times. I don't always agree with her (she panned Dogville and loved Elephant), but as is the case with Mr. D'Angelo, she writes intelligently and has a nice writing style.

I should also include J. Hoberman and Amy Taubin. Exceptional writers, those two.

Might be cliche but I still love Pauline Kael. J Hoberman is excellent. Rosenbaum, too. I occasionally read Duncan Shepherd, too, although he can get on my nerves.

Peter Travers of Rolling Stone magazine is my go-to guy when it comes to movie reviews. I read a lot of others, but he's my favorite movie critic.

I love Peter Travers too. He's being black sarcastic when he comes across something he don't like, still, I like him especially on this piece about Stop-Loss:

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/movie/17357964/review/19580698/stoploss