Web Site Teen Film Critic Calls It Quits

Roger Davidson, the 18-year-old self-titled Teen Movie Critic who built a loyal following of fans and movie buffs on his 2-year-old Web site, came to the end of the line when he announced he would be taking an indefinite break from reviewing starting Monday.

For the Minneapolis-based Davidson, the announcement marked the end of a remarkable rise, and then unfortunate stumble, in the world of online movie criticism--a stumble that involved two of the most prominent film critics in the country, Roger Ebert and Leonard Maltin.

Since Davidson’s Teen Movie Critic film review Web site (https://www.dreamagic.com/roger/teencritic.html) went up in April 1995, when Davidson was 16, his readership had grown to about 2,500 a day. People magazine and USA Today, among other publications, profiled the precocious movie reviewer. Davidson even debated the merits of the film “Clueless” on a Minneapolis radio show with his idol Ebert.

Hollywood took notice, too. Teen actress Christina Ricci e-mailed him to complain about his review of “Casper.” When Davidson, then a high school junior, visited Los Angeles film schools, he hung out with filmmaker John Singleton.

But earlier this year, Davidson received more attention than he had bargained for. In February, Internet user Kevin Reuben posted a message on a few movie-related Internet newsgroups details of similarities he had found between reviews by Davidson and Maltin.

For example, in his review of Ridley Scott’s 1992 film, “1492: Conquest of Paradise,” Maltin says, “Might have been better had the action aped director Scott’s ‘Thelma & Louise’ by having Columbus and crew sail off the edge of the world.” Davidson’s review: “This might have been more interesting if Ridley Scott, the director, had made the ending like ‘Thelma & Louise’ by making the Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria sail off the edge of the world.”

A copy of Reuben’s message found its way into Ebert’s e-mail box. Ebert says that a concerned Internet user e-mailed him because the site had been quoting him as a “supporter” of Davidson. What Ebert did next is something the Pulitzer Prize-winning critic still regrets. He got involved.

“I guess I was trying to be helpful and it just led to an enormous controversy that is probably a great disservice to Roger Davidson,” Ebert says. “I’m sure that it looks like some big-shot movie critic is making it tough on the poor teenager and that wasn’t my intention at all.”

After receiving a copy of the incriminating posting and subsequently finding more instances of Davidson’s apparently plagiarizing Maltin, Ebert messaged Davidson asking to take his quotes off Davidson’s Web site, and suggesting that Davidson close the site.

That message sparked a string of 11 contentious e-mails between Davidson’s father, Willy Chaplin (Davidson uses the surname of his maternal grandfather), and Ebert. Chaplin saw Ebert as picking on his son and telling him to quit writing forever. Ebert says he didn’t mean that Davidson should quit entirely, but that the teenager should take down the site for a few days, remove the old reviews containing plagiarism and start up again with new, original reviews.

“I thought it was totally unwarranted interference,” says Chaplin, a computer programmer.

Davidson then found himself the topic of a two-month Internet debate and had to fight off an attempt by a nameless foe on the Net to pressure his Web site’s sponsors (including the Southern Oregon Visitors Assn. and Telemania.com) to withdraw their support of the site.

In early March, Chaplin and Davidson posted a Web site apology that was taken offline a couple of weeks ago, which explained how and why Davidson plagiarized and stated that all of the lines plagiarized from Maltin had been changed. “Basically I figured that the best way to get through this was to be honest about the whole thing,” Davidson says.

Chaplin says his son plagiarized Maltin inadvertently. As Davidson’s editor, Chaplin says that he had not taught Davidson the difference between fact and opinion. And thus, when fact-checking his reviews against Maltin’s, Maltin’s opinions would often get into Davidson’s reviews.

Chaplin also used his portion of the online apology to say some not-so-kind words regarding Ebert’s e-mails--words that Ebert says forced him to ask Chaplin to make public online their entire correspondence (which he did), allowing readers to judge the controversy for themselves.

For his part, Maltin says he came aboard the controversy a bit late, having heard about the plagiarism through a third party.

“I have no rancor toward the teen critic,” says Maltin, who rarely surfs the Net and has never seen Davidson’s site (although he has seen the e-mail correspondence between Chaplin and Ebert, as well as the original newsgroup posting accusing Davidson of plagiarism). “I accept the apology, but I’m not sure I accept the explanation.”

Although Davidson has stopped writing new reviews (he says he may resume someday), the site will remain up, publishing his previous reviews and articles about him and awards he’s won. Davidson says he had originally planned to stop reviewing films in February, when he turned 18 but since the plagiarism news broke that month, he and his father decided it would reflect badly on him if he stopped at that time.

Davidson says he’s now taking his current break because over time he has grown less interested in writing reviews.

Davidson, who was home-schooled, says he hasn’t decided whether to attend college, and currently works as a cashier at a Minneapolis grocery store.