Reply
Thu 4 Apr, 2013 02:53 pm
He was 70.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/04/showbiz/roger-ebert-obituary/index.html
Here is an excerpt from his
review of the 1994 film,
North -
Roger Ebert wrote:I hated this movie. Hated hated hated hated hated this movie. Hated it. Hated every simpering stupid vacant audience-insulting moment of it. Hated the sensibility that thought anyone would like it. Hated the implied insult to the audience by its belief that anyone would be entertained by it.
@jespah,
I loved when Siskel and Ebert disagreed and when one would state that they must have seen two different movies and the other would almost start a fistfight.
This was quick. I'd just read that he had found he had cancer again, and he had a lot of plans for stuff to get done.
Care from here, to Roger's family.
@jespah,
I have to say watching his reviews both as a solo and with Siskel was like visiting old friends (that I wish I had). I'm going to miss him. Rest in peace and the balcony is closed.
@jespah,
RIP Roger
this was one of my favourite interviews with Roger Ebert
25 minutes with Jian Ghomeshi on Q in 2011
http://www.cbc.ca/q/blog/2011/09/20/roger-ebert-on-q/
As a Chicagoan, I have been reading Roger Ebert's movie reviews since 1967. Over the years, I saw him in person a few times. He was always a great writer and had great observation. He began writing for the Chicago Sun-Times at age 22 doing general news items. When their movie critic suddenly decided to quit, the Sun-Times asked Ebert to cover that duty. Even his early reviews were remarkable. Warner Brothers had decided to dump Bonnie and Clyde into drive-in movie theaters because it got bad reviews in New York City. Ebert was the first to praise the film and soon other critics decided to give Bonnie and Clyde a second look. Warren Beatty personally thanked Ebert for saving the film.
Very early in his career as a movie critic, Ebert was asked by somebody what made him such an expert. Ebert simply answered that five years of writing movie reviews made him an expert.
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
I loved when Siskel and Ebert disagreed and when one would state that they must have seen two different movies and the other would almost start a fistfight.
Now that was quality entertainment!
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:This was quick. I'd just read that he had found he had cancer again, and he had a lot of plans for stuff to get done.
Same here. I had just read about the recurrence of his cancer, but it sounded like he had plans. I wonder if his sudden passing was as much a surprise to him and his family as it was to us. Anyway, sorry to hear of his passing. Siskel and Ebert was one of the first review shows I ever watched.
My Roger Ebert story:
I was going through the reviews on his site when I came across his review of Casablanca (four stars, of course). In the review, he said there was some question about one of the lines delivered by Peter Lorre ("did he say General de Gaulle or General Weygand?"). I fired off a quick e-mail to the site, saying it was obviously "Weygand." Thinking that the e-mail might be read, if at all, by some staffer, I didn't give it much thought, but several hours later I got a reply e-mail from Roger Ebert himself, saying, in effect, "yeah, I kinda' figured that." Totally unexpected, but totally cool. He was, up to the end, a movie fan's movie critic who never lost the sense of wonder of that young kid sitting in a movie theater in Urbana, Illinois. He will be greatly missed.
One of my favorite critics. He appreciated all movies and not just the ones he was supposed to like.
I loved Siskel and Ebert.
I read Ebert's movie reviews on Rotten Tomatoes--I read one just yesterday about "Hope Springs" after I watched it on cable. His thoughtful appraisals never failed to increase my appreciation for all the things I missed in an actor's performance, or the director's technique, or by not knowing some background about the film.
He fought a brave hard fight, and I am so glad that the internet provided him with a continuing written platform after he could no longer speak--he said it allowed him to feel normal and like himself again.
He will be missed.
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
He appreciated all movies and not just the ones he was supposed to like.
Not quite. He took
Napoleon Dynamite so personally. It's a movie that one either likes or hates outright, and he was definitely in the latter group.
@InfraBlue,
Well, I didn't mean to suggest he liked all movies.
i grew up in Rockford which is now considered a suburb of chicago though in my time we would punch people who said that, so I used to watch Siskel and Ebert long before they became stars(on Chicago PBS as I recall) . I loved the way they argued, they sounded just like my family members, two guys who acted like they wanted to punch each other but who clearly loved and respected each other. but it was Ebert who I usually agreed with...right up to the end I would often check what he thought of movie and if he did not like it I probably would not go. the last one was SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK, which he gave 3.5 stars. I of course loved it.