Roger Ebert dies at 70 after battle with cancer

[Buckeye86]

I think Ebert truly enjoying movies and not prejudging or looking down on certain ones simply because that is what critics are supposed to do is perfectly encapsulated by him giving a good review to Hot Tub Time Machine (which is a highly entertaining movie, for the record).

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100324/REVIEWS/100329993

 

[Muck]

I think Ebert truly enjoying movies and not prejudging or looking down on certain ones simply because that is what critics are supposed to do is perfectly encapsulated by him giving a good review to Hot Tub Time Machine (which is a highly entertaining movie, for the record).

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100324/REVIEWS/100329993

"Chevy fixes the tub, and it starts to bubble with an inner glow, like beer on simmer."

Pure poetry.

"Hot Tub Time Machine," which wants nothing more than to be a screwball farce, succeeds beyond any expectations suggested by the title and extends John Cusack's remarkable run: Since 1983, in 55 films, he's hardly ever made a bad one. Well, I never saw "Grandview, USA."

Spoken for truth.

 

[RB07OSU]

I always read his reviews, I didn't always agree with his opinions but I loved his writing style

I tended to agree with Ebert a ton but his writing style was on another stratosphere. I aspired my writing to one day be even mentioned in the same breath...man was truly a visionary and will be missed.

 

[Dryden]

Can never forget the classic Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo review.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050811/REVIEWS/50725001

"Schneider is correct, and Patrick Goldstein has not yet won a Pulitzer Prize. Therefore, Goldstein is not qualified to complain that Columbia financed "Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo" while passing on the opportunity to participate in "Million Dollar Baby," "Ray," "The Aviator," "Sideways" and "Finding Neverland." As chance would have it, I have won the Pulitzer Prize, and so I am qualified. Speaking in my official capacity as a Pulitzer Prize winner, Mr. Schneider, your movie sucks."

 

[Bucklion]

I always read his reviews, I didn't always agree with his opinions but I loved his writing style

This, but I also agreed with him more than I ever thought I would. His ability to look at a movie that might not be his taste, but is still well made, is what made him a reader's critic, and not the useless pretentious cocktail party haughty bullshit critic that many are. I was initially shocked when I saw that movies that I love like Santa Sangre got 4 stars from him. The more I read, though, the more it made sense. I can probably count the huge disagreements I had with him (Gladiator, Clockwork Orange) on one hand. RIP.

 

[BayBuck]

A great line:

In a wonderful mutual interview Ebert and Siskel did for the Chicago Tribune in 1998, Ebert responds to Siskel's criticism that he tends to go too easy on "cheap exploitative schlock" like The Players Club with this telling reply: "I also have the greatest respect for you, Gene, but if you have a flaw, it is that you are parsimonious with your enjoyment, parceling it out as if you are afraid you will prematurely expend your lifetime share." Joy -- in movies, in conversation, in language, in life -- was not something that Roger Ebert meted out parsimoniously. He had more than enough to last a lifetime, and now that he's gone, he's left so much behind.

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/...stevens_on_the_great_chicago_film_critic.html

 

[Muck]

My first thought was to wonder who will be the first to draw a comic strip of Gene in a theater sitting next to open aisle seat saying to a standing Roger ... "I've been saving it for you".

 

[Muck]

My Roger Ebert Story

The first time I was ever published in a book was 1997. It was because I'd found Roger Ebert's email and asked him a question.

You can find the link right here, from Ebert's book Questions for the Movie Answer Man. Here's the question:

This was not the first question I had asked Ebert. (Considering the royal "we" construction I would use during my days as editor of Deadspin, it has a certain historical irony.) Ebert was an alum of the University of Illinois, and he was the reason I was there. He grew up in Urbana, just 45 miles up the road from Mattoon, my hometown, and as a high school sophomore slowly realizing he enjoyed plunking away on his typewriter far more than any job his sleepy town would have to offer, I found Ebert to be an inspiration. Thanks to the Esquire story about him that has moved millions, and of course his prolific and hypnotic Twitter feed, Ebert is now a national icon. (This will be cemented with his appearance on Oprah tomorrow, the closest our culture comes to knighting anyone anymore.) But to me, Ebert was glimpse of a better life: He was proof there was a ticket out. I went to study journalism at the University of Illinois, simply, because I wanted to be Roger Ebert. He was a Central Illinois kid, from the middle of nowhere, who was known worldwide simply because of his writing and work ethic.
.../cont/...

 

[Steve19]

An object lesson on the Golden Rule. Gratitude denied is a cancer that rots one's soul.

 

[ScriptOhio]

I really liked their PBS show that ran back in the late 70s/early 80s. Both were "movie critics" who worked for rival newspapers in Chicago. I remember that on one show they said it was "Siskel & Ebert" in lieu of "Eibert & Siskel" since Siskel won the coin toss. As part of their review for each movie each guy would give it either a "thumbs up" or a "thumbs down".