Skip to comments.Movie critic Roger Ebert dies
Posted on 04/04/2013 3:01:13 PM PDT by libstripper
CHICAGO (AP) Roger Ebert, the most famous and most popular film reviewer of his time who also became the first journalist to win a Pulitzer Prize for movie criticism, and on his long-running TV program, wielded the nation's most influential thumb, died Thursday. He was 70.
Ebert, who had been a film critic for the Chicago Sun-Times since 1967, died early Thursday afternoon at the Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago, his office said. He had announced on his blog Wednesday that he was undergoing radiation treatment after a recurrence of cancer.
(Excerpt) Read more at movies.msn.com ...
He was the last of his type. No media critic of any kind will ever have that kind of influence.
A great film critic.
An irritating lib in all other matters, yes.
But a great critic.
Did he die again?
Think of it as a sequel.
He outlived Siskel by 14 years, despite by born 4 years earlier. He had a good run...
I agree, Ebert was a first rate writer when he stuck to his subject, the movies. When he wandered to other topics, he was usually just wrong, and sometimes obnoxiously so. But he showed great fortitude in enduring his awful cancer. RIP.
I must disagree, this guy would give away plot twists and once gave away a movie ending and that’s when I stopped watching.
I preferred Ebert's TV show. I enjoyed the clips back in the days when that was the only place you could find them.
I searched on the article’s title and didn’t find it.
In 1998, Siskel underwent surgery for a cancerous brain tumor he died three years later
****** Both were very good for that era when Hollywood culture and films fit into my life but now Hollywood is formulaic and alien leftists to me
Condolences to family and friends of Roger Ebert
The book was released 2011. Maybe he found this out really late...and, unlike some critics, at least didn’t automatically dump on a film to make himself feel better.
The Chicago Sun-Times published a tribute that ended with a fitting quote from his memoir “Life Itself: A Memoir”: “’Kindness’ covers all of my political beliefs. No need to spell them out. I believe that if, at the end, according to our abilities, we have done something to make others a little happier, and something to make ourselves a little happier, that is about the best we can do. To make others less happy is a crime. To make ourselves unhappy is where all crime starts. We must try to contribute joy to the world. That is true no matter what our problems, our health, our circumstances. We must try. I didn’t always know this and am happy I lived long enough to find it out.”
Certainly his was always the first review I would seek out.
And he introduced me to Miyazaki for which I'll always be grateful.
Siskel was better and Ebert was one of the more obnoxious and uninformed celebrity liberals.
And just think, as soon a a dozen or so articles show up and push this one off the first page, there will be another article just like this one!
Even though he has died, years from now you will be able to check active voter roles in Chicago and there he will be, Roger Ebert, Democrat.
Agree, Siskel was better when it came to reviewing films — but re his politics: I lost all respect for Ebert when he began trashing Palin, calling her a liar, claiming someone else wrote her blogs and tweets, AND calling FOR the WTC mosque to be built. Celebrity liberal is a pretty good title for him. But oh yeah, RIP.............
I guess ole Roger isn’t mocking all those Catholic altar boys (as he used to be, himself) now.
May God have mercy on his soul. Anyway.
That just goes to show you, Ebert is a soulless liberal. He died but an evil spirt, who directed him, lived on. But today, it needs to move on to possess a different Hollywierdo as the vessel it occupied known as Ebert, has truly died? /s/
You needed only to search for “Ebert.”
You know you’re right? I really don’t think Perez Hilton will measure up! :)
I cannot judge his soul, I could not stand the man.
That's debatable. Both he and Siskel loved those pathetically boring, Euro-"art" flicks. I don't know if they ever quite understood that first a movie has to be entertaining rather than simply arty. I specifically remember them raving about this French pseudo-arty bore-fest "Diva." After I saw that, under their recommendation, I never took them seriously again.
Being that he was reviewing 150 films a year and seeing 300. You are of course wrong. He reviewed all films from highbrow to lowbrow. You may dislike the mans politics but lets not lie about him.
Mr. Bert was a great writer who never talked down to his audience. He liked many types of movies never sitting on the elite aisle in Hollywood.
I am a fan of his, true, but tell the whole story.
I am telling the story pal...I didn’t agree with many of his picks and not just that movie. If you liked him...fine..I don’t care. But I seemed to like Siskel’s picks a lot more than Ebert’s.
Definitely not your Pal. It is fine, you are entitled to your opinion, just want to make sure you are not inventing facts to support your conclusion.
He was also the first of his type: the nationally influential movie critic. A lot reviewers want to be the journalistic heir to Roger Ebert. None of theme are anywhere in his league. Roger knew a lot, saw a lot, and could write well.
So I’m sorry to see him go, but not particularly sad. I remember his outrage back in 2008 over seeing pictures of Obama dressed as a Nazi and swore no liberal had possibly stooped so low over Bush. Posters to his blog made sure he got an education on how low liberals could go before one day had passed.
The balcony is closed.
He was never averse to admitting he was wrong. He was a big Mark Steyn fan.
I never knew that. When/where did he say it?
Thanks for the tip! I missed that one...
Poor bastard couldn’t eat solid food for the last several years of this life.
He was a a huge lib but I wouldn’t have wished that on him.