[lwright84]

Incredible, moving, and engaging interview that the master critic himself gave with Chris Jones @ Esquire about his life, both past and current after cancer has left him disfigured and disabled. He lives on via Twitter and his blog, and is arguably doing his best and loudest work now through those and other mediums than he did when he could speak. This slashfilm article has a link to both the interview and Ebert's follow-up on his own blog.. highly recommend both reads:

http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/02/18/...le-in-esquire/

 

[IAM4UK]

I seek out Ebert's written reviews on his website, and have for years. I can generally gauge whether I will like a movie based on his take, even when his tastes and my own diverge. His reviews are therefore the most valuable I have read. I prefer to avoid his political musings, which have become more frequent.


I had no idea he had lost his entire lower jaw. Glad he has been getting along reasonably well, as evidenced by his work.

 

[Artslinger]

Thanks for posting that link the Esquire article was wonderful...


... and Disney is a one evil media corporation.

 

[Hicks]

While I don't always agree with Ebert his love of movies is quite apparent and his perspective is always valuable and worth checking out.

 

[oink]

It is sad to look at his photo.

 

[rezzy]

I had known for some time he'd been pretty sick, but first Siskel and now Ebert too?

 

[thehun]

I have found since he left the TV show due to his illness that some his writings are borderline loony, but then again I consider many of his peers in that category yet they are "healthy". I miss the "old Ebert".

 

[oink]



Quote:
Originally Posted by thehun /forum/post/18165344


I have found since he left the TV show due to his illness that some his writings are borderline loony, but then again I consider many of his peers in that category yet they are "healthy". I miss the "old Ebert".

I dunno...maybe it's the medication the poor guy must be taking...

 

[thebland]

Wow... Life hands out some difficult challenges. Some worse than others as we can see. Good luck to him. What a great attitude. He is to be so admired.

 

[jdrumm]



Quote:
Originally Posted by rezzy /forum/post/18162698


I had known for some time he'd been pretty sick, but first Siskel and now Ebert too?

His current condition isn't quite as serious as Siskel's.

 

[rollo131]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Hicks /forum/post/18161630


While I don't always agree with Ebert his love of movies is quite apparent and his perspective is always valuable and worth checking out.

I agree, Ebert's been willing in recent years to give overly laudatory reviews to too many unworthy films (Juno comes immediately to mind) at a time when he and other critics should be lambasting the current putrid state of the cinema. But he's been in such terrible health the last few years, it's understandable if he's softened up a little, and he's such a fine writer that his musings, about films he happens to have a perceptive take on or other topics, are still relevant and entertaining.


Stay strong, Roger.

 

[wizzack]

Amazing.


When life give you lemons...

 

[oink]

Ebert has excellent writing skills and often is quite amusing.

 

[chirpie]

I read the whole article yesterday. Very well done.

 

[Rammitinski]

Probably wouldn't be a bad idea for a mod to at least insert the word "spoken" in parentheses between "Last" and "Words".


Even though I was well aware of his health issues, I still thought he may have died when I read the thread title.

 

[TimV]

I can remember watching Sneak Previews on PBS with my dad in the late 70s / early 80s. I'm sorry to hear about his health issues. It sounds like he is making the best of them, however.

 

[rezzy]



Quote:
Originally Posted by jdrumm /forum/post/18167447


His current condition isn't quite as serious as Siskel's.

I meant he seems to be only a step away, though..

 

[RobertR]

Ebert does have good writing skills, but I determined long ago that his reviews are worthless as far as determining whether or not a movie is good. There's simply no logical consistency there.

 

[Dean Roddey]



Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo131 /forum/post/18167628


I agree, Ebert's been willing in recent years to give overly laudatory reviews to too many unworthy films (Juno comes immediately to mind) at a time when he and other critics should be lambasting the current putrid state of the cinema.

As always such statements are meaningless because they are just opinions. I think that Juno is the one of the best movies of its decade.

 

[Sean Nelson]



Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR /forum/post/18174627


Ebert does have good writing skills, but I determined long ago that his reviews are worthless as far as determining whether or not a movie is good.

Roger has never claimed to somehow presciently know everyone's tastes - he's always said that enjoyment of film is subjective and that his reviews express only his own reactions to the movies he writes about.


What I've found is that he's the best at explaining why he likes or dislikes a movie, which gives me a much better handle on judging how I'll react to it. And IMHO no other reviewer can touch his writing style.


Completely off the topic of written reviews, but I'll never forget his Siskel & Ebert review of "Raiders of the Lost Ark". Both of them were bubbling over with excitement and blurting out comments when Roger exclaimed "The rock! We didn't even tell them about the rock!".