You will be redirected back to your article in seconds

Obit: Roger Ebert was a Superman

Obit: Roger Ebert was a Superman

Sad news. Roger Ebert has died of complications of cancer. The legendary and indefatigable Pulitzer-prize-winning film critic had announced Tuesday that he was taking a “leave of presence,” per his journal on the Chicago Sun-Times. Since December he had been recovering in a Chicago rehab facility from a hip fracture. It turned out that the cancer he had been fighting since 2002 had returned. He is survived by his loving wife Chaz. 

Only Ebert would continue to insist that he was going to continue reviewing, even if in a limited capacity. I remember at a tete-a-tete Sundance dinner marveling at his competitive drive and intense devotion to sharing his love for movies. That’s what kept him alive and kicking this long. Ebert was able to hang on
tenaciously to Disney/ABC’s “Ebert & Roeper” after the death of his best
and most evenly matched sparring partner, rival Chicago critic Gene
Siskel of The Chicago Tribune, until Ebert lost his voice after jaw cancer surgery in 2006. He followed that up by producing, with Chaz Ebert and voiceover, “Ebert Presents At The Movies.” Ebert wrote in his blog post: 

“What in the world is a leave of presence? It means I am not
going away. My intent is to continue to write selected reviews but to leave the
rest to a talented team of writers handpicked and greatly admired by me. What’s
more, I’ll be able at last to do what I’ve always fantasized about doing:
reviewing only the movies I want to review.'”

The internet and media world responded with concern and good wishes for the beloved Ebert, who had been reviewing films since 1967 and published his must-read memoir “Life Itself” in 2011. The 70-year-old critic has also made a staggeringly impressive transition to the world of social media over the past few years — his Twitter account is more than 800,000 followers strong — while dealing with a string of health scares and setbacks.

Chris Jones at Esquire, who wrote the original 2010 profile on Ebert that included his post-surgery photo, said that he’s “hoping like Hell [Ebert] can negotiate a truce with [the cancer] again.”

Adam Vary of Buzzfeed wrote: “Cancer is just wrong. Roger Ebert is usually right. Wishing him good health.”

Steve Snyder of TIME Magazine tweeted that he’s “devastated” by the news, but “relieved he’ll keep reviewing,” in addition to keeping up his wonderful Great Movies installments.

Alas, this was not to be. Ebert was the new model critic and we should all follow in his giant footsteps.

“Ebert was singular,” tweeted A.O. Scott of the NY Times. “We are all in his debt.” Here’s the NYT obit and Variety.

–Beth Hanna contributed to this story.

This Article is related to: News and tagged , , , , , ,


Comments

Lizziebeth-1_IMDb

Thank you, Ms Thompson. And much love to dear Roger Ebert. I took issue with his appraisals sometimes, but I think we all fell in love with him precisely because he was so unpretentious, with common good sense always about everything he was witness to. The best kind of critic there ever should be. Precisely because he discovered early in his career that he's rather be a good critic than a bad writer ("Valley(s) of the Dolls" c.1970), he proved that critics can be lovable too!

JAB

This is a sad day for serious movie goers & film lovers. Ebert alone & when he was paired with Siskel then Roeper was always thoughtful & intelligent. Movies are are curious combination of high art & low entertainment. Ebert captured that in his writing.
He now joins the always provocative Pauline Kael & the smart everyman Gene Siskel in that Great Cinema in the Sky (Beyond Infinity) for a potent trio of critical Gods.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *