Last Thursday brought the devastating news that the country’s most iconic film critic, Roger Ebert, had passed away after announcing only the day before that his cancer was resurgent.
It’s hard to explain the impact Ebert had on movies, but he has unquestionably had the most influence over the shape of film criticism over the last thirty years. Sorry Pauline Kael fans (who are usually just other critics or extremely specific directors), people actually know Roger Ebert, and they like Roger Ebert. The “thumbs up” (or down) method that he and Siskel used said a lot about the instant-knowledge, let’s-get-to-it and debate it nature of film criticism (and entertainment) in recent decades.
Ebert may have had a larger impact simply because he lived longer than Siskel, but I think he was also the more populist critic. Some have said that his reviews grew too soft in his final years, and that he made a mistake by catapulting Richard Roeper to the honored position of co-host. However, I think his final years were just marked by an obvious love of life, and that couldn’t help but trickle into his other passions.
If I had to write the headline for Ebert’s obituary, it might read “Great critic, even better man.” Except for his occasional showdowns with Siskel (I enjoyed watching the two get heated), nearly everyone who met Roger talked about what a nice guy he was.
He helped raise awareness and money for cancer research. He’s noted for philanthropy. His beautiful and supportive wife Chaz helped him “get” most Interracial relationships in movies in a way few other critics seem to. And he went on one date with Oprah Winfrey but his advice on which deal to take at the time (she wasn’t yet so well-known) is credited with helping making her into the star she is today. If you wanted to make a bad pun about how his life deserves two thumbs up, I wouldn’t hold it against you.
Hear! Hear! “Great critic, even better man.” …