Roger Ebert: More Than Just Thumbs Up or Down – A Deep Dive into the Life of a Cinematic Titan
Roger Ebert's name brings to mind images of velvet ropes, popcorn, and that famous thumb. It was sometimes up and sometimes down. Yet behind Hollywood's glitz, Ebert was a writer and thinker. His life story is as compelling as any movie he reviewed. Let's explore his life and career. It was marked by triumphs and tribulations, with a love for the silver screen.
Early Life and Foundations
Roger Ebert was born in Urbana, Illinois, on June 18, 1942. He passed away on April 4, 2013, in Chicago. Ebert faced a courageous fight against cancer for ten years. Seventy years is a wrap on a life well-lived, though it had serious health plot twists in its later acts.
Roger grew up in the Roman Catholic faith. He went to St. Mary's elementary school and served as an altar boy. Picture a young Roger pondering the cinematic drama of the Mass. Faith was part of his early life while his curiosity led him down diverse paths.
Family life included his wife, Chaz Ebert. They married in 1992 and remained inseparable until his death in 2013. Chaz was a steadfast partner during his illness. Roger may not have had biological children but embraced stepchildren and grandchildren through Chaz. Family comes in many forms, just like cinema's diverse narratives.
A Career Forged in Ink and Light
Roger Ebert was not just a film critic; he was the film critic for a generation. His career was a monumental achievement filled with milestones that would envy any aspiring journalist. Let’s revisit the highlights.
In 1975, Ebert won the Pulitzer Prize for Criticism. This was a feat no film critic had achieved before. The Pulitzer Prizes recognized his exceptional film reviews for the Chicago Sun-Times. This achievement established his place as a leading voice in cinema discourse.
His tenure at the Chicago Sun-Times was legendary. For decades, Ebert's reviews shaped public opinion and launched careers. He was unafraid to pan blockbusters or praise independent gems. His reviews were insightful and witty, resonating with casual moviegoers and cinephiles alike. Imagine the pressure of knowing your words could make or break a movie. Ebert carried that with aplomb.
Television came calling, and Ebert teamed with Gene Siskel, creating magic for over two decades. “Siskel & Ebert at the Movies” became a cultural phenomenon. For twenty-three years, their chemistry, fueled by playful disagreements, captivated audiences. They were not just reviewing movies; they were debating and dissecting them. Matt Singer's book, “Opposable Thumbs,” discusses their dynamic relationship, revealing the friction that fueled their success. Must-watch TV for movie lovers.
Over his career, Ebert estimated he watched around 10,000 movies and reviewed approximately 6,000. That's astounding! Think about the dedication, those hours in dark theaters, the mental Rolodex of cinematic history he mastered. It shows his commitment to his craft and genuine love for film. He watched films to study and analyze them, sharing his insights with the world.
Ebert's writing style was as distinctive as his thumb. Known for his Midwestern voice, he connected with readers personally. His views were informed by populism and humanism. He judged films not just on artistic merits but also on emotional impact and reflection of the human condition. He championed movies that resonated with regular people, exploring universal themes of love and loss and meaning. He believed movies should be engaging for all, not just for intellectuals.
The Unfolding Drama of Illness and Resilience
Life often throws unexpected twists, just like a screenplay. For Roger Ebert, this came in the form of cancer. He received the first diagnosis in 2002: thyroid cancer. Soon after, he faced recurring salivary gland growths. This turned his life into a lengthy medical drama.
The most devastating moment came in 2006 when complications from reconstructive surgery silenced him. Cancer caused part of his jawbone to be removed. Imagine a man's voice now silenced. This was especially cruel for Ebert, a writer and communicator by nature.
Yet, Ebert showed remarkable resilience. He embraced technology, using a synthesizer and social media to communicate. He continued writing, reviewing, and engaging with cinema. His productivity was astonishing during this time. Even without his physical voice, his intellectual voice remained strong and insightful.
Despite multiple surgeries and health challenges, Ebert published reviews until his death on April 4, 2013. His final review was for Terrence Malick's “To the Wonder,” a film he cherished. Ebert faced his own mortality while still engaging with the art form he loved. His dedication was heroic.
RogerEbert.com: A Digital Legacy
Ebert's influence moved beyond print and TV into the digital realm with RogerEbert.com. Launched in 2002 and funded by the Chicago Sun-Times, this website became an archive of his work. It's a treasure trove of film criticism. This digital library includes his reviews and writings over decades of cinema history.
After Roger's passing, Chaz Ebert took over. She runs RogerEbert.com with a dedicated team. Chaz has not only preserved Roger's legacy but expanded the site, creating a community of film lovers and critics. RogerEbert.com remains vital for film criticism, a testament to Ebert's influence and Chaz's commitment to keeping his voice alive.
A Glimpse into Ebert's Cinematic Soul: Film Preferences
Every critic has their preferences and directors that resonate. Roger Ebert held Martin Scorsese in high regard as his favorite director. Scorsese's gritty realism and masterful storytelling aligned with Ebert's sensibilities. It was a pairing of titans: one behind the camera and the other behind the pen.
From Hitchcock's masterpieces, Ebert chose "Notorious" as the finest example. This thriller brims with suspense, romance, and moral ambiguity. "Notorious" represented the kind of layered storytelling he admired. He loved films that challenged viewers, offering more than surface entertainment.
Ebert's favorite films list is a cinephile's dream: "Raging Bull," another Scorsese work, leads alongside Yasujirô Ozu's "Tokyo Story," Terrence Malick's "The Tree of Life," and Hitchcock's "Vertigo." This eclectic mix shows Ebert's broad taste across genres and eras, united by artistic excellence and emotional resonance. To him, these were experiences—works of art that illuminated the human condition.
Ebert’s final review praised “To the Wonder,” a film by Terrence Malick. It is poetic that his last critique went to a director known for stunning visuals and deep themes. Even in his last days, Ebert gravitated towards films that challenged norms and explored significant subjects.
Every critic disdains certain films. Ebert was no different. His most hated films included "Catwoman" (2004). This film faced backlash for its muddled plot and poor costume design. He also loathed "Che!" (1969). To Ebert, these films were major failures.
Ebert set aside a special category for films he deemed "zero-star." Titles like "10 to Midnight," "Caligula," and "An Alan Smithee Film: Burn Hollywood Burn" made that list. They were not just bad; they were serious cinematic offenses. His zero-star reviews gained fame for their biting humor and harsh criticisms.
Personal Connections: Siskel, Oprah, and Beyond
Ebert’s personal relationships provide unique insights into his life. His dynamic with Gene Siskel was famous. Matt Singer's book, “Opposable Thumbs,” shows their relationship was often contentious. This LA Times article reveals that this friction added to their show's success. Their on-screen debates were engaging and intellectually rich, forming a partnership rooted in both respect and rivalry.
In a surprising twist, Ebert had a brief romance with Oprah Winfrey in the 1980s. Yes, that Oprah. Although it was short-lived, it adds a charming note to their stories. One notable moment was a dinner where Ebert advised Oprah on syndicating her show. Talk about a power play! Ebert’s business sense and Oprah’s knack for wise counsel shone here.
Beliefs, Values, and a Midwestern Heart
Ebert’s reviews reflected core beliefs and values. He wrote with a Midwestern style marked by directness and clarity. His populism informed his views, meaning he focused on films’ accessibility and depictions of human experiences. He praised movies resonating with ordinary people, stories of love, loss, and seeking meaning.
Ebert’s views on religion evolved over time. In his essay “How I Believe in God,” he pondered cosmic mysteries and the universe's nature thoughtfully. Yet, in “How I Am a Roman Catholic,” he admitted he did not believe in God the traditional way. He identified himself as Roman Catholic culturally, emphasizing his upbringing without strict adherence to dogma.
A Lasting Legacy: More Than Just a Thumb
Roger Ebert's impact goes beyond his Pulitzer Prize and TV fame. His presence in the entertainment industry persisted even through illness, securing his rank among the most influential critics ever. He democratized film criticism, making it accessible and engaging for many. He proved that film criticism could be both rigorous and personal.
His commitment to writing despite health issues became a beacon of resilience. Ebert showed that adversity could be overcome while pursuing passion. His life is a testament to words' power, cinema's allure, and a man’s spirit who loved films and shared that affection widely.
What about his last words? According to his wife Chaz, they were a quote from Shakespeare's Macbeth: “Life is but a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” These words, while bleak, offered profound thoughts on existence’s chaotic narrative. Even at the end, Ebert left us with something to contemplate.
Roger Ebert was more than a thumb. He was a voice, a writer, a thinker, and a cinematic spirit enriching our appreciation of movies. His legacy continues, not just through his reviews but in countless critics inspired by him and millions of viewers who learned to analyze films more deeply thanks to Roger Ebert's insights.
Responses (0 )