comment #1

Nicol D says ...

God bless you Rog.

Both he and Siskel were integral parts of teaching me how to read films as a child/youth and young adult.

He is in my prayers.

comment #2

Joe Leydon says ...

Nicol: Amen.

comment #3

delbomber says ...

Ebert's tastes are ecclectic to say the least, but he's one of the most articulate chums out there, and the readers of HE owe him a debt of gratitude for helping to validate film criticism as a serious form of journalism.

comment #4

Steve C. says ...

Ebert finally slams a major studio would-be blockbuster release (SR) and shortly thereafter has a medical crises. Can't decide to be cynical and say "Guess the strain was too much for him" or paranoid by suggesting "Boy, Alan Horn has a long reach for those who 'go off the reservation.'"

But guess I'll follow Nicol's lead (I think a blind person just regained sight from that idea) and wish him a good recovery based on the good will I still have for the best film show that was produced so far: Siskely & Ebert At The Movies.

comment #5

Steven R. Silver says ...

Roger Ebert is one of the few "elite" critics who has shown a willingness to give a thumbs up review to a lot of mainstream movies over the years that audiences found fun to watch but highbrow critics derided.

Now that there are a lot of serious internet critics out there (like JoBlo and others with a bit less elitist of an outlook), it's easier for potential viewers to get an "average guy" look at most movies, but for a long time Siskel and Ebert, the local newspaper (which tended to be kind of stuffy) and major magazines (even more stuffy) were it.

My own gut feel is that there are a lot of critics out there who liked certain films but were just afraid to admit it, so they gave the "safe" review. Ebert was not.

Best wishes for a speedy and complete recovery.

comment #6

richard crawford says ...

all the best, Roger!