On Sunday afternoons in my house growing up, we made a
ritual of watching “Ebert & Roeper.” The show usually aired early that
morning or late the previous night, so around noon my father and I would go to
the VCR and rewind the tape we had recorded the show on to see which movies
Roger Ebert and Richard Roeper had reviewed that week. If a movie looked good
and day’s schedule was clear, we went to the newspaper, looked up showtimes and
tried to catch a matinee.
In this way I saw countless movies, always on Roger Ebert’s
recommendation. There is no question that I have read or watched more of his
reviews than any other single critic. His genial presence on TV and the candid,
conversational style of his writing gave you the sense he was a friend telling
you which movies were worth your money and which you should avoid. He died
Thursday of cancer and he will be missed.
During my formative movie-watching years, he helped shape my
taste in movies. (The first time I was ever outraged by a movie review was in
reaction to his two-star panning of Attack of the Clones. Unbelievable! Blasphemous! I thought as a
twelve-year-old. Years later, looking back, I realize now he was right about that one.)
He was an immensely knowledgeable critic but always
emphasized the subjective nature of film criticism. Analyzing artistry and
craftsmanship was important, of course, but in the end all that really mattered
to him was his personal, gut-level response to a movie. That was what
interested him, what was worth writing about, what made a movie worth arguing
about (first with Gene Siskel, then with Richard Roeper, on the “At the Movies”
TV show). He freely shared details of his personal life if they changed how he
saw a given movie and openly confessed his biases and preferences. He
shamelessly gushed over his favorites and scorned the films he had no patience
for.
He was also a forward-thinking man. One of the first critics
to embrace the web, he reveled in the internet’s ability to foster
opinion-sharing and debate. He did not believe, as many do, that the golden age
of film criticism was forty years ago, when he was awarded a Pulitzer Prize – a
first for a movie critic – and rose to fame. We are currently living in that golden age, he said. For as long as the thoughtful discussion and heartfelt
enjoyment of movies exists, Roger Ebert’s spirit will live on.
- Steve Avigliano, 4/5/13
No comments:
Post a Comment