Maybe it was around the time I went to college. I’m not sure when I stopped looking for Siskel & Ebert. Further, he seemed courageous and intelligent on television, despite putting himself out there, and you’ve got to respect that. To me, Roger Ebert was a smart, preppy film critic from television, but had some of the same thoughts I did about the movies.
And I certainly didn’t subscribe to the Chicago Sun-Times, being in Michigan. At that time, there was no YouTube and no internet. It was 0ften hard for me to find the show, and I would completely forget about it for a time, as it slipped away into the mass of television programming. Siskel & Ebert and the Movies used to play on Sunday mornings or later in the day or not at all. His intelligence always struck me as outstanding. Roger Ebert always struck me as having the best of both of those worlds I love, having an education and common sense to match. I can remember reading something like that almost with the same fascination of Sherlock Holmes stories, trying to understand the mystery and contemplate the nuances of the crime. It makes me sad that real, formal criticism like I used to read about in books and magazines is becoming lost. For that, I personally am thankful, given this blog. Today, I think the only real media critic I know of is Leonard Maltin, as “media” of the past has evolved into the “social media” of today, making the common-man critic just as valued as newspaper critics.
It used to be a common thing to see his name on movies with a good buzz or movies that were trying to promote themselves.
ROGER EBERT REVIEW SHERLOCK HOLMES MOVIE
My awareness began as a young person, seeing Ebert’s name plastered all over movie posters. I think I’ve been aware of Roger Ebert for over twenty years, and when I say that, I mean it in different ways. I recently saw the 2014 documentary Life Itself about the life of Roger Ebert, which made me wax nostalgic about family, friends, and movies.
0 kommentar(er)
