Roger Ebert (1942-2013)

On Thursday, the 4th of April, Roger Ebert died and I felt I wanted to write this as I have a great affection for him. The details of Roger's life and death can be found elsewhere on the internet, this is about what he meant to me.

Roger Ebert was a film critic, more accurately, and in keeping with this piece, he was my favourite film critic. That might sound like I'm being overly film-y; "Imagine having favourite film critics! What a wanker." I'm afraid to say it is true. There are other film critics whose writing and reviews and insights I enjoy but there are very few that I make a habit of reading. So why did Roger Ebert make such an impression on me? Was he always right - of course not. Film reviews are subjective, first and for most, and simply being immersed in film doesn't give you some sort of direct link to a filmmaker's mind. There were three things that made Ebert's writing stand out for me: his wit, his honesty, and his love of film. These all, for me, linked to his humanity - I know, I know, I'm a wanker.

His reviews were often funny and at times irreverent (although this was generally when the film was not to his liking):

Armageddon (Michael Bay, 1998)
'No matter what they're charging to get in, it's worth more to get out.'

The Brown Bunny (Vincent Gallo, 2003)
'I had a colonoscopy once, and they let me watch it on TV. It was more entertaining than The Brown Bunny.'

The Last Airbender (M. Night Shyamalan, 2010)
'The Last Airbender is an agonizing experience in every category I can think of and others still waiting to be invented.'

There are many more examples that show his wit but when he wrote about films that he loved the short, sharp quips died and poetic lyricism shines through and this leads me to his honesty. I always got a feeling that the opinions in his reviews genuinely were his opinions, he wasn't trying to impress everyone with his knowledge and insight, or baffle people with language, and this to me helped his pieces ring true. They were often almost conversational, and always on a level with his audience. This honesty (or lack of it in others) is why I cared what he thought. A reason I find Mark Kermode so difficult is that I don't believe him, he uses language as a weapon, not as a form of communication, and I rarely feel he loves film. I enjoy reading reviews by Philip French, Peter Bradshaw, Jonathan Romney and Kim Newman, but I also follow these guys (not Kermode) on Twitter and they have a much lighter, playful side that comes through on Twitter but not so much in their writing. With Ebert you got a very personal insight into what made a film work (for him):

The Tree of Life (Terrence Malick, 2011)
'I don't know when a film has connected more immediately with my own personal experience. In uncanny ways, the central events of "The Tree of Life" reflect a time and place I lived in, and the boys in it are me.'

Synecdoche, New York (Charlie Kaufman, 2008)

'I watched it the first time and knew it was a great film and that I had not mastered it. The second time because I needed to. The third time because I will want to. It will open to confused audiences and live indefinitely. A lot of people these days don't even go to a movie once. There are alternatives. It doesn't have to be the movies, but we must somehow dream. If we don't "go to the movies" in any form, our minds wither and sicken.'

Tokyo Story (Yasujiro Ozu, 1953)

'a tale as simple and universal as life itself. It is about a few ordinary days in the lives of some ordinary people, and then about the unanticipated death of one of them. What it tells us about the nature of life or death is not new or original -- what could be? -- but it is true.'

This honesty revealed for me two things; his love of the cinema and his love of people. His humanity is the main draw to his writing for me. He saw the importance of cinema on many levels and never rejected others opinions, despite his initial response to The Brown Bunny (above) a year later he reassessed and even credited Gallo for a recut that allowed 'The film's form and purpose [to] now emerge from the miasma of the original cut, and are quietly, sadly, effective. It is said that editing is the soul of the cinema; in the case of "The Brown Bunny," it is its salvation.' Ebert's writing is not there to lord over film and filmmakers, he saw that this film could be redeemed and I feel he wanted it to be, and was happy that it had been (to an extent), he did not just want Gallo to fail and was generous enough to acknowledge that he'd worked on it. These qualities shine through in his reviews and in his other writing such as this beautiful letter to Werner Herzog, that reduced me tears and helped reaffirm my own love of film.

Roger Ebert helped me find my way with film, he helped me discover that form moved me in cinema, and he helped me see that everyone's opinion is important. I saw 'Do the Right Thing' (Spike Lee, 1989) because of Roger Ebert and his beautifully eloquent stance on the film that seemed so removed from most others at the time.

Ultimately Roger Ebert inspired me, he helps remind me that film is important and that, like any other art form, it has many different levels, styles and appeals. He saw that film is not exclusive and neither are its delights; it can be exciting and fun and entertaining, it can also be challenging and upsetting and raw - like life.

I never met him but I think I already miss him. J


Roger Ebert (1942-2013)