Roger Ebert had his lower jaw removed

[broberfett]

He can't talk and he can't eat. I never heard anything about his health until now. I saw a New York Times article about it a few minutes ago.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/01/dining/01ebert.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&no_interstitial

 

[Trekker4747]

He's been like this for quite some time now.

 

[JiNX-01]

Wow. He has an amazing attitude.

 

[JarodRussell]

That's just unbelievably awful. Can't they give him something like... a titanium jaw or something?

 

[Trekker4747]

That's just unbelievably awful. Can't they give him something like... a titanium jaw or something?

They probably could but he's had a number of surgeries during this ordeal and even some serious infections/side effects as a result of them. He's pretty much had enough with having surgery. He's still mostly happy and enjoying life as much as he can all thing considered.

 

[Count Zero]

That's quite a horrible fate. I can understand he misses food so much. He seems to be coping with his bad health in a great way, though.

 

[Jax]

His family n friends kept that quiet for a long time, I didn;t have a clue I feel bad now for calling him after his Star Trek review.

 

[Amaris]

I'm just about near crying after reading that article. I feel for the man, and I am glad to see him take it so well, but I mean, Jesus Christ, that's terrible, and it's a shame we don't have the capability to rebuild his jaw.

 

[Trekker4747]

Again, I believe we do and they tried but infection took over, caused complications and at this point Ebert is tired of surgery and the hospital and just wants to live his life. Doctors have asked him to give them another chance to restore his voice but he's not having it.

I find it very dobutful that building a titanium jaw is beyond our capability. Ebert simply doesn't want surgery any more.

It is terrible what the man has gone through but he wants to enjoy the years he has left with his family and doing what he loves, watching movies.

IIRC he has a computer that provides him with a "voice" (much like Stephen Hawking has) and the people who made it have tried to best tune the voice of the computer to match Ebert's real voice.

Here's a "recent" Oprah interview he's done:

PART 1:
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDW9a35OZlY[/yt]

PART 2:
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thvBklNRYUQ[/yt]

 

[PsychoPere]

IIRC he has a computer that provides him with a "voice" (much like Stephen Hawking has) and the people who made it have tried to best tune the voice of the computer to match Ebert's real voice.

I don't have a link saved to the article, but I recall reading on his website a post Ebert wrote several months ago regarding the computer voice. It was quite amazing the amount of work that went into it, how much of his old review show they went through for reference to build his "new" voice.


In addition to his blog, he also frequently updates his Twitter feed and is easily one of the most interesting people I follow over there.

 

[pookha]

yep roger tweets often with links about a wide range of subjects.

 

[Owain Taggart]

Not everyone might agree with him, but he's overcome a lot, and his attitude is admirable. He misses a lot of things, sure, but I don't think he's looking at it as a sad thing, as he still does a lot of what he loves, like cooking for instance. I think he's looking at life positively and trying to make the most of it despite what happened to him.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

His family n friends kept that quiet for a long time, I didn;t have a clue I feel bad now for calling him after his Star Trek review.

You really shouldn't feel bad about that.

He's not one of those self-absorbed reviewers that takes themselves way too seriously, so I think he'd welcome divergent opinions to his own.

I remember the old Siskel & Ebert show. Those guys had differing opinions all the time, but had a sense of humor about it.

 

[Trekker4747]

His family n friends kept that quiet for a long time, I didn;t have a clue I feel bad now for calling him after his Star Trek review.

You really shouldn't feel bad about that.

He's not one of those self-absorbed reviewers that takes themselves way too seriously, so I think he'd welcome divergent opinions to his own.

I remember the old Siskel & Ebert show. Those guys had differing opinions all the time, but had a sense of humor about it.

At The Movies should've ended when Siskel died; he and Ebert had a certain "chemistry" where when they discussed movies it seemed like you were sitting with two, old, friends disucssing the merits of a movie. Granted, your friends were a bit pretentious.

None of the stand-in critics they had over the course of time until they settled on Roeper and even, still, him didn't quite play of Gene as well.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

^ True. Maybe he just wanted to continue doing what he loved. Or his bosses wanted the "show to go on" .

 

[DonIago]

I always make it a point to listen to his commentaries on DVDs. Probably the closest I could ever come to having a conversation with him.

 

[AstroSmurf]

Actually, Ebert has been very open about his cancer and the operations to his face. In fact, he has been interviewed several times about it before this article. More to the point, I heard about it when he was first diagnosed. And being a great fan of his (having invited his show and reviews into my home every week for damn near twenty-five years) I spent several months raptly monitoring his condition and progress with great concern. It was like a close friend was gravely ill. (I believe, if memory serves, he almost died during the last one.)

But since the initial operation and the reconstructive surgeries, Ebert has managed to stay positive, which I find absolutely amazing. He has even used this opportunity to open up other avenues of commentary besides movies. Every week I now enjoy his reviews and his editorials. As I said before, he is like an old friend so I welcome any further chance to read what he has to say. (And I may not agree with it all but he doesn't expect me too.) I find him and his strength nothing short of remarkable. I only hope I can manage the same in a similar situation.

 

[Amaris]

His family n friends kept that quiet for a long time, I didn;t have a clue I feel bad now for calling him after his Star Trek review.

You really shouldn't feel bad about that.

He's not one of those self-absorbed reviewers that takes themselves way too seriously, so I think he'd welcome divergent opinions to his own.

I remember the old Siskel & Ebert show. Those guys had differing opinions all the time, but had a sense of humor about it.

At The Movies should've ended when Siskel died; he and Ebert had a certain "chemistry" where when they discussed movies it seemed like you were sitting with two, old, friends disucssing the merits of a movie. Granted, your friends were a bit pretentious.

None of the stand-in critics they had over the course of time until they settled on Roeper and even, still, him didn't quite play of Gene as well.

Well, I wouldn't say pretentious, I see it as two of your friends who watch a lot of movies and have a lot to say about it. They certainly know more about movies than I do, and I'm a movie buff. I do love watching the old episodes, though.

By the way, if you haven't read any of his books, I highly suggest reading at least one. My personal favorite, "Your Movie Sucks". It's brilliant all the way through.