• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

status of Roger Ebert

Flying Spaghetti Monster

Vice Admiral
Admiral
http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/04/02/people.ebertrecovery.ap/index.html

CHICAGO, Illinois (AP) -- Roger Ebert will resume writing reviews later this month, but will not rejoin his syndicated TV show because he's still unable to speak.
art.ebert.ap.jpg
Roger Ebert had surgery that ended in complications; the movie critic's ability to speak has not returned.


corner_wire_BL.gif



In a letter published in Tuesday's Chicago Sun-Times, the Pulitzer Prize-winning film critic and co-host of TV's "Ebert & Roeper" said surgery in January ended in complications, and his ability to speak was not restored. He said the return of speech would require another surgery.
"But I still have all my other abilities, including the love of viewing movies and writing about them," Ebert said.
Ebert, 65, said he's looking forward to his annual film festival starting April 23.
"I will resume writing movie reviews shortly thereafter," he said.
Ebert, famous for his "thumbs-up" or "thumbs-down" critiques, had surgery in 2006 to remove a cancerous growth on his salivary gland. He also had emergency surgery that year after a blood vessel burst near the site of the operation.
He had undergone cancer surgery three times before the 2006 operation -- once in 2002 to remove a malignant tumor on his thyroid gland and twice on his salivary gland the following year.
Ebert said he remains cancer-free, and is not ready to think about more surgery.
"I should be content with the abundance I have," he said.
The 10th annual Ebertfest at the University of Illinois runs April 23-27. Ebert chose 13 films for the festival.




I wish him the best! I miss him on the show. I never liked Roeper, who seems more interested in filling reviews with clever puns and idioms and lacks the real knowledge of film and the true, unbridled passion that Ebert has. When Roeper says that a film is "so well-done" it sounds more like he's talking about steak.
 
Ebert was always the lesser of Siskel and Ebert, but Roeper is by far the lesser of Ebert and Roeper. I hope his operation goes off without a hitch and his ability to speak (and his spoken reviews) returns.
 
I'm glad to hear that he's writing again.

The man has a lot of guts, that's for sure. When he first came out in public, after his surgery, the press were trying to get a picture of his disfigured face, and his staff were trying to protect him. He stepped right out and let them snap away. He wrote in to the local paper and said that "too many people that are disfigured by accident or illness feel that they have to hide away. Why should I hide? This is what cancer did to me, and I'm going on with my life. I'm not going to stop doing what I love. Deal with it."

More power to him.:techman:
 
I'm glad to hear that he's writing again.

The man has a lot of guts, that's for sure. When he first came out in public, after his surgery, the press were trying to get a picture of his disfigured face, and his staff were trying to protect him. He stepped right out and let them snap away. He wrote in to the local paper and said that "too many people that are disfigured by accident or illness feel that they have to hide away. Why should I hide? This is what cancer did to me, and I'm going on with my life. I'm not going to stop doing what I love. Deal with it."

More power to him.:techman:

Wow - I didn't know this. But good for him.

What a great attitude.
 
Is this news per se? I thought he'd been back and writing for a while now, I've checked out some of his reviews. Particularly liked The Bucket List, where he uses his own experiments as a cancer patient to venomously attack its cloying attitude to great hilarity, and Mad Money, where he quotes a random internet punter's succinct opinion.

I don't have a preference either way with Siskel and Ebert; I agree with the first on some movies and the second on others; but Roeper really needs to get some charm and better chemistry (though I find myself sometimes agreeing with him against Ebert as well).
 
Is this news per se? I thought he'd been back and writing for a while now, I've checked out some of his reviews.
He was back after the first, long gap following unexpected complications during a cancer surgery, but had stopped writing regular reviews again a couple months ago for this (failed) surgery to restore his full speech capacity.

BTW, a couple other posters seem to think he has some upcoming surgery; he doesn't. If he wants to get his speaking ability back, he'll need to have another procedure at some point in the future, but as he says that won't be any time soon.
 
Roger Ebert is my favorite reviewer because he really loves movies. I wish him all the best!
 
Sweet. Now he'll go right back to reviewing the positive performances of Angelina Jolie's, Jennifer Lopez's and Neve Campbell's breasts. :)
 
I'm glad to hear that he's writing again.

The man has a lot of guts, that's for sure. When he first came out in public, after his surgery, the press were trying to get a picture of his disfigured face, and his staff were trying to protect him. He stepped right out and let them snap away. He wrote in to the local paper and said that "too many people that are disfigured by accident or illness feel that they have to hide away. Why should I hide? This is what cancer did to me, and I'm going on with my life. I'm not going to stop doing what I love. Deal with it."

More power to him.:techman:

That is a great story. I admire his courage.
 
They could just film him sitting in the balcony with Roeper, and, after Roeper gives his spiel, Ebert just does a tumbs up or tumbs down, or tumbs sideways. :techman:
 
I'm not a huge Ebert fan. I think his reviews tend to be rambling rants about nothing a bulk of the time, but he is a man who's opinions I mostly respect and he still a man going through one hell of a time. I wish him the best.

:)
 
They could just film him sitting in the balcony with Roeper, and, after Roeper gives his spiel, Ebert just does a tumbs up or tumbs down, or tumbs sideways. :techman:
And if Roeper is really off-base, he could smack him in the head, too.

I'm glad he's back writing again. I don't even know what time the show is on anyway, so it's not like I was missing much there.
 
They could just film him sitting in the balcony with Roeper, and, after Roeper gives his spiel, Ebert just does a tumbs up or tumbs down, or tumbs sideways. :techman:
And if Roeper is really off-base, he could smack him in the head, too.

I don't know; I kind of like the guest reviewers, which currently seem to be a tag team of Michael Phillips and A.O. Scott. Not as good, maybe, but then, neither is Roeper.
 
Wow. I had no idea he ever had cancer (shows how much attention I pay to movie critics). I never regularly read his reviews, but he gave some excellent commentaries on Citizen Kane and Casablanca. It's sad to think he might never record another. Despite that, he seems to be coping well with everything he's gone through. I give him "Two Thumbs Up"!
 
Wow. I had no idea he ever had cancer (shows how much attention I pay to movie critics). I never regularly read his reviews, but he gave some excellent commentaries on Citizen Kane and Casablanca.

What always irked me about his Casablanca commentary that it doesn't mention Conrad Veidt (Major Strasser) in an omission that seems very intentional. He mentions in passing by name many of the film's minor performers, and to add injury to insult finds a way to refer to The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari with no reference to Veidt (one of the stars of that picture).

But, generally, his commentaries are pretty good. He's no Stephen Prince, but not bad.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top