Influences: Roger Ebert

Erik wasn't born with this natural ability to write.  His sense of humor, his taste in language, his ability to communicate ideas and form opinions were all shaped by numerous influences in the world around him.  Some, like the Marx Brothers, helped shape his ability to point out the absurd in any situation.  Others, like watching that one five minute clip of Jersey Shore probably killed a bunch of his brain cells.

Today, however, we discuss a legend who just passed away.
 Whenever a movie came out, there was a single source I went to to figure out if it would be something I'd enjoy.  It wasn't Rotten Tomatoes, though I understood that a greater gathering of critics would present a better collection of evidence, scientifically speaking.  It wasn't any of the entertainment channels, magazines, or tabloids.

I went to Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert.

Every weekend while growing up my father and I would sit in front of the television and watch as two men from Chicago discussed, argued, praised, and raged against movies.  I saw two uniquely dynamic personalities that were never afraid to say what they felt about a film, and while they did point out what they, themselves, liked or disliked about the movie, they never did more than express amazement at the others' opinion.  In my childhood eyes, there was no hostility, there was no refusal to give up ground, there was simply a concession that "you have your opinion, I have mine, and I might not understand it, but I'll let you have it."

I always associated a bit better with Roger Ebert growing up, finding myself having similar opinions when it came to certain types of films.  I enjoyed how Ebert would talk about how a movie made him feel, as opposed to Siskel's tendency to pull specific details and spotlight specific high and low moments.  Both methods have their advantages, as one was looking at films from a more logical standpoint, while the other was more emotional.

Yes, this is somewhat ironic considering how now one small thing in a film can take away a lot for me from what was otherwise an enjoyable experience.

I'm looking at you, sinking ice in G.I. Joe.

This isn't to say I didn't ever side with Gene Siskel.  Certain movies, when he explained his point of view, had certain things I wouldn't be able to overlook in a film, and if he mentioned those events, I took them into heavy consideration.

Now, I'm not going to explain their history or go into too much detail, since others have done much better than I ever could,   Instead, I just want to talk about how I was influenced.

I've said it before, something I've always had trouble with while growing up was being able to form my own opinion and voice it without being influenced from everything from advertisements to my friends opinions.  Even if I hated something, if my friend would say they thought it was okay, my opinion softened slightly.  I never felt like I could really tell someone what I thought.

And then came this.

 I mean, wow.

Now, when Gene Siskel passed away and was later replaced by the (I feel) underrated Richard Roeper, I stuck with the show.  When Ebert retired from the program, however, my interest started to wane.  I still watched it to see two critics debate the highs and lows of a film, but I found myself traveling to Roger Ebert's own website, reading his written reviews.

I still found myself enjoying his writing, how he managed to keep a breakdown of very similar films unique and interesting seemingly without effort.  I loved his play on language, and how he could tell you everything you needed to know about a scene without spoiling a single event.  It was the evidence of a master at his job, and one who always took delight in being able to do it.

Yes, even when he had to review a movie like North.

Reading his reviews every week, I was able to at least understand why he liked or disliked a movie, but I was able to use my then-developed ideas of what I enjoyed to decide if I'd like it.  And more often than not, if Ebert said he hated a movie for something I tended to hate, it turned out I'd hate it as well.  If he loved it, and his reasoning resonated with me, I usually enjoyed it.

In fact, I think the only movie I really disagreed with him on was the remake of The Nutty Professor.  Man, I hated that film.

When Roger Ebert lost his voice, I felt so sad for him.  A man who made his living with words and ideas was now unable to express them except through writing or having a machine say them for him.  To his credit, any time I read one of his reviews, I always heard his voice in my head saying the same words out loud, and I could feel where he meant for me to emphasize an emotion, or strike a harsh word against the film.

Today, Roger Ebert passed away.  Personally, I feel like a dear friend, someone who's been around since I was a child, has gone.  There's a space that won't be easily replaced, even if someone else takes over writing his reviews.  I lost someone who shared many of the same ideas I had, whose writings could lift me up even on really dark days, and whose strength and perseverance through multiple tragedies in life taught me to not give up.

Most of all, though, I think Roger Ebert taught me how to enjoy movies.  Reading his praise for classics, at how movies connected to him emotionally, and at how poorly made films filled him with anger let me be better prepared for more mature movies as I got older and got away from typical Disney kids fare.  I was better mentally prepared the first time I saw movies like Dark City, Casablanca, or even This is Spinal Tap, because I had an idea of what to expect and what to look for.  I was better prepared to open myself emotionally to movies meant to make me feel something, and better able to notice the details of films that required close attention.

To Roger Ebert, I owe an enormous debt.  One that, even if he and I were to live forever, I could never fully repay him for.  I loved him as a dear friend, though we never met, and I regret that I'll never be able to meet him and thank him in person.

My deepest sympathies to his wife, Chaz, and I know without doubt that the legacy of Roger Ebert lives on through his site, his festivals, and his archives.  Obviously, newspapers and movie companies will have to replace him with someone else to fill the void, but nothing will ever measure up to that bar he and Gene Siskel set for all critics, regardless of their subject of review.  Nobody will be able to control the sway of peoples opinions of a film like he was able to, and I don't think anybody will get a child, curled up on a couch with his father, to fall in love with movies the way he was able to.