This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/05/movies/roger-ebert-film-critic-dies.html#commentsContainer

The article has changed 11 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Roger Ebert, Popular Film Critic, Dies at 70 Roger Ebert, Popular Film Critic, Dies at 70
(about 1 hour later)
Roger Ebert, the popular film critic and television co-host who along with his fellow reviewer and sometime sparring partner Gene Siskel could lift or sink the fortunes of a movie with their trademark thumbs up or thumbs down, died on Thursday in Chicago. He was 70.Roger Ebert, the popular film critic and television co-host who along with his fellow reviewer and sometime sparring partner Gene Siskel could lift or sink the fortunes of a movie with their trademark thumbs up or thumbs down, died on Thursday in Chicago. He was 70.
His death was announced by The Chicago Sun-Times, where he had worked for many years.His death was announced by The Chicago Sun-Times, where he had worked for many years.
Mr. Ebert’s struggle with cancer, starting in 2002, gave him an altogether different public image — as someone who refused to surrender to illness. Though he had operations for cancer of the thyroid, salivary glands and chin, lost his ability to eat, drink and speak (a prosthesis partly obscured the loss of much of his chin, and he was fed through a tube) and became a gaunter version of his once-portly self, he continued to write reviews and commentary and published a cookbook he had started, on meals that could be made with a rice cooker.Mr. Ebert’s struggle with cancer, starting in 2002, gave him an altogether different public image — as someone who refused to surrender to illness. Though he had operations for cancer of the thyroid, salivary glands and chin, lost his ability to eat, drink and speak (a prosthesis partly obscured the loss of much of his chin, and he was fed through a tube) and became a gaunter version of his once-portly self, he continued to write reviews and commentary and published a cookbook he had started, on meals that could be made with a rice cooker.
“When I am writing, my problems become invisible, and I am the same person I always was,” he told Esquire magazine in 2010. “All is well. I am as I should be.”“When I am writing, my problems become invisible, and I am the same person I always was,” he told Esquire magazine in 2010. “All is well. I am as I should be.”
In recent years, Mr. Ebert had written extensively about his illness and talked with friends via Twitter, on Facebook and in his blog.In recent years, Mr. Ebert had written extensively about his illness and talked with friends via Twitter, on Facebook and in his blog.
It would not be a stretch to say that Mr. Ebert was the best-known film reviewer of his generation, and one of the most trusted. He liked to say his approach — dryly witty, occasionally sarcastic, sometimes quirky in his opinions — reflected the working newspaper reporter he had been, not a formal student of film. His tastes ran from the classics to boldly independent cinema to cartoons, and his put-downs could be withering.It would not be a stretch to say that Mr. Ebert was the best-known film reviewer of his generation, and one of the most trusted. He liked to say his approach — dryly witty, occasionally sarcastic, sometimes quirky in his opinions — reflected the working newspaper reporter he had been, not a formal student of film. His tastes ran from the classics to boldly independent cinema to cartoons, and his put-downs could be withering.
“I will one day be thin, butVincent Gallowill always be the director of ‘The Brown Bunny,' ” he wrote. “I will one day be thin, but Vincent Gallowill always be the director of ‘The Brown Bunny,’ ” he wrote.
In 1975 he became the first film critic to win a Pulitzer Prize, for his Sun-Times reviews. His columns were syndicated to more than 200 newspapers in the United States and abroad, and he wrote more than 15 books, many by skillfully recycling his columns. In 2005 he became the first critic to be honored with a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.In 1975 he became the first film critic to win a Pulitzer Prize, for his Sun-Times reviews. His columns were syndicated to more than 200 newspapers in the United States and abroad, and he wrote more than 15 books, many by skillfully recycling his columns. In 2005 he became the first critic to be honored with a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.
“In the century or so that there has been such a thing as film criticism, no other critic has ever occupied the space held by Roger Ebert,” Mick LaSalle, movie critic for The San Francisco Chronicle, wrote in 2010. “Others as influential as Ebert have not been as esteemed. Others as esteemed as Ebert have not had the same direct and widespread influence. And no one, but no one, has enjoyed the same fame.”“In the century or so that there has been such a thing as film criticism, no other critic has ever occupied the space held by Roger Ebert,” Mick LaSalle, movie critic for The San Francisco Chronicle, wrote in 2010. “Others as influential as Ebert have not been as esteemed. Others as esteemed as Ebert have not had the same direct and widespread influence. And no one, but no one, has enjoyed the same fame.”
With Mr. Siskel, Mr. Ebert essentially defined television film criticism. Their collaboration began in 1975, the year he won his Pulitzer. Mr. Ebert was asked to appear on WTTW, the public broadcasting station in Chicago, as co-host of a new movie-review program. He was intrigued, but then taken aback when told that Mr. Siskel, the film critic of The Chicago Tribune, would be his partner.With Mr. Siskel, Mr. Ebert essentially defined television film criticism. Their collaboration began in 1975, the year he won his Pulitzer. Mr. Ebert was asked to appear on WTTW, the public broadcasting station in Chicago, as co-host of a new movie-review program. He was intrigued, but then taken aback when told that Mr. Siskel, the film critic of The Chicago Tribune, would be his partner.
“The answer was at the tip of my tongue: no,” Mr. Ebert told Time magazine in 1987.“The answer was at the tip of my tongue: no,” Mr. Ebert told Time magazine in 1987.
As for Mr. Siskel, he said he initially had no desire to team up with “the most hated guy in my life.”As for Mr. Siskel, he said he initially had no desire to team up with “the most hated guy in my life.”
But the pairing worked. The show, originally titled “Opening Soon at a Theater Near You,” was a public television hit. It evolved into “Sneak Previews,” which went national when the Public Broadcasting Service began syndicating it in 1978. It eventually attracted more viewers than any other entertainment series in the history of public television.But the pairing worked. The show, originally titled “Opening Soon at a Theater Near You,” was a public television hit. It evolved into “Sneak Previews,” which went national when the Public Broadcasting Service began syndicating it in 1978. It eventually attracted more viewers than any other entertainment series in the history of public television.
Seeing its commercial potential, Tribune Entertainment acquired the show in 1982 and syndicated it under the title “At the Movies.” In 1986 Mr. Ebert and Mr. Siskel signed a contract with Buena Vista Television to syndicate the program under the titles “Siskel & Ebert” or “Siskel and Ebert at the Movies."Most people knew the two as intellectually engaged, sweater-wearing, often contentious men sitting in cozy armchairs ad-libbing about a film’s strengths and weaknesses. Mr. Ebert was the larger one with the owlish eyeglasses, Mr. Siskel the taller one who was losing his hair. For all their combativeness, however, they actually agreed on a movie’s worth much more often than they differed. Seeing its commercial potential, Tribune Entertainment acquired the show in 1982 and syndicated it under the title “At the Movies.” In 1986 Mr. Ebert and Mr. Siskel signed a contract with Buena Vista Television to syndicate the program under the titles “Siskel & Ebert” or “Siskel and Ebert at the Movies.”
Most people knew the two as intellectually engaged, sweater-wearing, often contentious men sitting in cozy armchairs ad-libbing about a film’s strengths and weaknesses. Mr. Ebert was the larger one with the owlish eyeglasses, Mr. Siskel the taller one who was losing his hair. For all their combativeness, however, they actually agreed on a movie’s worth much more often than they differed.
“We liked each other; we even loved each other,” Mr. Ebert told Television Week in 2005. “And we also had days when we hated each other.”“We liked each other; we even loved each other,” Mr. Ebert told Television Week in 2005. “And we also had days when we hated each other.”
They even hugged, in 1985, when they appeared on “The Tonight Show” withJohnny Carson. They even hugged, in 1985, when they appeared on “The Tonight Show” with Johnny Carson.
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: April 4, 2013Correction: April 4, 2013

An earlier version of this article misidentified a movie critic for The San Francisco Chronicle. He is Mick LaSalle, not Mike LaSalle.

An earlier version of this article misidentified a movie critic for The San Francisco Chronicle. He is Mick LaSalle, not Mike LaSalle.