tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4029870750479192711.post8978976964712543306..comments2024-03-28T19:23:28.347-07:00Comments on RICH LIEBERMAN 415 MEDIA: Remembering Roger Ebert and Gene SiskelRich Liebermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18174495340920055435noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4029870750479192711.post-67624597681803077582013-04-07T21:23:44.512-07:002013-04-07T21:23:44.512-07:00Loved those guys! True movie buffs who's opin...Loved those guys! True movie buffs who's opinions we valued highly because they really studied and understood and appreciated the art of film. Their likes will not be around again!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4029870750479192711.post-72511358121034872042013-04-07T00:56:09.937-07:002013-04-07T00:56:09.937-07:00Sadly, "The balcony is now closed," as R...Sadly, "The balcony is now closed," as Roger would close the show. Rest in peace, Mr. Ebert. The movie world you now look upon with your friend Gene Siskel is a darker one without your charm, courage and cinematic expertise.<br /><br />Goodnight, Roger.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4029870750479192711.post-33243994450294986192013-04-06T00:10:43.273-07:002013-04-06T00:10:43.273-07:00I agree with you,6:40 and 7:54. I think 2:38 is tr...I agree with you,6:40 and 7:54. I think 2:38 is truly a miserable excuse for a human. (Wendy)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4029870750479192711.post-7648359740208013422013-04-05T19:54:44.524-07:002013-04-05T19:54:44.524-07:00Right on, 6:40! What a disgusting post by 2:38. Ja...Right on, 6:40! What a disgusting post by 2:38. Jackass.Auntie Lnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4029870750479192711.post-492546556629213682013-04-05T18:40:42.921-07:002013-04-05T18:40:42.921-07:00For your information, you hateful little person, R...For your information, you hateful little person, Roger Ebert wanted to be photographed with his condition because he didn't believe a disability or disfigurement was something to be ashamed of. And you have a lot of nerve calling *him* shrill after a post like that. You have all the compassion of Ann Coulter. I'll take his "liberalism" any day.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4029870750479192711.post-4236841723061874792013-04-05T14:38:22.949-07:002013-04-05T14:38:22.949-07:00So Ebert won a Pulitzer? I didn't know that. T...So Ebert won a Pulitzer? I didn't know that. That may explain to some degree why he felt so driven to write until virtually his last hour. That may explain why he felt the need or presumed obligation to his public that he stay in the conversation of everyday life, and not be so easily forgotten. I do know that as time went on, Ebert became more shrill in his liberalism, and more Michael Moore-ish in his eagerness to use character destruction as a tool to oppose any openly conservative public figure. <br /><br />The Pulitzer may explain his profound vanity at insisting he be photographed in all physical conditions, i.e. with his bottom jaws missing due to the effects of cancer. I'm sure his wife accepted long ago that Ebert could not be talked out of running in front of the cameras every chance he got.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4029870750479192711.post-29019638798534175072013-04-04T14:22:24.852-07:002013-04-04T14:22:24.852-07:00When George Lucas' the Phantom Menace was rele...When George Lucas' the Phantom Menace was released in 1999, Roger Ebert said he took Gene Siskel's son to see the movie because of a promise he made to Gene before he died. With a Star Wars sequel in the works, it is strange to know that neither Gene Siskel nor Roger Ebert will be around to review it. How sad. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com