Sunday, September 28, 2008

I love it when Roger Ebert is angry - because it means he has something worth saying

As a young boy, I was raised on Roger Ebert - he is one of the three reasons I decided to major in cinema in college (the others being my father, who first taught me to love movies correctly, and my high school cinema teacher). I always favored him over Gene Siskel (though I liked him tremendously, and still remember where I was when I found out he died), and valued his judgment even during the few occasions when I disagreed with him. It's no small coincidence that he was the first (and until recently, the only) film critic to win the Pulitzer Prize. Now, Ebert typically sticks to discussions about cinema - usually in film reviews, often in interviews, and of course, on his (now sadly defunct) television show. While no stranger to discussing topics outside of the cinematic realm, Roger Ebert does so sparingly.

Which is why his column today in the Chicago Sun-Times (his longtime employer) grabbed my attention. In it, he mercilessly (and convincingly) argues that John McCain lacks the decency to be president, based upon his behavior in the presidential debates. His anger is definitely not without reason, and though his recent illness has robbed him of the ability to speak, it has thankfully not limited his ability to write caustically. While you may not agree with his assessment, I encourage you to read the column here.

No comments: