In response to:

Ebert's Death Means End of An Era

PragEAR Wrote: Apr 10, 2013 12:03 PM
How unimportant it is that we waste so much time in our lives dwelling on all things pertaining to entertainment. On one hand we have the passing Margaret Thatcher - a person who gave her life fighting against the real evils of our world. On the other we have the passing of Roger Ebert, who gave opinions on a form of escapism that we might or might not waste our time watching. Importance and the greatest stories in life abound in the real world. Seek them out and don't waste your time waiting for Hollywood's interpretations of them!
dreadnaught/13 Wrote: Apr 10, 2013 1:14 PM

Ebert is gone and Medved will lament for him. Everybody has to finally die, and someone will praise him.

Lady Thatcher had her day, and she is lamented everywhere conservatives gather. Britain is not very sentimental about her. They might mourn Maggie more in Ireland than they do in England. Lots of odd things have been happening there. The Brits discovered the mortal remains of Richard III deep underneath a parking lot, it's reported. "A horse! A horse! My kingdom for a horse," said the king. They found no horse under there with Richard. Which really is odd. For the kingdom itself, who would've hesitated to sell his horse? Englishmen have always been fools.

Editor’s note: A version of this column appeared first in USA TODAY.

The national outpouring of grief and praise in reaction to the death of Roger Ebert signaled the film critic’s ultimate victory in his long-running competition with cross-town Chicago rival (and on-air TV partner) Gene Siskel. When Siskel died of a brain tumor in 1999 his passing provoked few if any front page tributes, no effusive presidential proclamation, and scant sentiments like the LA Times headline anointing Ebert as “First Citizen Critic and Father to Us All.”

In a sense, this contrast seems surprising. Siskel succumbed at age 53,...