The opinions represented in this article do not necessarily represent those of the staff of CU Independent nor any of its sponsors.

Roger Ebert died at 70 years old after a long battle with cancer on April 4.

On April 2, Roger Ebert took to his blog and explained to the world that after 46 years of producing 200 plus movie reviews per year, he would have to cut back. Ebert called his decision a “leave of presence” as he wanted to continue writing reviews, but only of the movies of his choice. He ends the blog by saying “So on this day of reflection I say again, thank you for going on this journey with me. I’ll see you at the movies.”

What makes the late film critic so great was his love for cinema. Ebert almost always found positives in a film, despite its overall quality. He combines a clear passion for his work with excellent movie insight, which translates into an easy read and builds trust for many—including myself. Most importantly, though, he wrote his reviews without bias and thus could relate to all persons, regardless of taste.

Every critic will write articles that people will disagree with, and I do occasionally disagree with Ebert’s views. For example, Roger Ebert wrote a negative review of the movie “Kick Ass,” which I found entertaining. However, his negative comments generally revolve around moral issues with aspects of films; all other traits of a movie are treated without predetermination.

One could always trust that Roger Ebert would never judge a movie based on its style or genre, but rather on its quality and execution. Even though he notoriously thought lowly of horror movies, his critiques were never based on personal taste. Rather, he had specific reasons that only pertained to what he was reviewing.

I remember the first time I read a Roger Ebert article three years ago. I was curious about critical reception for the wonder film “Grave of the Fireflies” after sobbing through it. Ebert’s review on the movie so greatly reflected my thoughts and emotions that I still reread the article occasionally.

The name “Roger Ebert” has been ubiquitous in media for longer than our generation can remember. Whether it is from his books, articles, blogs, or television, Roger Ebert has cemented his legacy with his love of movies and desire to share his views. In fact, Roger Ebert’s signature is in the cement of the Hollywood walk of fame. Since he first joined the Chicago Sun-Times in 1967, Ebert has garnered enough respect and acclaim from the public that he will be remembered for many years to come. People will still refer to his writings or the reviews of those in his company when they choose which movies to watch.

Despite his passing, Ebert’s notion of a “leave of presence” is still applicable because people will read his work long after his death. Even if Roger Ebert can no longer physically express his love for movies, that passion will be remembered by all who read him and I know he would be happy knowing that.

Contact CU Independent Opinion Writer Edward Quartin at Edward.quartin@colorado.edu.