Siskel & Ebert & the Movies

What can I say? I've known this show all my life. First, it was Ebert and Siskel. I'll also remember how it was when Siskel was in the hosptial and he talked, like, over the phone I think, and tell his reviews of movies like "Godzilla". It seemed to have such an empty hole in the show when it was just Ebert, with his thumbs up or down. I mean, one person's opinion? What fun is that? Then, they had a different guest star every week. Finally, it was all down to just one critic on the show with Ebert: Roeper. Basically, I have no problem with him. Just the simple concept of two critics having reviews of movies is entertaining. The same formula has not worked for shows like "Hot Ticket". I've read Leonard Maltin's reviews and there are a lot of times when I have to disagree with him. He's definitley not my favorite critic. I should start getting some of Ebert review books, but they don't explore as many movies as the Leonard Maltin books.

The one episode where Ebert was reflecting on his reviews with Siskel was probably the most memorable. Sure, I disagree with them, sometimes, but it's cool to know critics that agree with most of what you think. I liked to give a tribute to Gene Siskel for rating "Babe: Pig In The City" as the #1 movie of 1998! I totally agree with him! Anyway, I'll be sure to watch this whenever I can! A 9/10.

Why, Gene, why?!? You were the only critic with taste! You gotta love a guy who puts Kingpin on his top 10 list. Now, we have Roeper who makes this show funny because he hates just about everything. Then there's a hilariously funny argument between the two whenever there's a split decision. I make sure to tape it every week. Funny stuff.

Ever since I was 13 years old, and I tuned into "Sneak Previews" with Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert back in 1982, I fell in love with these two guys overnight. Besides being the kings of film critics, they also had the makings of a comedy team in the Abbott and Costello vein (well, you figure out who was Abbott and who was Costello, and the answer is painfully obvious). They were so highly successful they were asked to go onto syndicated TV and do "At the Movies", which did wonders for their forever-famous thumbs and their careers, then another TV show bearing their name, which kept fans rolling in the aisles until Siskel's tragic death in 1999. By the way, replacements for "Sneak Previews" and "At the Movies" were copycats who shouldn't have been there because Siskel and Ebert were always number one. Those annoying copycats included New York's squeaky-voiced, touchy-feely Jeffrey Lyons, the nerdy Michael Medved, the mean-streaked Rex, Reed, and the bimbette Dixie Whatley who didn't really review movies, but her glamourous presence was only to lure unsuspecting viewers. Anyway, we all miss Siskel and no other critic in his chair, not even the new guy, Richard Roeper, could ever review movies the way Siskel did. Ebert does his best with Roeper, and it seems that the corpulent Ebert is now the straight man, which he always needed because he was a better spark plug with Siskel. Still, Roeper is nowhere near as bad as the four copycats in the above paragraph, and the show is still going on, as long as there is Ebert.

It feels kind of strange to critique the critics, but I'll do it anyway. What can I say? The show's funny, entertaining, and knowledgeable. If anyone loves movies, they will definitely be an inspiration. Thumbs Up.

Gene Siskel's death is the death of a major movie advertising tradition. What will happen to the thumbs? I love the show and think the two guys are so intelligent and I hear another guy will take Siskel's place. It won't be the same.