Chicago Tribune - We are currently unavailable in your region
According to the Archive of American Television, Siskel and Ebert determined main draws, their relationship was based on fierce mutual respect. at a roiling boil, I never considered [going our separate ways],” Ebert wrote. Siskel and Ebert -- the use of their last names a badge of honor and mark of Now there are hundreds of ways to get movie reviews -- blogs, Much has been made of Siskel and Ebert's sometimes snappy relationship. 1 Quotes. Awake in the Dark: The Best of Roger Ebert (); Your Movie of course, because children have such a strong symbiotic relationship with.
Siskel said it was absurd that Ebert was giving a Kubrick film that rating, while in the same show he gave a recommendation to Benji the Hunted which he disliked. In their review of Kids in the Hall: Brain CandyEbert rattled off a list of adjectives as to why he hates the film: Boy, are we apart on this one. I found this movie to be awful, terrible, dreadful, stupid, idiotic, unfunny, labored, forced, painful, bad! I'm afraid the brain is missing.
The movie might've been better if it had simplified its storyline, and not tried to deal with homeless men, baseball, romance, cancer, aliens from outer space, magic fireworks, people who are missing in action, and the small town resentment of outsiders.
I think- I did cover baseball, okay. The show in its various incarnations ran for decades from to Love It or Hate It: Famously, they awarded each movie they reviewed a Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down. Their thumbs were in fact trademarked to prevent other shows from copying them! Ebert stated that Connery's huge smile in Highlander II: The Quickening was perhaps because of the massive paycheck he received, especially since the film had a huge budget and looked like it had No Budget.
Due to the wide variety of films that debuted each week, they could review a slasher flick Lampshaded by Siskel in one episode: Our next movie, and it's The Rugrats Movie Another good one was when they reviewed Nicolas Cage 's It Could Happen To You, which they were very enthusiastic about, calling it one of the best films of all time After the commercial that followed this review came the North review, which doesn't need an explanation. Their review of Silent Night, Deadly Night consisted mostly of them wagging their fingers and clucking "Shame, shame" at all the names listed in the credits.
There's also Siskel's infamous review of the original Friday the 13thin which he referred to the director as "one of the most despicable creatures to ever infest the movie business" and gave out the personal addresses of some of the people involved in the film's creation so equally infuriated viewers could send their hate mail directly to them.
13 Facts About ‘Siskel and Ebert and the Movies’ | Mental Floss
The opening to Siskel and Ebert: The duo write their reviews for their respective newspapers, and head for the news stands where the papers with their reviews are being delivered, followed by the two heading into the theater while arguing with each other about each others' reviews. In their review of Frozen Assets which both would name the worst film ofEbert said that as a reward for having to view this film, he deserved months "in a beautiful valley with honey and nectar and zephyr-like breezes".
Siskel joked that he had simple tastes, to which Ebert added: And a big car!
Siskel and Ebert were spoofed in many shows, usually in a Take That, Critics! Siskel said the caricature was "petty," and Ebert complained, not that he felt insulted, but that he was in a Godzilla film and didn't get to be eaten or squashed by the monster.
A segment in Animaniacs featured obvious caricatures "Codger Egbert and Lean Hisskill" as a pair of TV critics who are tormented by Slappy and Skippy Squirrel for rating Slappy's cartoons "two stinky toes down. Twice in the series, Ebert resorted to this in the same context: When reviewing Double DragonEbert said kids might enjoy it but nobody else: We're not kids- Siskel: Then why not recommending it?
Because I'm not a kid. I can't say that I enjoyed it, because I didn't. I wanna- I wanna- I'm gonna praise you in spite of yourself. You have recommended, on this show, kids films that you've liked, and you've knocked kids films that you don't.
Why, suddenly, all of a sudden, are you praising a film that you don't like? To the degree that that's praise, I accept it. A similar situation came up when they reviewed Good Burgerand Ebert accused Siskel of reviewing it as if the film were made for adults instead of the movie's target audience kids who are fans of the Good Burger skits on All That: You're giving it a positive review? Not for myself, but I'm trying to give a fair assessment of the function of the movie and its intended audience.
I thought you were a guy who always says you review movies, what you think, and not try and predict what the audience is gonna think?Siskel & Ebert's 1989 Holiday Gift Guide
Well, if I have been useful to our viewers, I'm very grateful. Siskel accused Ebert of this when Ebert gave a scathing review to Kids in the Hall: I got my sense of humor.
My sense of humor was starving for a laugh! Siskel also asked Ebert where his sense of humor was when Ebert gave a thumbs down to Eddie Murphy: Not Distracted by the Sexy: Siskel derided the sex scene in Disclosuresaying it was unrealistic for the boss to sleep with an employee on the first night: This is a totally preposterous scene, no matter how much you like looking at these actors' bodies.
The same went for Barb Wire ; Siskel got annoyed at Pamela Anderson's "assets" being shoved in his face. One of their stranger arguments was debating whether Ed was truly stupid what Siskel believed or faking it to be ironic what Ebert believed in Good Burger. One of the Kids: Ebert called himself "eternally young" when he gave a positive review to Garfield 2: A Tale of Two Kitties.
In Siskel and Ebert's review of Star KidEbert liked the film because he was in touch with the child inside himself. This was pretty much Siskel and Ebert's only criticism of Bound: The title was vague and didn't really give a clue as to what the movie was about.
They theorized that's why it didn't do especially well at the box office. Before the closing catchphrase, each episode featured Siskel or Ebert saying what they'd review on the next show. The duo generally avoided even the mildest curse words, but Gene let a "damn" slip out when he reviewed Speechless: This screenplay didn't care enough to teach us a damn thing- excuse me, a darn thing, about politics, speech writing, or political campaigns.
A few of Ebert's guest hosts could be seen as this. The sponsors varied, but two companies that often appeared in the "Promotional Consideration" slide were Nestle's Raisinets, sponsor of the Video Pick of the Week segmentand Jelly Belly Jelly Beans. While the duo resisted using bad puns in their reviews, they occasionally let one slide.
Have you seen enough? Well, multiply the experience of seeing those two scenes by about twenty, and you see you get your eyeful rather quickly.
This show provides examples of:
In their review of Scooby-Doo 2, Ebert said: In their "Worst of " show, Ebert recalled what he wrote in his Chicago Sun-Times review of North which they both considered the worst movie of that year: I hated this movie! Hated, hated, hated, hated, hated this movie! Hated every stupid, simpering, vacant, audience-insulting moment of it! In their "Worst of " show, Siskel and Ebert criticized the parents who took their kids to see Mighty Morphin' Power Rangerswhen they could've taken them to better family movies instead.
Any fan of Siskel and Ebert and the Movies can tell you that some of its best moments came when the critics were in serious disagreement about a movie. When we were in a group together, we were always intensely aware of one another.
Sometimes this took the form of camaraderie, sometimes shared opinions, sometimes hostility. But we were aware. If something happened that we both thought was funny but weren't supposed to, God help us if one caught the other's eye. We almost always thought the same things were funny. That may be the best sign of intellectual communion. We were linked in a bond beyond all disputing. But if we were teamed up against a common target, we were fatal.
When we were on his show, Howard Stern never knew what hit him.
He picked on one of us, and we were both at his throat. Though reviews were their main business, Siskel and Ebert worked hard to develop an appreciation for the art of cinema itself in their viewers. In an editorial for Film Comment inEbert reminded readers of the many themed issues he and Siskel had produced where they delved into issues facing moviemakers of the day, including the colorization of films, the virtues of letterboxing, the art of black-and-white cinematography, and why the MPAA was the same as censorship.
To illustrate that aforementioned point about black and white cinematography, Siskel and Ebert filmed an entire episode in black and white. While much of the show was dedicated to major Hollywood movies, Siskel and Ebert made a point to review smaller films, including foreign films, arthouse movies, and documentaries. There are some actors I will see anything that they do.