@@FygeeFor a film expert Siskel was clueless a lot of the time; he was also unethical-giving away the endings of movies he hated, doxxing the cast of Friday the 13th. That's why I loved Leonard Maltin; when he disliked a movie, his responses were hilarious.
@@tomdalton4293 Yeah, Tom Hanks' acting from Big onward is very different from his sitcom-like performances before. That's why everyone was surprised by what he did in Big.
At my local corner store around 1985 or so, they used to sell six-packs of movie trading cards for $1.00. I spent a lot of money on those, and in practically all of those I bought was a pack of Return to Oz stickers. So I collected almost all of them.
Goes to show even professional critics can't let go of their childhoods. They both saw Wizard of Oz as kids and didn't accept a different vision of that mythology/film.
St. Elmo's Fire was nauseating, awful trash that actually angered me. This movie glorifies shockingly irresponsible behavior to such a point that is totally acceptable in this movie's world. I hated all the characters in that movie.
15:29 famously my older brother was 5 years old when my parents took him to see Return to Oz and he flipped his shit so hard when the decapitated heads were coming to life and talking that they had to leave the theatre!
In1985 these two movie critics sent corporate Hollywood a message, no more clichéd, mindless summer movies, and ever since then we have had nothing but original, thoughtful, and engaging movies in the summer season. Thanks guys
You joke, but the 90s are just around the corner with what some reasonably consider a 3rd golden age of Hollywood (30s-40s, '67-'74 being the others). But more importantly, independent films really take off in the 90s.
I remember at that time I thought the same thing before I heard Gene say it ...he's doing kind of a Bill Murray impersonation in one of his movies ...I forgot which one now
I love how the summer of Back to the Future, Goonies, Rambo, Fletch, The Stuff, Pale Rider, Fright Night, Weird Science and Real Genius is "one of the most bland and homogenized" summers. Christ, dude. You were in Paradise and didn't even know it.
I was 16 that summer, Rambo was the first film I walked out of, Reagan propaganda, the Goonies and Weird Science sucked even Day of The Dead was a disappointment. The highlights that summer were Return of The Living Dead and Lifeforce.
Even with all this it was still a massive step down from the summer of 1984, though. That might have been the greatest movie summer of all time: Ghostbusters, Gremlins, Temple of Doom, Red Dawn, Karate Kid, Top Secret!, Bachelor Party, Revenge of the Nerds and The Last Starfighter. And I'm sure I missed a few.
Gene Siskel talking about legacy sequels and passionless reboots in 1985 is so jarring, but not surprising. The only reason why they keep doing it is because people keep watching them.
Romero wanted to film Day of the Dead in different locations, but the budget didn't allow it, that's why he set the movie in the underground bunker. I think it has aged rather well, and despite the overacting, that movie contained some of Tom Savini's greatest practical special effects.
keep in mind that Ebert also slagged Night of the Living Dead pretty badly. He famously had a vendetta against horror films in general - although he enjoyed Dawn of the Dead.
Mom was obsessed with Tom Hanks after seeing Bachelor Party. She took us to see The Man With One Red Shoe, and we didn’t laugh once. And neither did the audience.
You're definitely not. Return to Oz is much more true to the books, which were scary and dark (at a kid's level). And yeah, Siskel is right that it's not 100% faithful to the book, but the scenery, feeling, story, and characters definitely are. Ebert doesn't give kids enough credit here either.
All eight of those movies were ranged between mediocre to plain awful. And I must agree with Siskel and Ebert none of the films had any pay-offs whatsoever. The screenwriters clearly had no sense of inspiration around that time, which meant their films were bound for negative criticism, despite moviegoers paying $5 to root for lead and some supporting stars. I guess one generation after another were all about copying and pasting ideas to this day.
@@sha11235 i think he would have like Casino Royale and likely defended the sequel with Bardem as the villain. Gene liked performers and performances most.
Day of the dead? No way! Return to oz is a very good movie that even mick Martin and Marsha porter of video guide gave it four and a half out of five stars
Yeah that was a bizarre criticism against the film. Did he just totally forget the Bub character who got upset at seeing Dr. Logan killed and gets revenge, even sarcastically saluting Rhodes as the latter meets his demise?
I have to wonder what gene would've thought of the fact that sean connery's final performance was reprising his role as james bond in the 2005 video game remake of From Russia With Love.
I heard the director of The Bride said in his commentary "Don't shoot your ending last. Especially went you run out of money." That might explain why the conclusion was anti-climatic.
The Man With One Red Shoe is uneven and flawed (how on earth does he afford that apartment?!) yet I’ve always enjoyed the films energy and Thomas Newmans dynamic score
Return to Oz was a movie from the Oz series of books, not a sequel to the Judy Garland movie; it was ridiculous it think of it that way. And "St. Elmo's Fire" was not a great film, but it had some memorable stuff in it, and no way could it be one of the worst of the year.
Whhhaaa?? Brewster’s Millions was hella fun. And there were restrictions on what he could buy. Pryor had great energy in the film. Just flowed really well with all of the chaotic spending he had to do. With a great ending as well.
I still agree with them about Return To Oz even if I liked it. You don't go from a beloved and bright song based film to a dark and gritty "true to the source material" type movie without any type of warning or marketing. Same goes with comparisons to C3P0. No one cares who did it first, they only care about who did it right first. This is why in the comic movie world a character like DC's Darkseid will always be considered a ripoff of Marvel's Thanos even though Darkseid came out in comics five years earlier than Thanos.
"More true to the original spirit. Sure, we really hated that first one." Great for Siskel to just real openly admit he doesn't like remaking (or sequel-izing) classics, yeah that is a bad idea and will get rejected.
Wow! It's interesting hearing Roger Ebert say he's tired of James Bond, especially considering that he was all for Bond by the time Goldeneye came out. What really changed? It was still the same old formula.
@@ricardocantoral7672 Yeah, Moore came across as too old to be James Bond. Also, while I like Dalton and License to Kill, a lot of people in the late 80s felt that The Living Daylights was mediocre and that LTK was more akin to Miami Vice than a proper Bond film. GoldenEye was perceived as a much needed reboot to keep the series fresh.
The 007 movies have the narrowest range of quality of any franchise. They are rarely truly awful, nor are they ever great. It's the perfect Hollywood formula for regurgitating product for steady revenue, though ironically not strictly Hollywood.
I'm so glad to hear Gene's opinion on Roger Moore as Bond. I didn't like him either. He didn't come across as athletic enough to pull off the stunts and the writing was way too campy.
SISKEL THIS IS NOT A REMAKE BUT A SEQUEL THAT IS BASED OFF THE THE SEQUEL BOOK AND ITS JUST A LITTLE DARK FOR A FAMILY FILM BUT ITS ALSO STILL BEAUTIFUL IN ITS WAY.
I really enjoyed A View to a Kill, I thought it was a lot of fun, campy yes, but fun. And after a few years and a few viewings, I like Return to oz now, I think after they get to Oz it was a lot of fun.
This is the first time ive seen one of these 'worst of' videos from them where almost all of the films they hated are now complete classics that get mountains of praise and are still watched and loved by fans around the world. Almost all of these movies have solod ratings with other critics and even higher from audiences. I think this may be the most out of touch 'worst of' i have seen from them. They are so incorrect about over half of the movies. Crazy to look back on this and see how much they hated on movies that would become beloved classic movies still watched to this day, over 30 years later. They are bonafide classics with that stating power.
What are you blathering about? The Bride was *never* going to be a success, much less a classic, with Sting and Jennifer Beals. St. Elmo's Fire is largely despised. I suppose there's an annual festival for The Man With One Red Shoe..... "Shoe-palooza"? A la "Lebowski-fest"? I suspect you must be a Romero fan... that would explain the misplaced righteous indignation.
As dumb (and forgettable) as the "A" story with Sting and Beals was, the "B" story with Clancy Brown and David Rappaport got to me. I always liked David, a very good actor who didn't play stereotypical "dwarf" roles. And everyone by now knows how talented Clancy is. He was pretty good as the Monster.
Siskel hated every actor that played Bond after Connery. I doupt he even watched these movies. You only live twice was a total snorefest with a tired Connery wanting out of the franchise in 1967, and Diamonds are forever was a total walkthru by Connery just accepting that paycheck. Siskel never mentioned those.
Neither Ebert or Siskel understood the obvious: THE BRIDE is of course not a remake of BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN, it is a loosely held sequel to Whale's classic. They are far from alone, but the misunderstanding remains unbelievably stupid.
I thought it was great also,. Some people just hate Roger Moore,.. Chis Walken was a great Bad Guy also~ And it's a great Theme Song,., sUPER HoTT Tanya Roberts as a Bond Girl,. What's to HATE?
@@KRhetor Tell me you don't understand that the charisma of the leading mean does not equate to being a good film without telling me..... ah, you know the rest.
While I agree that the Roger Moore Bond's are virtually unwatchable , I felt , "A View To A Kill" was the best of that bad bunch - also , while I agree that it lacked depth , I personally enjoyed , "Brewster's Millions" - Other than that , I agree that the rest were pure garbage
The saxophone on the score of St. Elmo's Fire is so oppressive. I mean, that is reason #174 why that movie blows but it's like nails on a blackboard to me.
But John Badham really kicked his habits for good. As an veteran filmmaker, he made an healthy comeback with 1986's "Short Circuit" at Columbia with Steve Guttenberg, Ally Sheedy and G.W. Bailey. The movie was an major box-office success.
@@morgan8757 We all do. And that's why Columbia's Short Circuit was one of the studio's highest grossing hits of the 1986-1987 year. It made a whole lot of money.
It's never easy to make a good decent movie for everyone to like, watch & see, if it was everybody would do it. U have to have great screen write story, right people for the roles & great crew, producers & right director to not only make picture look good also execute it well or the whole project will be completely a flop failure not only to review critics & audience but sometimes the box office.
Since 1954, when legendary actress, author, writer and producer Dame Jackie Collins of the Hollywood Wives fame finally came to America to write novels. By now, she gave lots of wonderful praise for "American Flyers" (1985-1986), the first movie was co-produced by Cruise-Wagner Productions and Spring Creek Enterprises and is distributed by Warner Bros., a Time Warner Company under John Badham's superior direction. This was a follow-up to Disney's Oscar winning "Breaking Away" (1979-1980). It features an all-star cast: Kevin Costner, David Marshall Grant, Alexandra Paul, Robert Townsend and Janice Rule in her final film role. It was great fun to watch and enjoy "American Flyers" - but today, you can see it on syndication in the early 1990's and beyond.
I think _Return to Oz_ is one of those movies that's WAY over-valued because of how weird and dark it is for a kid's movie. this, coupled with nostalgia from those who saw it as kids. I wonder how it plays these days to young people. it didn't work for me.
I hated Return to Oz and only saw it on TV / video. I left my bedroom and fell down the stairs and cut my leg wide open. I was so fortunate because, this was during the 80s before cellphones and my mother was out and my sister was there. She placed a kitchen towel on my gushing leg and my mother pulled up and we went to the hospital (feeling dizzy while I am writing this just thinking of this scary stuff). I never will watch that movie ever again. Ugh.
"American Flyers" was an so-so success, not great nor terrible. Sequel to "Breaking Away." "The Man with One Red Shoe" was a minor disappointment. "The Bride" was a critical bomb. "Return to Oz" was a major flop.
According to Time Warner board member Janis Paige who wrote "John Badham's American Flyers was an sleeper hit of the 1985-1986 year with Kevin Costner, David Marshall Grant, Janice Rule (in her final role in a movie), Alexandra Paul, Robert Townsend and others - were providing lots of the film's action sequences. Also having lots of magic moments that can take your breath away. Sequel to Disney's Breaking Away. I'm very proud of what makes American Flyers so special for families and friends as an true American classic."
Sting gets a bad rap for being a musician turned actor. People forget Bowie and Jagger made a few stinkers in from the early 70's to the 90's. Brimstone & Treacle is a fair film and a nice departure from typical 'possession' genre. His performance in Dune(especially in light of the 'lead' actors we see in horrible movies/series now, looks like Olivier or Brando by comparison. St. Elmo's Fire is a great example is a mostly bad film, carried by a passably good soundtrack. Return To Oz and Day Of The Dead are buoyed today by strong cult followings, with supremely lowered baselines of expectations. Also, Ebert and Siskel are treating "RTO" as a 'sequel', when it really isn't. It's more of an adaption of another LFB story, and Dorothy is much closer to the age Baum wrote her as in the original novels.
The title *literally* has 'Return' in it, with several of the same characters. It's not hard to regard it as a sequel. What are any sequels but adaptations of other related stories? For all intents and purposes, it *is* a sequel. Perhaps you meant it's not a remake. There's your out.
Also, hearing Siskel call Tom Hanks a "second rate Bill Murray" is freaking hilarious.
Well, this was 1985 and Hanks had not gotten into serious stuff yet that would change our image of his ass.
@@sha11235 I know, the 20/20 hindsight is what makes it funny to me. Little did they know then...
@@FygeeFor a film expert Siskel was clueless a lot of the time; he was also unethical-giving away the endings of movies he hated, doxxing the cast of Friday the 13th.
That's why I loved Leonard Maltin; when he disliked a movie, his responses were hilarious.
"Tom Hanks, a second rate Bill Murray..." Well that aged well
LOL, THAT was the first thing that I thought. As good as they were, history has shown Siskel & Ebert to be wrong sometimes.
Tom Hanks was great, and then someone told him he was an actor.
@@Laceykat66 They were right at the time
@@tomdalton4293 Yeah, Tom Hanks' acting from Big onward is very different from his sitcom-like performances before. That's why everyone was surprised by what he did in Big.
he is a second rate bill murray, he's a first rate tom hanks. that's not what he meant.
I'm one of those who liked return to oz. Fairuza Balk was great in it
I love Return to Oz when I was a kid. I even had the coloring book.
Me too
At my local corner store around 1985 or so, they used to sell six-packs of movie trading cards for $1.00. I spent a lot of money on those, and in practically all of those I bought was a pack of Return to Oz stickers. So I collected almost all of them.
Goes to show even professional critics can't let go of their childhoods. They both saw Wizard of Oz as kids and didn't accept a different vision of that mythology/film.
“St. Elmos Fire - a movie about spoiled yuppie brats.”
Accurate
Though at the time that was what everyone thought about "Yuppies." They were the butt of jokes in every media.
Funny how Young Urbam Professionals became an object of ridicule...almost like our betters wanted to raise a generation of shiftless wage slaves...
St. Elmo's Fire was nauseating, awful trash that actually angered me. This movie glorifies shockingly irresponsible behavior to such a point that is totally acceptable in this movie's world. I hated all the characters in that movie.
BELUSHI: I'm not thirsty.
SISKEL: And I'm not laughing.
15:29 famously my older brother was 5 years old when my parents took him to see Return to Oz and he flipped his shit so hard when the decapitated heads were coming to life and talking that they had to leave the theatre!
I was 8. I don’t remember it well, but I think it scares me a bit and there certainly wasn’t anything especially fun or memorable about it.
Return to Oz is a fantastic movie and was one of my favorites growing up. Shame they didn't like it.
In1985 these two movie critics sent corporate Hollywood a message, no more clichéd, mindless summer movies, and ever since then we have had nothing but original, thoughtful, and engaging movies in the summer season. Thanks guys
They provided the same admonition every damn year, too 😂
You joke, but the 90s are just around the corner with what some reasonably consider a 3rd golden age of Hollywood (30s-40s, '67-'74 being the others). But more importantly, independent films really take off in the 90s.
Tom Hanks, a second rate Bill Murray - Gene Siskel.
He wasn't wrong then
I remember at that time I thought the same thing before I heard Gene say it ...he's doing kind of a Bill Murray impersonation in one of his movies ...I forgot which one now
@@smileybubbles9894 Oh, I agree. Tom Hanks certainly wasn't TOM HANKS when Gene made that comment. It just hasn't aged well.
I had to check the comment section after he said that too lol.
I loved Bachelors Party...and Nothing in Common.and liked Volunteers...but I didn`t laugh once in "Red Shoe" ....Hanks worst movie
I love how the summer of Back to the Future, Goonies, Rambo, Fletch, The Stuff, Pale Rider, Fright Night, Weird Science and Real Genius is "one of the most bland and homogenized" summers. Christ, dude. You were in Paradise and didn't even know it.
If you loved the Eighties, you probably weren't there.
@@KRhetor Oh, I was there - at least, as a teen. If you didn’t have AIDS, it was a pretty great decade.
@@KRhetor I was there,and @WholsJohnCleland is correct!
I was 16 that summer, Rambo was the first film I walked out of, Reagan propaganda, the Goonies and Weird Science sucked even Day of The Dead was a disappointment. The highlights that summer were Return of The Living Dead and Lifeforce.
Even with all this it was still a massive step down from the summer of 1984, though. That might have been the greatest movie summer of all time: Ghostbusters, Gremlins, Temple of Doom, Red Dawn, Karate Kid, Top Secret!, Bachelor Party, Revenge of the Nerds and The Last Starfighter. And I'm sure I missed a few.
Gene Siskel talking about legacy sequels and passionless reboots in 1985 is so jarring, but not surprising. The only reason why they keep doing it is because people keep watching them.
Romero wanted to film Day of the Dead in different locations, but the budget didn't allow it, that's why he set the movie in the underground bunker. I think it has aged rather well, and despite the overacting, that movie contained some of Tom Savini's greatest practical special effects.
An under rated classic
The over acting is the best part
Day of the Dead is my favorite film of all time. It's a microcosm of humanity.
The original script was crazy and it would have been a totally different movie
" choke on it"
The character of Tiktok the Mechanical Man is more than 100 years old. Nothing to do with R2D2 has nothing to do with it.
To them, it reminded them of R2D2 from Star Wars. Maybe they hadn't read the book it was based on.
"Tom Hanks is a second rate Bill Murray".- Siskel Cold as hell.
Hanks overrated.
Hanks was only seen as a light, comedic actor back then. Philadelphia was when he was finally taken seriously.
@@ricardocantoral7672 That's true.
"Tom Hanks will not play a simpleton (unless it wins him an Oscar)." FORREST GUMP 😅
Or that there, the simpleton was lovable and the movie was better.
"Everybody knows you never go full retard" - Kirk Lazarus
Day of the Dead is my favourite movie of all time. I'm a major fanboy. Hard to imagine this harsh take, it's as if they watched a different film.
keep in mind that Ebert also slagged Night of the Living Dead pretty badly. He famously had a vendetta against horror films in general - although he enjoyed Dawn of the Dead.
Roger Moore in Moonraker was awesome‼️ and funny ‼️ and lois chiles was so breathtaking☺️🛸
Yes he was. Siskel was being an asshole
Mom was obsessed with Tom Hanks after seeing Bachelor Party. She took us to see The Man With One Red Shoe, and we didn’t laugh once. And neither did the audience.
I can’t be the only one who likes “Return to Oz” more than “The Wizard of Oz”.
Yes. Yes, you can.
You're not. I always hated "Wizard" and loved "Return".
Balk was good but Garland was excellent.
You're definitely not. Return to Oz is much more true to the books, which were scary and dark (at a kid's level).
And yeah, Siskel is right that it's not 100% faithful to the book, but the scenery, feeling, story, and characters definitely are. Ebert doesn't give kids enough credit here either.
You gotta be a dummy then.
All eight of those movies were ranged between mediocre to plain awful. And I must agree with Siskel and Ebert none of the films had any pay-offs whatsoever. The screenwriters clearly had no sense of inspiration around that time, which meant their films were bound for negative criticism, despite moviegoers paying $5 to root for lead and some supporting stars. I guess one generation after another were all about copying and pasting ideas to this day.
Anything with John Candy is ok in my book
That comment is nothing but trouble.
@@chonconnor6144 I saw what you did there
@@chonconnor6144 Adam is armed and dangerous with his comment.
From the thumbnail, I thought it was Abigail.
Return to Oz is worth watching once and no more.
I wouldn't inflict this movie on anyone
At least Fairuza Balk would have a great career after Return To Oz.
She became the stock, weird 90's chick.
@@ricardocantoral7672 She's good at playing those roles, just like Christina Ricci.
Then New Line Cinema ruined her with that awful experience on the set of Dr. Moreau.
@@whenfatkillsfat803 Like Loring Mandel who wrote this in 2002, "Of all those projects,
everybody has terrible fights."
Gene got his wish. _A View to Kill_ did in fact end up being Roger Moore's last go around being James Bond. 😄
Wonder how he would have felt about the current JB films?
@@sha11235 i think he would have like Casino Royale and likely defended the sequel with Bardem as the villain. Gene liked performers and performances most.
Roger Moore was pure class and his tenure as Bond was the most entertaining of all of them.
Even Roger Moore hated A View to a Kill when he said "That was not Bond"
@@sha11235 Moore was a huge fan of Skyfall. Pretty easy to find his reaction to it online
Day of the dead? No way!
Return to oz is a very good movie that even mick Martin and Marsha porter of video guide gave it four and a half out of five stars
I remember that. Their glowing review of Return To Oz was the reason I wanted to see it.
Who and Who of What???😂😂😂
"The zombies don't do anything new"... uh, they shoot guns and talk?
Yeah that was a bizarre criticism against the film. Did he just totally forget the Bub character who got upset at seeing Dr. Logan killed and gets revenge, even sarcastically saluting Rhodes as the latter meets his demise?
We'd only have the same problem years & years later with the remakes that Gene's talking about.
St. Elmo's Fire. Liked the song hated the movie.
I like Brian Eno's St. Elmo's Fire. Much better. 😊
I have to wonder what gene would've thought of the fact that sean connery's final performance was reprising his role as james bond in the 2005 video game remake of From Russia With Love.
Sending a message to corporate Hollywood to make better movies? Imagine what they would have to say to todays Hollywood!
I love the VHS warbling from these old videos!
20:22 lmaooo Gene with the knowing smile
There was actually a critic from Boston who thought return to oz was better than the original. HOW MUCH MONEY DID HE GET FOR LYING?
I heard the director of The Bride said in his commentary "Don't shoot your ending last. Especially went you run out of money." That might explain why the conclusion was anti-climatic.
So funny hearing them talk about remakes..Wonder how they'd feel about the slew of reboots now..
Boy we miss these guys❗️
boy do we miss these guys‼️®™️☑️☑️
I know, right?! Am I weird kind of having a sort of 'crush' on Gene?... and Roger is just like a cute Teddy Bear!
The Man With One Red Shoe is uneven and flawed (how on earth does he afford that apartment?!) yet I’ve always enjoyed the films energy and Thomas Newmans dynamic score
Return to Oz was a movie from the Oz series of books, not a sequel to the Judy Garland movie; it was ridiculous it think of it that way. And "St. Elmo's Fire" was not a great film, but it had some memorable stuff in it, and no way could it be one of the worst of the year.
Well I enjoy watching fantasy thriller flim Return to Oz in my opinion
Whhhaaa?? Brewster’s Millions was hella fun. And there were restrictions on what he could buy. Pryor had great energy in the film. Just flowed really well with all of the chaotic spending he had to do. With a great ending as well.
It was silly fun, but Pryor was never going to as big in movies as on stage.
"tom hanks, a second rate bill murray" man, that did not age well.
I still agree with them about Return To Oz even if I liked it. You don't go from a beloved and bright song based film to a dark and gritty "true to the source material" type movie without any type of warning or marketing. Same goes with comparisons to C3P0. No one cares who did it first, they only care about who did it right first.
This is why in the comic movie world a character like DC's Darkseid will always be considered a ripoff of Marvel's Thanos even though Darkseid came out in comics five years earlier than Thanos.
"More true to the original spirit. Sure, we really hated that first one."
Great for Siskel to just real openly admit he doesn't like remaking (or sequel-izing) classics, yeah that is a bad idea and will get rejected.
Absolutely love Brewsters millions
Wow! It's interesting hearing Roger Ebert say he's tired of James Bond, especially considering that he was all for Bond by the time Goldeneye came out. What really changed? It was still the same old formula.
GoldenEye was a lot more energetic and exciting. By comparison, A View To A Kill was dull and plodding.
@@ricardocantoral7672 Yeah, Moore came across as too old to be James Bond. Also, while I like Dalton and License to Kill, a lot of people in the late 80s felt that The Living Daylights was mediocre and that LTK was more akin to Miami Vice than a proper Bond film. GoldenEye was perceived as a much needed reboot to keep the series fresh.
The 007 movies have the narrowest range of quality of any franchise. They are rarely truly awful, nor are they ever great. It's the perfect Hollywood formula for regurgitating product for steady revenue, though ironically not strictly Hollywood.
Bill Murray a second rated Tom Hanks 😁
Wow, we were just kinda dumb back then. Like fk, so dumb.
Return to Oz is a great movie, and Day of the Dead is my favorite in the franchise.
I loved "A View to a Kill"~
5:46 "Tom Hanks, a second rate Bill Murray"
I'm so glad to hear Gene's opinion on Roger Moore as Bond. I didn't like him either. He didn't come across as athletic enough to pull off the stunts and the writing was way too campy.
part of the 70's malaise that moore played bond.
@@dont-want-no-wrench 👍🏽
Roger Moore is the best OO7
@@treystephens6166 Stop the cap!
@@midasapprentice8670 the cap ???
Tom Hanks has been acting for so long year after year that he eventually got the hang of it.
He got better over the years in films.
Day Of The Dead is a masterpiece. Mr. Ebert was also wrong about both Blade Runner and The Thing in 1982.
SISKEL THIS IS NOT A REMAKE BUT A SEQUEL THAT IS BASED OFF THE THE SEQUEL BOOK AND ITS JUST A LITTLE DARK FOR A FAMILY FILM BUT ITS ALSO STILL BEAUTIFUL IN ITS WAY.
I really enjoyed A View to a Kill, I thought it was a lot of fun, campy yes, but fun. And after a few years and a few viewings, I like Return to oz now, I think after they get to Oz it was a lot of fun.
He thought *A View to Kill* was a lousy movie?????
Guess they don't always get it right.
1000%~
Oh, c'mon -- what's not to love about a new version of Dr. Frankenstein with surfer-dude hair?
This is the first time ive seen one of these 'worst of' videos from them where almost all of the films they hated are now complete classics that get mountains of praise and are still watched and loved by fans around the world. Almost all of these movies have solod ratings with other critics and even higher from audiences. I think this may be the most out of touch 'worst of' i have seen from them. They are so incorrect about over half of the movies. Crazy to look back on this and see how much they hated on movies that would become beloved classic movies still watched to this day, over 30 years later. They are bonafide classics with that stating power.
What are you blathering about? The Bride was *never* going to be a success, much less a classic, with Sting and Jennifer Beals. St. Elmo's Fire is largely despised. I suppose there's an annual festival for The Man With One Red Shoe..... "Shoe-palooza"? A la "Lebowski-fest"? I suspect you must be a Romero fan... that would explain the misplaced righteous indignation.
The Bride walked so Poor Things could run 😂
Day of the Dead had everything you want in a horror... a memorable villain and lots of gore. It wasn't Romero's best but still very watchable.
Return to Oz really grew on me.
"Tom Hanks, a second rate Bill Murray."
Wow...
As dumb (and forgettable) as the "A" story with Sting and Beals was, the "B" story with Clancy Brown and David Rappaport got to me. I always liked David, a very good actor who didn't play stereotypical "dwarf" roles. And everyone by now knows how talented Clancy is. He was pretty good as the Monster.
Yeah, let's not forget Shawshank Redemption. But he'd been around a long time before.
I wont't. I promise.@@sha11235
@@sha11235 That's Clancy Brown.
@@markelijio6012 I know. I didn't even realize he was the Monster until I looked up the description of the film and saw his name in the credits.
Siskel hated every actor that played Bond after Connery. I doupt he even watched these movies. You only live twice was a total snorefest with a tired Connery wanting out of the franchise in 1967, and Diamonds are forever was a total walkthru by Connery just accepting that paycheck. Siskel never mentioned those.
I liked the man with one red shoe
Imagine thinking The Wiz is better than Return to Oz! 😂
Tik-Tok predates R2-D2 by several decades.
Wow, Siskel referring to Tom Hanks as a "second-rate Bill Murray" hurts. I wonder if he ever recanted!
Spot on with St Elmo's Fire. Couldn't stand any of them except Emilio's character
The older I get, the more I agree with their review of "Day." Tom Savini was the real star of the film.
Return to Oz was some creepy MK Ultra sh1t.
Hey don’t forget American 🇺🇸 Ninja 🥷 (1985 Movie)!
See red letter media
Cannon's American Ninja was one of the biggest hits of the year. Followed by a great pair of four other sequels
until 1994.
"Tom Hanks, a second rate Bill Murray in my opinion..." OUCH 😅
Neither Ebert or Siskel understood the obvious: THE BRIDE is of course not a remake of BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN, it is a loosely held sequel to Whale's classic. They are far from alone, but the misunderstanding remains unbelievably stupid.
Not half as stupid as defending a yawnfest like The Bride.
So please explain how understanding this bit of trivia somehow makes it a better movie.
@@Hexon66 Oh dear, you are the kind of person who believe you can judge without understanding. Poor fella.
View to kill was the best Bond film ever!
Tell me you haven't seen any of the Connery Bonds without telling us you haven't seen any of them.
I thought it was great also,.
Some people just hate Roger Moore,..
Chis Walken was a great Bad Guy also~
And it's a great Theme Song,.,
sUPER HoTT Tanya Roberts as a Bond Girl,.
What's to HATE?
@@KRhetor Tell me you don't understand that the charisma of the leading mean does not equate to being a good film without telling me..... ah, you know the rest.
While I agree that the Roger Moore Bond's are virtually unwatchable , I felt , "A View To A Kill" was the best of that bad bunch - also , while I agree that it lacked depth , I personally enjoyed , "Brewster's Millions"
- Other than that , I agree that the rest were pure garbage
did Gene Siskel just call Tom Hanks a "second-rate Bill Murray"???
what a weird world this is, when spliced in with hindsight.
Lol a lot of these movies did great at the box office
The saxophone on the score of St. Elmo's Fire is so oppressive. I mean, that is reason #174 why that movie blows but it's like nails on a blackboard to me.
It's kind of cool watching these about movies that were out when I was in high school.
Fairuza Balk's mouth is the size of Belize
😂😂😂
Wow, Tom Hanks a second rate Bill Murray? My, how times have changed.
american flyers was a terrible ripoff of breaking away
But John Badham really kicked his habits for good. As an veteran filmmaker, he made an healthy
comeback with 1986's "Short Circuit" at Columbia with Steve Guttenberg, Ally Sheedy and
G.W. Bailey. The movie was an major box-office success.
@@markelijio6012 i liked short circuit
@@morgan8757 We all do. And that's why Columbia's Short Circuit was one of the studio's
highest grossing hits of the 1986-1987 year. It made a whole lot of money.
It's never easy to make a good decent movie for everyone to like, watch & see, if it was everybody would do it. U have to have great screen write story, right people for the roles & great crew, producers & right director to not only make picture look good also execute it well or the whole project will be completely a flop failure not only to review critics & audience but sometimes the box office.
True. And I couldn't agree with you more!
@@markelijio6012
Thank you 👍
I don’t know anyone who dislikes American Flyers. Great movie.
Since 1954, when legendary actress, author,
writer and producer Dame Jackie Collins of
the Hollywood Wives fame finally came to
America to write novels. By now, she gave
lots of wonderful praise for "American Flyers"
(1985-1986), the first movie was co-produced
by Cruise-Wagner Productions and
Spring Creek Enterprises and is distributed by
Warner Bros., a Time Warner Company under
John Badham's superior direction. This was a
follow-up to Disney's Oscar winning "Breaking
Away" (1979-1980). It features an all-star cast:
Kevin Costner, David Marshall Grant,
Alexandra Paul, Robert Townsend and
Janice Rule in her final film role. It was great fun
to watch and enjoy "American Flyers" - but today,
you can see it on syndication in the early 1990's
and beyond.
I think _Return to Oz_ is one of those movies that's WAY over-valued because of how weird and dark it is for a kid's movie.
this, coupled with nostalgia from those who saw it as kids. I wonder how it plays these days to young people. it didn't work for me.
It does seem a lot of people either love it or hate it based on the darkness (I thought it was average-OK).
Still better than all the crappy movies we have today
I hated Return to Oz and only saw it on TV / video. I left my bedroom and fell down the stairs and cut my leg wide open. I was so fortunate because, this was during the 80s before cellphones and my mother was out and my sister was there. She placed a kitchen towel on my gushing leg and my mother pulled up and we went to the hospital (feeling dizzy while I am writing this just thinking of this scary stuff). I never will watch that movie ever again. Ugh.
St. Elmos fire is a classic
Brewsters Millions one of the worst? Well never great. But a quite harmless fun comedy i would say.
❤❤❤
Sorry, return to oz is a great movie.
Whatever… Some of these wound up as cult classics…
No more of this junk, please! was the title of this show.
"American Flyers" was an so-so success, not great nor terrible. Sequel to "Breaking Away."
"The Man with One Red Shoe" was a minor disappointment.
"The Bride" was a critical bomb.
"Return to Oz" was a major flop.
According to Time Warner board member Janis Paige who wrote "John Badham's American Flyers was
an sleeper hit of the 1985-1986 year with Kevin Costner, David Marshall Grant, Janice Rule (in her final
role in a movie), Alexandra Paul, Robert Townsend and others - were providing lots of the film's action
sequences. Also having lots of magic moments that can take your breath away. Sequel to Disney's
Breaking Away. I'm very proud of what makes American Flyers so special for families and friends as
an true American classic."
Sting gets a bad rap for being a musician turned actor. People forget Bowie and Jagger made a few stinkers in from the early 70's to the 90's. Brimstone & Treacle is a fair film and a nice departure from typical 'possession' genre. His performance in Dune(especially in light of the 'lead' actors we see in horrible movies/series now, looks like Olivier or Brando by comparison. St. Elmo's Fire is a great example is a mostly bad film, carried by a passably good soundtrack. Return To Oz and Day Of The Dead are buoyed today by strong cult followings, with supremely lowered baselines of expectations. Also, Ebert and Siskel are treating "RTO" as a 'sequel', when it really isn't. It's more of an adaption of another LFB story, and Dorothy is much closer to the age Baum wrote her as in the original novels.
The title *literally* has 'Return' in it, with several of the same characters. It's not hard to regard it as a sequel. What are any sequels but adaptations of other related stories? For all intents and purposes, it *is* a sequel. Perhaps you meant it's not a remake. There's your out.
The zombies tried y'all...lmbo
Mostly I also dislike Moore as Bond However I do think the Spy who loved me, is brilliant