A riff on my usual show, here we have a non-linear compilation of Ebert & Roeper (mainly) reviewing the films of Christopher Nolan Obviously (and unfortunately) Siskel never lived to see a Nolan film, so it would be wrong to title this "Siskel & Ebert Review..." From Memento to Dunkirk (except for Insomnia, unfortunately): 00:21 Dunkirk (Roeper solo) 02:00 Memento (Ebert & Roeper) 06:49 Interstellar (Roeper solo) 09:00 Batman Begins (Ebert & Roeper, then solo Ebert) 15:00 The Prestige (Roeper & A.O. Scott) 19:02 Inception (Roeper solo) 20:37 The Dark Knight (Roeper & Michael Phillips, then Ben Lyons & Ben Mankiewicz) 29:57 The Dark Knight Rises (Roeper solo) Primarily for educational purposes, but enjoy however you see fit! For more of this series: th-cam.com/play/PLjog8SEXXlNV9hSA2USQDeuz-Njrkhuar.html&si=9MBkX8IAqz2l-B1b
Ebert and Roeper had more cooperation and less antagonism, hence it feels like the show and their dialogue flowed more naturally. Their personalities didn't clash and so neither did the content. It was easier to watch. But Siskel and Ebert were very different from each other. Even when they agreed on movies, they would have some different way of looking at them or find something to disagree about. It was never smooth and frequently argumentative. But the content was way more interesting and you truly would get 2 different viewpoints.
@@spinin1251 But Gene knew way more about film that Richard. Sure Richard is now one of the best film gurus in the world today, but 20 years ago, he couldn't hold a candle to Gene. Plus Gene and Roger were way more lively and fun. Their chemistry was like two brothers. Roger and Richard was more calm and had a teacher=mentor or father-son ordeal.
A riff on my usual show, here we have a non-linear compilation of Ebert & Roeper (mainly) reviewing the films of Christopher Nolan
Obviously (and unfortunately) Siskel never lived to see a Nolan film, so it would be wrong to title this "Siskel & Ebert Review..."
From Memento to Dunkirk (except for Insomnia, unfortunately):
00:21 Dunkirk (Roeper solo)
02:00 Memento (Ebert & Roeper)
06:49 Interstellar (Roeper solo)
09:00 Batman Begins (Ebert & Roeper, then solo Ebert)
15:00 The Prestige (Roeper & A.O. Scott)
19:02 Inception (Roeper solo)
20:37 The Dark Knight (Roeper & Michael Phillips, then Ben Lyons & Ben Mankiewicz)
29:57 The Dark Knight Rises (Roeper solo)
Primarily for educational purposes, but enjoy however you see fit!
For more of this series:
th-cam.com/play/PLjog8SEXXlNV9hSA2USQDeuz-Njrkhuar.html&si=9MBkX8IAqz2l-B1b
Clever to play with the timeline of Nolan's filmography
Thanks! My way of making it more fun considering Siskel's absence
Very creative editing. I enjoyed it.
Great job.
Unpopular opinion, and I love Siskel & Ebert, but I prefer Ebert and Roeper more.
WHAT!?!? 😲 😲
All respect to your opinion, but TWO THUMBS WAY DOWN !
Ebert and Roeper had more cooperation and less antagonism, hence it feels like the show and their dialogue flowed more naturally. Their personalities didn't clash and so neither did the content. It was easier to watch. But Siskel and Ebert were very different from each other. Even when they agreed on movies, they would have some different way of looking at them or find something to disagree about. It was never smooth and frequently argumentative. But the content was way more interesting and you truly would get 2 different viewpoints.
Appreciate all of your opinions 😊
@@spinin1251 But Gene knew way more about film that Richard. Sure Richard is now one of the best film gurus in the world today, but 20 years ago, he couldn't hold a candle to Gene.
Plus Gene and Roger were way more lively and fun. Their chemistry was like two brothers. Roger and Richard was more calm and had a teacher=mentor or father-son ordeal.