Siskel and Ebert The Biggest Arguments
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ธ.ค. 2023
- PayPal - PayPal.Me/TMMMKMP
#SiskelandEbert has had many reviews from the good and the bad but on occation there would be the big disagreements and massive arguements, some strange, some justified and others...well...you'll see...I even included a review of one my all time favourite films, Bram Stoker's Dracula only because I couldn't find the full version of Baby's Day Out which is one I wanted in this compilation. Ah well! Here's the biggest arguemnts compilation! - บันเทิง
17:40 The timing of Siskel's "WHAT!?" was gold😂
I’m usually a Roger guy, but damn I agreed with almost everything Siskel said here. Roger had a real blind spot for children’s movies. The only one Siskel got wrong was Silence of the Lambs - that’s a classic.
You didn’t like “Alaska?”
Roger was more consistent overall, which is part of what makes his gaffs far more entertaining. His gripes tended to be predicated on one specific, neurotic thing, whereas Gene's pans of good movies were often just "I didn't buy it." Way less to pick on there.
I thought SotL was lame.
Wow really? Why? @@darwinblinks
Childhood is agreeing with Roger most of the time but adulthood is realizing Gene was the real critic.
Siskel was right on Starship Troopers!
Siskel &Ebert weren't always Right. They even admitted that fact themselves
no, starship troopers was disturbing and dull
Yeah, that was one of those rare times when Roger got it really wrong. I've seen *Starship Troopers* at least 7 times and I fucking love that film. Absolutely love it. Roger was definitely wrong there, almost as wrong as he was about *The Usual Suspects* although at least he eventually admitted that he was probably wrong about it after everyone basically tore him to shreds over it. I loved and still love Roger Ebert, but he was way off there on those two films and on several others.
@@bobthebear1246 they both loved Popeye! Popeye! One of the worst movies ever made.
Siskel was so wrong on Silence Of the lambs!
"And by the rude and annoying off-screen noises you've been emitting I take it you do not agree."
God, I love it when these two go at each other. And Gene's broad grin when we cut to him at this moment is just priceless.
Their debate over David Cronenberg's Crash is a good one, too. And Full Metal Jacket, which takes place right before Benji the Hunted. When Ebert gave a thumbs-down to FMJ and a thumbs-up to Benji, Siskel looked like he was about to leap out of his chair and strangle him.
Lol😂 I like how Roger never forgets what movies Gene loves or hates 😂
It’s basically the only reason anyone remembers Benji The Hunted or even North
@@colten53 I got tricked into seeing Benji The Hunted by my best friend's mom. She told us we're going to see Arnold's Predator but instead took us to some boring dog movie. I never forgave her for that. Me & my friend found a way to see the movie we really wanted to see the next day. We were in our early teens so we had to figure out a way to see an R rated movie. Even though Predator is purely action with sprinkles of violence. Not adult stuff. I think for non-adult themed movies that has action/violence, there should be a lower movie grade.
@@PelvisPresley420 Yeah it's called PG-13, it already exists, and let me tell you something: I've seen *Predator.* It was a stupid *Alien* knockoff that never made much sense to begin with, the acting was awful (except for that of Jesse "The Body" Ventura, who pulled-in a supreme performance. I've never seen *Benji The Hunted,* but I can tell you you really didn't miss much with *Predator* and you really owe your mom an apology for how much of a dick you were to her about it.
The fact that you have to put a “ cop and a half note” on the intro card is absolutely hilarious
How in the hell do you like home alone 3 better than the first? Yikes.
Roger's main complaint with the first one is that there was too much violent slapstick at the end of the film. It seems like that's all the third one is
It’s not so much his opinion but the consistency is what I find strange. I personally don’t mind Home Alone 3. It’s fine for what it is, but I also liked the first two. Ebert didn’t like the first two and loved the third one for all the same reasons he hated the original even though the first objectively has more heart and better writing. Siskel was at least consistent in that he didn’t like any of those movies
They're all terrible.
"Generic mop-top" was as hilarious as it was accurate. Home alone 3....what a stinker.
@@stonegasman3866 Home Alone 2 is much more rewatchable than #1 even though it's obviously derivative because it doesn't make you slog through so much overwrought concerned mother stuff every time. Also, Tim Curry.
I think Siskel was largely ahead of Ebert on a lot of these takes. He was taken from the earth too soon :(
I can't believe you mentioned Siskel being "largely ahead" when the man died from a brain tumor.
Roger left too soon, too.
Would have loved to have seen Gene take Roger to town over his Phantom Menace phrase.
They were both taken too soon. I would watch their show every week. I miss them very much.
Gene Siskel 👎
• Benji: The Hunted
• Home Alone 3
• Beverly Hills Cop II
• Curly Sue
• Alaska
• Silence of the Lambs (Siskel makes some compelling comments)
• Bram Stoker’s Dracula
Roger Ebert 👎
• Starship Troopers
• Eddie Murphy: Raw
• Dirty Dancing
• Kids In The Hall: Brain Candy
• Career Opportunities
• Blue Velvet
Roger Ebert barely recommended Silence of the Lambs - so the shock of Gene Siskel trashing the film doesn’t land as strongly as it would have if Ebert fully endorsed the film.
Using just the examples in this video, I have to give the edge to Gene Siskel having the better taste and judgement in his criticism. Roger Ebert shits the bed too many times to be declared the victor.
If I recall, Ebert admitted before that he was more lenient to films than Siskel who was more strict and especially when it came to family films, held them to high regard. Ebert often tried to judge things from an audience perspective rather a critic’s. That said I do disagree with Siskel on Silence of the Lambs and Dracula, meanwhile I disagree with Ebert on Starship Troopers. The other films I haven’t seen so can’t make an opinion
@@themagnificentmrmcgee Ebert's pearl clutching with Blue Velvet was a pretty significant bad take.
Oh I agree, never seen the film myself but Ebert’s response was pretty bad. Then again he has said before he’s not into the “icky” stuff, it’s a reason he was against movies like The Thing for example
Gene Siskel gave a 👎 to The Big Lebowski. Ebert gave a 👍.
I think they were fucking with us.
@@themagnificentmrmcgee I remember Ebert saying Aliens was too much, a rough roller coaster ride and he felt exhausted in a bad way afterward. The really good stuff, imo, they tend to soften their views over enough time, generally.
At 23:02 Ebert decides that he can no longer abide Siskel's divergent tone and appears ready to do whatever it takes - including engage in physical combat if need be - to uphold the honor of a children's adventure film that inexplicably seems to have triggered his most protective human instincts.The smile is off, the gloves are on.
Love this! Thanks for compiling
Its weird how Siskel liked Blue Velvet, but not SOTLs....
"It STINKS!" - Jay Sherman, The Critic
Didn't that dummy like anything?
Siskel - "I think the film is flawed and not worth your time." 👎
Ebert - "WHAT!? That cute kid movie? Have a heart, Gene. It's for kids!" 👍
They are like a married couple.
Based on the clips provided here, I'm more in agreement with Siskel than Ebert. Siskel got Silence of the Lambs wrong to be sure though.
I have never forgotten after nearly 40 years how Ebert's review of The Golden Child, reprinted in the NY Post, was so glowing he gave it 4 out of 4 stars. Even better than Beverly Hills Cop. And like a dope, I looked for ward to seeing that movie only to be completely blindsided. Even upon recent viewings, there's nothing there to quantify that kind of review. I'm not saying Siskel was never full of it, but Evert definitely was more so than Siskel.
Does anyone remember the animated series The Critic with movie critic Jay Sherman (a cross between Siskel and Ebert: fat AND bald)? In one episode Siskel and Ebert actually appeared (providing their own voices) and got into a fist fight.
yes.
It was good for its time I enjoyed it
Episode 4
I posted an idea for a skit elsewhere in the comments (only 30+ comments so far shouldn't be to hard to find it), I'll expound a little more here: Just a therapist assisting these two argue their points better, the therapist being a third wheel on camera. He would forget his role, and start arguing except he's a terrible film critic, only in his own mind he's a pro. Maybe S&E have two big thumbs down for Biodome, but the extra guy starts praising it like it's as good as One Flew Over The C.N. Yes, the 3rd wheel is the main focus. But I've got other ideas that are more centric to them, as long as you pay homage to their memory without making them too ridiculous. The therapist can be a real d ick though.
It's funnier if you think up an alternative skit with S&E, since most trust their own sense of humor over others.
40 or older remembers it. I liked it
Gene's expression when Roger said the kid in Home Alone 3 was better than Culkin was priceless. Was Roger high on that episode??
But God Siskell has such a bad take on Silence of the Lambs
Siskel never liked morbid/dark films. He was pretty consistent with that
@@mikeh4818 He liked Halloween
Theres like 3-4 kills in that film and theyre not grpahic @lyndonchastain3181
@@mikeh4818 ...and Henry Portrait of a Serial Killer wasn't dark? Lol-and I hated that film.
With Dirty Dancing, never forget that a 45 rpm disk holds 20 minutes of music
Always an easy way to settle these arguments - trust Ebert if you want your movies to have truth, beauty, class, and style... trust Siskel if you like your movies edgy, gritty, and prurient
oh yeah, home alone 3
22:50 - I gotta remember that line! 🤣
I love how stunned Ebert looks when Siskel says it. lol
Ebert dropped the ball on Eddie Murphy's Raw. That movie was freaking hysterical 😂
I've tried over the years , but i just didn't care for Bram Stoker's Dracula. I agree with the Keanu Reeves performance it wasn't very good . I found Gary Oldman to be overacting throughout the movie . It's a good looking movie but that's where it ends for me .
Bram Stokers Dracula was the epitome of style over substance. The movie looked great but the script and some of the performances were lacking.
I've learned to accept Oldman as Dracula. The performance I still can't understand is Anthony Hopkins' Van Helsing. That character needs to be the calm, reasoned, logical core of the film. Hopkins' performance is way over the top. Just horrible.
In all fairness ro Roger, Brain Candy never did become the midnight cult classic film that Gene predicted.
Should have, though.
@@heavysystemsinc. Agree! To say it's DAMN HILARIOUS would be an understatement.
The funnest dig Ebert made against Siskel was on the Letterman show after Ebert lost weight. "I can lose as much weight as I want. Gene will always be bald."
When that goofy actor made the awful "Brown Bunny" movie and Ebert hated it, the guy said that Ebert was nothing but a fat loser. Ebert said "I am fat, but one day I will be thin. You, on the other hand, will always be the man who made "The Brown Bunny".
Winners of arguments(based on clips and movies I’ve seen):
Benji The Hunted - Gene 👎
Home Alone 3 - Gene 👎
Eddie Murphy Raw - Gene 👍
Dirty Dancing - Roger 👎
Brain Candy - Roger 👎
Curly Sue - Gene 👎 (“WHAT?”😂)
Alaska - Roger 👍
Starship Troopers- Roger 👎 (but it is better than Home Alone 3…ROGER 🙄 )
Silence of the Lambs - Roger 👍
Blue Velvet - Gene 👍
Bram Stoker’s Dracula - Roger 👍
Hell no, Starship Troopers is absolutely great and ages like fine wine, Gene was on point.
I’d also like to add that they mildly disagree on the Back To The Future sequels. One of them prefers Part 2 for its darker elements and future setting while one preferred the Western genre of Part 3.
Gene was crazy wrong on silence of the lambs... he was right on almost every other argument.
“until they get big enough to eat him”. 😅ebert. ur a funny guy
Although it wasn't fully on display here, Ebert was usually WAAYYY better at compartmentalizing and just "relax and enjoy the movie" for what it is than Siskel was . Siskel was usually a lot more nitpicky. If it was a lighthearted comedy (or a clear KIDS movie like Benji The Hunted), Ebert would usually evaluate it on THOSE terms. That's why I always loved him.
He just seemed to have an unquenchable thirst for cinema, and he was never "too good" for any movie. If it was produced and released, he was willing to give it a shot. Just go on Rotten Tomatoes and search out any obscure "B" movie, and if there was only one "top critic" that reviewed it, it was usually Roger. Hell, he even gave UHF two hours of his time (Of course he panned it, but at least he was willing to sit through it.)
It's nice to see that some people love and appreciate Ebert 😃
He was brilliant at analysis and writing. I revisit his reviews not just for the analysis but for the quality of his writing. People flip out at film critics way too much. Their takes are here for us to consider... or not. That's it!
Imagine liking Home Alone 3 over Starship Troopers while that doesn't say everything
Bad language should always be used as spice, not the ingredients.
I'm curious where you found these high quality clips? Every S&E video I've ever seen come from compressed VHS rips. Some of these are clearly from a better source.
I agree. They look like they're from 1920s
Silence of the Lambs is a rare time where Gene Siskel was absolutely up his own ass and DEAD WRONG about a movie!
He makes it sound like it's a shitty slasher movie!
Yeah, I just watched that review. Gene thought Henry Portrait of Serial Killer was a superior movie. It was too real in a counterproductive way to be actually entertaining. His point seemed very ironic.
Heh, that's nothing... you should see what both Siskel and Ebert said about The Hitcher (an absolutely criminally underrated film. I seriously wouldn't hesitate to rank it ahead of Silence of the Lambs. The original Hitcher, not the remake, obviously.) It was the most utterly unhinged rant I've ever heard out of either of them, and Ebert doubled down on it in his print review.
They exaggerate the gore to a ridiculous extent (even for the 80s it was pretty tame stuff, and nowadays could easily be shown uneditted on network TV), they both say that stuff is shown on-screen when it obviously wasn't shown at all, they start ranting about the whole thing being code for S&M gay sex and/or AIDS (?!) apparently on the basis of nothing but a one-off scene where the killer pretends to be gay for a few seconds just to get past some cops, and Ebert has a baseless and demented notion that the ending of the film was meant to imply that someone was turned evil in order to take over the killer's role, when in reality there were no such hints given at all (it was ultimately a coming of age story that highlighted the importance of overcoming one's fears and fighting evil... how Roger managed to twist that into "to fight evil is to become evil" is completely beyond me.)
They weren't always Right on movies. They often changed their minds. They admitted this more than once
I agree with Gene
Lambs is good but overrated.
wow. silence of the lambs is a masterpiece with a great ending. wtf was siskel thinking.
Completely agree with Gene Siskel on Eddie Murphy Raw, and he wasn’t wrong. It has gone down as one of the best stand ups of all time.
roger was against the sexism. sexism was the death of rap.
I completely agree with Roger on this one. Eddie Murphy is no Richard Pryor.
“Kids in the Hall:Brain Candy” is hit or miss, some bits are funny, other moments make you scratch your head. The famous disagreement of “Blue Velvet” is a classic. Siskel was easily angry at Roger for hating it, even telling him that it’s not a slasher movie (and with the exception of “Halloween”, we all know how much they hated slasher movies).
Ebert was clueless. His popularity has always baffled me somewhat.
Like an old married couple.
That's what happens when you live or work with the same person for decades
Yeah. It's hilarious.
Yep, and like an old married couple they may have had some intense arguments but at the end of the day they still loved and respected each other (and no doubt one was crushed when the other one died).
@@davidl570 if any of them would be the Wifey, my money is on Ebert 😂
@@PelvisPresley420 Totally agree! (Nice screen name, btw!).
Back in 1993, the greatest arguments between Siskel and Ebert were for 'Cop and a Half' where Siskel despised that film yet Ebert recommended it, and for 'Carnosaur' where Siskel recommended that film but Ebert despised it!
I'll admit i saw Home Alone 3 WAY too much back in the day on VHS but in general I loved all 3 as a kid. Now i love the first 2, even the second one i enjoy watching on the holidays
"Thumbs up/Thumbs down is an arbitrary thing anyway." Took you long enough to say that, Roger.
shut up xen, now
@@peainapodtube Thumbs down to that.
He said it many times in many different interviews.
@@user-uq6sz6po3d Yeah, and his written reviews had the standard star rating. Still, this one's fun to watch.
God, I hate lawyers.
I know we all love Ebert but goddamn, Siskel fucken cooked!
I think one of their best episodes, & arguments (or at least a movie subject that took total opposite conclusions from) was one of my favorite movies "Batman 1989" where Gene Siskel liked it a lot & Ebert did not yet at the same time I think both of their opinions were totally correct.
I agree with Siskell so hard on that Eddie Murphy film.
Murphy was a bigot. And a homosexual.
Should also add the review of the film 'The Doors' where Rodger Praises Val Kilmer's performance and the art Direction but gives it thumbs down.
John Hughes was a movie making machine
This seems like an 80's show rather than a late 90's. Funny how HD changed everything.
To be fair most of these are from the 80s and this show did go on till around 2008 I think (of course it was Reoper and Ebert after 1999 because of Siskel’s death.
I’m usually a pretty hardcore feminist and even I think Roger was too sensitive about Eddie Murphy Raw. I feel more comfortable saying this in 2024 now that it’s a relic of it’s time of course, but the clip they show made me laugh so hard because Eddie was right, I was thinking “good for her” 😂
That leather outfit didn't age well though.
@@Three_Random_WordsTrue. Even Murphy himself has laughed at that leather outfit choice in recent years.
While Silence of the Lambs was very good, that year, both Bugsy and JFK were far superior.
L
No Way. JFK equals it but bugsy although a fine picture but it's behinds silence of the lambs. Silence of the lambs is a masterpiece
I sure do love in cinema at the cinema
Jesus. If I were going on this video alone, I'd think Ebert was this worst critic ever.
I actually have seen Benji the Hunted- I binged several of the OG Benji films after I adopted a dog that happened to look like those two dogs actors, heh (Higgins and his daughter Benjean). My main issue with it was at the end, where we just see rescue coming for Benji, without any payoff. It comes off annoying since they did set up how he was missing and that there was a huge national search for him. But I can see Ebert's good review, since there actually was impressive animal work there, to coach Benjean and the other animals in the cast. It's also a bit of a throwback to nature-based kids films of the 60s-70s. Plus, Ebert was being consistent in saying his review shouldn't compare to his FMJ one, since he always said he rated within genres.
Eddie Murphy’s movie must be the best movie ever.
Ebert was most concerned about how children would perceive movies. But he was most often wrong.
Gene had kids, Roger didn't.
1. Benji the Hunted is for young kids only. 2. Home Alone 3 is absolutely AWFUL. 3. Eddie Murphy Raw is good but Delirious is better. 4. Dirty Dancing is predictable but I still enjoyed it except the ending is AWFUL! 5. I have heard "Brain Candy" is awful. 6. I couldn't watch Curly Sue very long. 7. I never saw Alaska. 8. I liked Starship Troopers a lot. 9. Silence of the Lambs is incredible but tough to watch. 10. I hated Blue Velvet. It is plain weird. 11. Dracula is different but somewhat interesting.
Ebert was wrong on every Lynch film imo. I think Siskel had an overall worse track record, but for some reason he got it when it came to edgier or darker films. Siskel was wrong on classics like Scarface, Terminator, etc but Ebert would recommend trash more often like Home Alone 3 or Anaconda. Wtf Ebert??
HOME ALONE 3: HOW ROGER WAS PAID OFF TO LIKE IT
Holy crap, did that review make NO sense. I love Roger but he was totally out to lunch--everything he said applied to the first two movies.
@@pronkb000 If I produced the show I'd have fired him on the spot. ("Gene, the animated sequel to THE WIZARD OF OZ is actually a better flim --" ) FIRED FIRED FIRED!!!
Anthony Hopkins great performance… NO. Wins Oscar for best actor.
I mean...I'm not siding with Gene here, but there has been plenty of garbage that have won Oscars.
Hopkins' acting was more like a cliched idea of a serial killer rather than how most serial killers are actually like. At least when interacting with people. I much prefer Brian Cox in the role.
Siskel had BABE as one of his favourite movies that year ❤❤❤
in argument with Ebert's view on Benji: I saw Benji as a child and i thought it was boring as shit slowly aerating in a middle school bathroom. It was a slog, it was not interesting, and I can't imagine being able to sit through it as an adult.
I really _must_ impress upon readers that this movie _is_ boring and should not be watched. As per usual, Siskel cleans up on their disagreements
you write like the shit you describe (why middle school? fuckin extra weird detail)
CURLY SUE? Oh Roger.... I guess no one is perfect.
I didn't care for Curly Sue but if it worked for him, it worked. I at least get it. The Home Alone 3 thumbs-up (when he thumbs-downed the first two) I TOTALLY am baffled by. At least Gene was consistent on that series.
0:00 Content Advisory: Contains Tobacco Depictions
Why is some of this stuff blocked out
Copyright. It seems there’s plenty of companies who will block the video for clips used in a review
@@themagnificentmrmcgee they shouldn't , if its a fair use review
@@ganglabeshOh I know but they still do it and TH-cam always sides with them
use a fuckin question mark
?
This what happens when people have different opinions for each movie.
I love to watch Siskel & Ebert. For example 1993 before internet their thumbs up/down were on the covers of VHS tapes, Laserdiscs and so on. But I didn't know who they are and how they looked. Going into arguments is good, but might be scripted. The different aspects/point of views are great. "Come on Roger, you missed the whole harbor, where is your humor?"
It's definitely NOT scripted. Ebert has stated many times that when they go see a film they don't discuss it with each other. they write their review and the show is the first time they are hearing about it...
except Janet Leigh did not do the shower scene in Psycho: she had a body double.
Ebert reigns supreme
Other Honorable Mentions for Arguements include: Baby's Day Out and The Swan Princess (1994).
Plus, Romeo and Juilet (1996) and Hercules (1997).
Damn I didn't realise Siskel was so redpilled
This made Siskel look twice as good as Ebert
Gene loved starship troopers..❤
Never saw Curly Sue way back when because it looked liked it sucked. After I saw the clips and Roger give it high praise, I know for sure now I'll never see Curly Sue. Right on, Gene!
I like Gene a lot, but on Silence of the Lambs....well, when you're wrong, you're wrong.
eberts 100% right on silence of the lambs the rest he was wrong about IMO
4:54; is Ebert trolling?
siskel review of silence of the lambs is ridiculous. ever seen henry a portrait of a serial killer? it's the true exploitative film
Never understood why Siskel and Ebert consistently gave spoilers in their reviews, often reciting the entire plot and the ending. Talking about the ending of Silence of the Lambs in their review?? Wow.
Gene thought the ending was clichéd. Can't spoil a cliché.
@@user-uq6sz6po3d You missed the point. They specifically discuss the end of the film. Doesn’t matter whether they think it was cliche or not…they spoiled it. They gave spoilers constantly in their reviews.
Personally I respected Gene's opinion more
Gene was so wrong on silence of the lambs
tbh these are crappier siskel ebert episodes from late in the shows run. i liked them better on sneak previews. benji the hunted i saw 7 years old the first day it came out. it was a tough year for me to be a kid, burying pet after pet hit by cars, and that was a hard movie to watch. i found even pet sematary to be more enjoyable tbh. there is no way i could revisit now. i have similar feelings about ernest goes to camp. the same year ebert gave thumbs down to stanley kubricks full metal jacket which left siskel stunned. the two parodied the incidents on jon lovits short lived, but inspired animated sitcom "the critic", both voicing their own characters.. a lot of these i havent seen, like alaska, or curly sue. silence of the lambs was really good, but also remember that gene did not recommend taxi driver the year it came out either. back and forth they played wimpy critic. ive read how eberts scathing review of night of the living dead, which he praised as a very effective horror movie, lead to the creation of the movie ratings system as weve known it ever since. he wrote that he was baffled why 5 and 6 year olds were allowed in the theater, describing crying, screaming, and terrified expressions on literal toddlers as living corpses were devouring people on screen. lol tbh mustve been a sight. i tried to watch starship troopers once and found it unbearable. ive come to appreciate bram stokers dracula just for what it is. because of the fame of universals dracula starring bela lugosi, many of the events and characters, such as the wild american cowboy with the hunting knife, had been all but forgotten. that film does in fact to this day, present the most faithful adaptation of stokers novel available. it was well made with excellent performances by the cast, including keanu reeves, who i feel hadnt quite been recognized in 1992.
I like how Siskel's hair comes and goes in these clips. He must remember his wig some days and not others.
He was balder towards the end because of the surgeries he was undergoing.
It is a compilation video.
Ebert (rip) and myself have crazy different tastes in films. My man liked Home Alone 3? 🤣 Did they pay him to say that? Then he disliked Starship Troopers? I'm with Siskel (rip) during most of this but not Dirty Dancing. That film sucked balls.
9:00 Sums up Ebert's PC-before-PC-was-even-a-thing personality a nutshell. Apparently, it's an "attack on women" to say that someone shouldn't be entitled to NINE FIGURES just because she marries and then decides to divorce a rich man!
Both were talentless 😅
This should be called “ Everything that Siskel found enjoyable and Ebert did not”
Siskel is a great critic because he understands that a movie for kids should also be whimsical and charming for adults as well.
redundant syntax
hahaha.... Dirty Dancing?! Thumps up? hahaha. NOPE.... NO ONE PUTS THIS MOVIE IN CORNER!
Left field random thought. SNL sux and has for quite a while.
My skit idea of these two and a third wheel therapist helping Roger and Gene make their points better while filming the show. Millenials probably wouldn't get it, 'Who?' So what.
SNL would have to shop for a new cast first, and put Lorne Micheals in a retirement home.
More on this in another thread - word search 'Does anyone remember '
Agreed 100%. Everything dreadfully overwritten and not funny at all. Overdone is not the same as being funny. SNL is a joke now…and not in a good way.
So he gives Siskel shit because Dirty Dancing was 'too predictable' but he likes curly sue even though its also just as predictable.
Eddie Murphy is such a jerk! I have never ever liked him.
I never EVER liked him.
Let me guess. Gene was almost always wrong.
I’m one third of the way through and while I always wanted to be Roger Ebert, he was wrong on almost every movie.
starship troopers is sublime... Roger missed the boat for sure.
Roger was right about Eddie Murphy, nobody's material has aged worse
Wow...Roger has no sense of humor. :)
Roger was too soft on the kid friendly movies. Ironic because he never had kids of his own, which is usually an indication that a person hates children.
He was a step-grandpa to two young kids from his wife's first marriage, at least.
sad that two grown ass men argued about movies so much that there's a 3/4 of a hour compilation video devoted to it. I wonder if when they were both riddled with cancer if they regretted frittering their time away arguing about imaginary shit. let's hope so.
Oh come on, they were GREAT.
I’m sure they were heart broken that they got to do a pretty easy job in something that they loved that I’m sure paid them and their families a fair bit of cash. Surely.
I like how when I point out that this is not the best way to spend one's life, your first thought is "yeah, but smackeroos" telling me you might not value what is most important. If sitting around watching people pretend is where you find meaning, you might want to rethink your life. What an extreme thing for me to say@@simonbaker95
I’m getting entertainment from these guys 25-30 years later so probably not
What a legacy, I stand corrected.@@Dogy0909
Curley Sue is one of the "BIG FALL MOVIES" ?