I’ve stayed away from the news of Disney-ABC canceling “At the Movies” throughout the week because I wanted to collect my thoughts in a post-Batman environment. As you know, it’s been very difficult to get around to discussing much beyond “The Dark Knight” for two weeks now.
By now I’m sure you’ve read the initial AP story, quoting Roger Ebert as saying he “won’t be a part” of the “new direction” company brass are taking the daily film review show. You can also read perspective on the matter in any number of places, from Anne Thompson (who has taken a stab at filling in for Ebert across from Richard Roeper during the show’s string of guest critics) to David Poland (roots in Chicago, worked on the show eight or nine years ago, vocal about the show’s decline over the years).
Thompson also reported on the duo’s replacement by the two Bens, Lyons and Mankiewicz. Poland, who posted a statement from Ebert on Monday, was livid at the news.
With all the behind-the-scenes train-wrecking going on, I can’t help think back to the mid-to-late 1980s when I first discovered and really grew to enjoy Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert’s tussling over the cinema. It wasn’t until maybe 10 years later that I felt I could really stake an opinion on the proceedings, but those early years were an interesting sort of primer for the cinematic passion that would grab me later in life.
I think Poland may have said it best:
If you want to engage people who love movies enough to watch a show like this, you need people on the show who REALLY care. We all remember the fighting between Roger & Gene. But in retrospect, it was more than fighting…it was real arguing over different ideas of what made a good or bad movie. And we, as an audience, were invited to take sides…if, someday, the Ebert & Siskel chemistry is found again, it will be a real pleasure.
He’s referring to a potential Roeper/Michael Phillips (of the Chicago Tribune) rival show in the last line. Roeper left “At the Movies” the day before the cancellation announcement.
I don’t know if that old feeling will ever be felt again. And I don’t know if, in this Internet-driven age of egos and knee-jerk reactions, real chemistry and true discussions about films can take place between two “in the business” talking heads. It is a very different world, an opinion-based, personality-driven Web era of singular assessments.
But I’d like to be wrong. In the meantime, it is relaxing to look back and remember…at the very least.
Here’s one of my favorite vintage clips, Siskel and Ebert’s review of Stanley Kubrick’s “Full Metal Jacket,” which sparked one of the duo’s many disputes. Ebert thought it was cliched, Siskel thought it was a near masterpiece:
httpv://youtube.com/watch?v=BFiQ1YVJ9js
There are, of course, dozens of clips available on YouTube. Just a handful of the highlights:
“Schindler’s List”
“Pulp Fiction” (Ebert’s #2 film of the 90s)
“Goodfellas”
“Full Metal Jacket” (big split of opinion here)
“Die Hard 2: Die Harder” (one of Siskel’s top 10 films of 1990)
Richard Roeper prefaces his Oscar predictions with the following suggestion to spice up the nominations announcement: