Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

Do you really believe that actually happened?

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

I do. He seemed pretty upset describing it.
Why would you think he was lying?

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

Maybe he thought it would help his argument against slasher films (sort of like pretending that only women are victims in those movies, or that the killer's POV shot was something that just came about in 1980).

I'll just repeat what I said about it in my earlier post: "And if Ebert actually did sit next to a guy who rooted for the killer in a movie, I'd say that says more about where he lived than about some trend in movie-making, or audiences in general."

To tell the truth, I think they were both more upset that they had to watch the movie in a theater, and didn't get a private press screening, than anything else (and if homicidal maniacs really were ranting in the audiences in Chicago movie theaters in 1980, I can understand why they would be).

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

The episode where they review North from 1994 is epic. They wreck it and go back to talking about Ed Wood instead. :lol:

I also enjoyed their review for Species in which Siskel says he "loves breasts."

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

It was a different time, and Gene could get a little creepy. During the Endless Love review, he was irritated because Brooke Shields (then still only 15) used a body double.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

Wait, is there really a question as to whether or not audiences root for the killer in a slasher movie? Isn't that like half the appeal for people?

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

Speaking of great Siskel and Ebert stuff on You Tube, David Letterman archivist Don Giller put together a six part, six and a half hour collection of every appearance Siskel and Ebert made on the show (including other neat bits, like Michael J Fox's hilarious breakdown of their critiquing styles and their personalities).

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

One thing I realize made the show so good for me, is that trailers weren’t easy to find before the internet. And they’d give a few long clips during the review. So even when it was an R rated movie I couldn’t watch, I’d get to savor these clips.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

Life Itself is free on YouTube right now.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

:sad:Not in my country.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

There is definitely a connection between the killers and the audience in these films. Look at all of the fanfare that developed many years after films like Halloween (Michael Myers), A Nightmare on Elm Street (Freddy), Friday the 13th (Jason), Child's Play (Chucky) etc. were released. There's good reason you don't see any Laurie Strode, Nancy Thompson, Alice or Andy Barclay figurines for sale!

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

Sad news: Christy Lemire, longtime movie critic who writes reviews for the rogerebert.com website has been diagnosed with breast cancer. However, it was caught early and sounds like it is very treatable, which is very good news.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

Still miss Ebert like I miss certain celebrities. Felt like family while they were around.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

I miss true "celebrity" critics, like Siskel and Ebert.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

Yeah I saw Christy's video. She said it was caught very early, so she'll be fine. Nothing to be sad about.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

Richard Roeper is leaving the Chicago Sun-Times where he did movie reviews. This is of course the paper that Ebert used to write for.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

That sucks.

I was watching :Behind the Monsters' on Freddy Krueger on AMC+ and Ebert really hated the Nightmare on Elm Street movies.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

What did they have Ebert saying on the show? The only two reviews I've ever seen him give for the series was a poor review to part 3, and a rave for New Nightmare.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

He thought the whole movie series was garbage and the reason for the decay in society with senseless murder and gore.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

Siskel and Ebert mostly hated horror of the '70s and '80s with a few odd exceptions. Siskel particularly hated traditional slashers.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

To be fair, the vast majority of horrors movies of the 70s and (especially) 80s WERE trash. As young boys, we may have all loved them because they were forbidden by our parents and we have nostalgia from watching them late at night with our friends but they were mostly garbage.

They both liked Halloween and The Exorcist.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

I can see their point and probably made me feel guilty if I watched them.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

What Gene REALLY hated was exploitation - particularly of women and children, which most slasher films of that period reveled in.

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

Siskel and Ebert reviewing horror movies always seemed pointless.

It's not like anyone was hanging on their opinion of Friday the 13th Part III in 3D or Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge before deciding whether or not to see them. Those movies have their audience, and most of the people watching Siskel and Ebert at the time weren't going to base their decision to see those movies or not see them based on their reviews.

Though I think they both enjoyed being offended and outraged by slasher films. :lol:

Re: Roger Ebert – Discussion & Appreciation (1942-2013)
 

I still watch Siskel and Ebert on YouTube. It’s a real
shame that no one has ever bothered to restore or re release the show. I’d be holed up for weeks if they were ever released in long form and not the truncated versions we saw on tv. I assume there is probably a shitload of rights issues with the movie clips.

But it’s fun to watch an 80s or 90s film and then track down the At the Movies clips. Back when arguing on tv was fun to watch and not the totality of what the medium is used for, like it is now lol.