Is Roeper a complete DICK he totally decides he isn't going to like something and then justifies it half assedly. At least Roger still gives credit to the parts of a movie that are good.
Roger told him to stop looking at him like that after Roeper did his typical "REALLY" response during Eberts reviews. FIRE HIS ASS hire Elvis Mitchell

Agreed. Roeper was a poor choice to replace Gene.

Didn't see.

Clue me in on what was being reviewed...

They reviewed some decent looking movies
Harvard Man
Pumpkin
Lovely and Amazing
Roeper hated everything
more than his taste I am opposed to the snide cooler than you attitude that he exudes. Roger and he got into it tonight though.

He's basically sticking with what he knows. If you've ever read his newspaper column, you'd think he was a decent enough guy with a different take on things, even saying things that a lot of people wouldn't because that'd be un-PC.

Take that same attitude that infuses his writing and apply it to movie reviews on TV.....he comes off as a jackass. i don't know why.

well, I don't know about you guys, but I'm waiting for th reviews of blue crush and swimfan@

those reviews should be hilarious

Ebert should have given the job to Michaela Pereira (who got the lame job of internet reporter or something like that and it's been ages since I last remember seeing her).

Roeper thought the romance in Ep. II was good.
He's an idiot.

How about "Mr. Skin" as a replacement.

Ebert needs to find someone who appreciates the finer artistic merits of Beyond the Valley of the Dolls as much as Siskel did. And that person should throw the awfulness of that flick in Ebert's face everytime there is a serious disagreement.

Gah. I miss Siskel. He knew how to get Ebert where it hurt everytime.

Roeper really was a jackass on this weekend's show. I half expected Ebert to scream "I'm sorry I ever picked you..." I think Roeper's right up there (down there) with Micheal Medved when it comes to movie reviews. Unimaginitve reactionary crap? Love it. Anything edgy or artsy? Hate it.

Me too.

Roeper's delivery is as if he's performing for the camera. Roger just talks to the audience like he's having a conversation with us.

Poor choice, Roger.

I didn't think Roeper was that bad this week. For instance, I'll check out Harvard Man on dvd because I like the cast and director, but that clip he showed did look horrible.
The most idiotic Roeper moment that I remember is when they reviewed Metropolis(2001). I didn't really like the movie myself, but Roeper seemed to justify his dislike by saying he hates the Japanese animation style with the big eyes. Ebert was telling him to just get over that detail and Roeper kept harping on it.

I can't stand Roeper anymore. He gets more and more hateful. He shouts at the top of his lungs and Roger can't get in a word edgewise. I think Roger wanted Roeper to be on equal ground (hence the retitle of the show), but this is Roger's show and Roeper is f#&*ing it up.

That's who I was hoping he would pick during that period where there were multiple guests. I don't even watch Ebert's show anymore because I cannot stand Roeper. I read Ebert's reviews on his website instead. Pereira wasn't a critic I agreed with very often (seemed to have an annoying affection for inane chick flicks and never seemed to like anything remotely daring or artsy...at least on those few episodes I saw), but I thought she was a good foil for Ebert.

To tell you the truth, I can't remember what she liked or didn't like or how much I agreed or disagreed with her. But she and Ebert had good working chemistry together and she seemed to be intelligent and personable. And I'm sure she would have grown as a critic the more she did the show. Roeper never changes at all.

Maybe Ebert's wife didn't want him sitting across the aisle from such a pretty woman every week.

I think the show needs a female critic, to give opinions from both sexes. Like garmonbozia said, she would be a good foil for Ebert.

No more of that pompous playboy Roeper. I remember seeing him on Leno w/ Ebert, and he kept cracking one-liners, while Ebert sat there and talked movies.

She is a correspondent on TechTV Live now and is one of their best! Great personality and hilarious at times. She would have been great next to Ebert.

Sam

It's true that Roeper tends towards being a pompous schlemiel, and he doesn't have anywhere near the knowledge of films and cinema history that Ebert has, but I think he's not bad. It's all just opinion after all. It seems Ebert has gotten a little too soft over the last few years. C'mon, HARVARD MAN does look and sound like a piece of crap. Ebert's become more Hollywoodized. Many of his "thumbs-ups" are dubious from a qualitative standpoint.

Pereira would have been an awful choice. She's just a pretty face. Ideally, Ebert would have chosen someone more distinguished and established than Roeper, but he could have done worse: Jeff Craig (if he even exists) or some other blurbster from KRAP Radio in Kalamazoo.

I thought he was in a bad mood in this episode for some reason. He seemed really cranky...