jfoobar

Just got through watching the first episode. A marked improvement over the prior hosts, but I still have the same concern after watching it that I predicted I would have when the replacements were announced. Phillips and Scott together are just a little too dry and lack, collectively, a nice everyman schtick that brings in viewers. Siskel and Ebert and later Ebert and Roeper both managed to appeal to a fairly broad range of viewers. I'm not sure that Phillips and Scott are going to be able to do that. I'd rather see Phillips and Roeper.

Overall, a good show and one that will certainly make the fanatical film buffs happy. I'm just not sure that Buena Vista is going to see the massive ratings improvements that they were hoping to see.

ken_572002

I enjoyed the 'Bens' a lot, and am sorry to see them gone. I especially liked Mank, but both had good, insightful reviews....

zekeburger1979

I'm looking forward to watching the first new episode tomorrow night.

RoboDad

I cringed during each and every "Bens" episode, and I am ecstatic that they got the boot.

As for the new hosts, I didn't get the "dry" impression at all. I thought Phillips' comments about '9' were very much "everyman" comments. Most serious cinephiles would never dare say such things.

Sure, the two need to find their footing, and establish the tone of their chemistry, but I think that will come over time.

All in all, I was very pleased with the new show, but I would spruce up the set just a bit. It doesn't exactly give the "at the movies" vibe that the old (Ebert era) sets used to. Now it is more like "in a bare room sitting on chairs".

calhoun07

Has Roeper's bridge been burned with this show? What are the chances they could ever get him back?

I bet the At the Movie producers regret ever letting him go now.

calhoun07

I HATED the episodes where they would have like three or four different critics via video give their reviews on a movie as well. When it got back to just being the two critics, it improved a bit, but not much.

JeffTheAlpaca

Roeper was funny and I miss his humor when he would give his take on bad movies.

hapgilmore

It doesn't matter who hosts this show, NOBODY can ever replace the awesomeness that was Gene Siskel.

Seriously, Siskel was not afraid to argue and rip up Ebert. And vice versa. He was the ultimate heel film critic, and damn it, thats what we need. Roeper was a terrible replacement. Why? Because he never had the balls to insult and disrespect Ebert's opinion. Thats what made Siskel and Ebert great. They were ruthless towards each other. These new critics are too damn nice, and because of this, its very lame. The Ben's sucked for this same reason.

GuessWho

If you like his humor, you may want to check out his almost-daily newspaper column; he can get pretty snarky there too

http://www.suntimes.com/news/roeper/index.html

Thrush

Yeah they had great chemistry. Often times you got the distinct impression that they genuinely didnt like each other, which made for great TV. I initially hated Roeper. But I came around to grudging acceptance. He was no siskel though, not even close.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rmnYCSwt2Js&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rmnYCSwt2Js&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

mike7162

Just watched the first episode with the new guys and was very impressed. They were both enjoyable as substitute hosts and have a good chemistry but I still think Roeper got screwed. It's nice to have ATM back.

Thrush

I thought it was great. Especially for their 1st ep.

outcastja

I liked Scott's review of The Burning Plain.

Count Dooku

You mean The Burning PAIN

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/YA2HKoAnM7I&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/YA2HKoAnM7I&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

JuryDuty

LOL Yeah, Scott's review of The Burning Plain was awesome.

I was really impressed. I think it's about as close as we're going to get to the old show...SO much better than the original redux.

And, yes, overall, I think Roeper got screwed. If they had just left the show alone in the first place, everything would have been fine.

Patman

A.O.Scott was much more assertive and in-yo-face alongside Phillips than he ever was with Roeper.

dhmac

Ben Lyons was the real problem with the previous incarnation of this show, so I feel sorry for a good guy like Ben Mankiewicz to also get kicked to the curb in a way that's a bit like what happened to Richard Roeper a year earlier.

But A.O. Scott and Michael Phillips are excellent choices and this first one with them really seems a lot like the old Ebert & Roeper show, so I'll be watching regularly again.

Chew

I know Ebert has rights to the "Thumbs", but couldn't they of at least returned to the balcony seats of the Roeper/Ebert years? They both looked rather odd in those tiny chairs.

dhmac

The balcony didn't matter much to me - most people these days probably don't even associate balconies with movie theaters anymore anyway.

And I actually prefer the "See It / Rent It / Skip It" review categories on the new show over "Thumbs Up / Thumbs Down" because it has that middle recommendation for movies that are marginally good. (The old system needed a "Thumbs Sideways" or something like that added to it for rating the "just OK" movies.)

Norm de Plume

One of the things I miss about the old incarnations of the show, even under Roeper, was the vehemence of some of the opinions. They would say things like "Thumbs way, way up; great movie!" or "Thumbs way, way, way down to this irredeemable garbage; worst movie of the year so far". With the Ben yutzes, opinions were always tempered to the point of being somewhat insipid. There were no enthusiastic exclamations of "masterpiece!" or, to the contrary, "absolutely worthless crap".
And mark me down as someone who didn't really care for Mankiewicz either. Both Bens lacked gravitas, though Lyons had even less with his perma-grin and forced critic-speak. These two new guys have a little more gravitas, but not much. Siskel and Ebert projected a certain innate cinematic authority and elegance, and they had effortless give-and-take. Roeper didn't have the authority, but I liked his alacrity, and he had improved demonstrably by the end of his run.

Anyone have a scoop on whether Roeper's still working on his own review show, or has this new more-palatable "At the Movies" duo quashed those hopes?

calhoun07

You'd get the random "marginal thumbs up/down" from Siskel and Ebert (and Roeper when he could use it) but those never translated to a video box that would simply post the "THUMBS UP!" leaving out the "marginal." At least with the new system, it's a bit more straightforward and to the point.

Also, I like the new system they are using, because there simply are movies you think should wait for DVD, and it's great to see them acknowledging this.

jeffkjoe

At least A.O. Scott and Michael Phillips have some real creds.....

RoboDad

It doesn't necessarily need to be a balcony, but it could at least look more like theater seats than plain leather chairs.

As far as the review catch-phrases, I don't have a problem with "see it/rent it/skip it" either, although they are somewhat generic. Quoting the "See it! - Phillips and Scott" phrase in a printed ad doesn't really jump out the way "Two Thumbs Up! - Siskel and Ebert" did. And, I also do admit I miss Ebert's experimental add-on, "the wagging finger of shame". That one was great.

Daytripper

Just got done watching the two new hosts. Scott and Phillips might be great critics (on paper), but they have absolutely no screen presence or chemistry. And it was borderline torture watching them. And if the producers think these two are going to bring the ratings, then they have pretty lofty expectations.

MrE

Worst makes worse a lot more appealing.