Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Ebert presents At The Movies

This weekend the show re-broadcasts a special Siskel & Ebert they did in 1980, showing the step-by-step process they used in reviewing movies. They pick one movie (The Blue Marble starring Robert Foxworth and Paula Prentiss) and follow the process from being invited to a screening to the finished review in the newspapers.%0D %0D Really interesting and really detailed, and good insight into their minds at the time.%0D %0D I recommend you catch it, especially those with opinions on Roger Ebert.%0D %0D

by Anonymousreply 4004/04/2013


that's what I think of when I think of the show.

by Anonymousreply 108/06/2011

Rather they show old shows than the two mannequins they have now. The chick and the Russian guy with the unpronounceable name are downright boring.

by Anonymousreply 208/07/2011

You can see it online....

by Anonymousreply 308/07/2011

Then why do you have a TV, R1?

And "never" turned on that TV? Not during 9/11, the Olympics, The Oscars, a State of the Union speech, the election of 2000? Not once? You sound precious.

by Anonymousreply 408/07/2011

R4, Not everyone has cable anymore. I don't. I have my 50" plasma TV connected to a computer. I watch movies (streaming only) on Netflix. I buy season passes to shows I like on iTunes. I watch The Daily Show and The Colbert Report on

I haven't watched broadcast TV in many, many years, and haven't watched cable for the past two years.

by Anonymousreply 508/07/2011

That flashback reminded me how much more i agreed with Siskel than Ebert. That film was awful and Ebert gave it 3.5 stars?

by Anonymousreply 608/07/2011

Well thank goodness you're using the time you're saving not watching broadcast television by commenting on a thread on the internet about broadcast televisionm, r1. Well managed!

by Anonymousreply 708/07/2011

I've been watching the worst movies of the year episodes all day. I can't believe Waterworld and Showgirls came out the same year.

by Anonymousreply 808/07/2011

I found it a very interesting look behind the scenes.%0D %0D And r6, when did you actually see the Black Marble in order to state so firmly your opinion of it?%0D %0D Excerpt from Variety review:%0D %0D With The Black Marble, Joseph Wambaugh [adapting his own novel] at last comes close to presenting police as human, even humorous, beings, capable of balancing remorse, regret and romance without becoming total psychotics. %0D %0D %0D Transferred out of homicide after too much exposure to a string of child murders, Robert Foxworth is teamed on a burglary detail with Paula Prentiss. %0D %0D %0D The crime is either terribly serious or impossibly trivial, depending on your love of animals. Barbara Babcock's showdog is kidnapped and she proves superb in the role of a lonely, sex-starved woman with her whole life wrapped up in her schnauzer.%0D %0D %0D %0D Director Harold Becker is at his best in maneuvering carefully through the minefields of animal worship. %0D %0D %0D %0D Much of the credit for making the picture work goes to Harry Dean Stanton as the dognapper, driven to his dirty deed by debt.%0D %0D

by Anonymousreply 908/07/2011

I was just perusing the Paula Prentiss page on IMDb and I'm struck by how little acting she did after this movie. What happened to her career?

by Anonymousreply 1008/07/2011

Why the heck do they have that kid on the new show? No, I'm not talking about Ignatiy - I mean the real kid.

Did they learn nothing from the mess that was Ben Lyons? This kid has similar taste to Ben, but presents himself and speaks like he could be Lyons' elder. It's creepy and unnecessary.

Aside from him, I like the new show. Both hosts have grown on me and I like their rapport together. Unfortunately I have to watch the program online since my local PBS station chose not to carry it, but I'm happy that I have that option.

by Anonymousreply 1108/08/2011

At least he's not presenting his hole.

by Anonymousreply 1208/08/2011

I used to like Roger Ebert, and I suppose I still do, but I find it so uncomfortable to look at him with his facial reconstruction.

I know it isn't very nice, but it's true.

by Anonymousreply 1308/08/2011

I don't like that child either, R11. He actually gave his opinion on Woody Allen's latest movie, as if I want to hear the opinions of a child on Woody Allen-type flicks. I don't care whether he liked it or not: He doesn't have the wherewithal to understand more than the rudiments of the plot.

Plus, it sounds like it's all scripted for him. I have 3 sons around that age, and while their all 3 smart, with one especially good in communication, they couldn't write on that level,and if they could, they wouldn't.

I hate when shows try to make children into mini-adults. They aren't. I don't want to hear a kid's opinion on a movie unless it is animated, has a car that turns into a monster, or talking woodland creatures are involved. Even then, I want a simple thumbs up or thumbs down.

by Anonymousreply 1408/09/2011

I don't know if the kid belongs on the show, but I am surprised to find I agree with most of his opinions.

by Anonymousreply 1508/09/2011

r8 needs to be banned.

by Anonymousreply 1608/09/2011

It ain't 1980 anymore, OP, the last time I checked. Why would I give a shit?

by Anonymousreply 1708/09/2011

The hand gestures that little boy makes are creepy. Kids his age don't usually punctuate their points by thrusting their hands around. %0D %0D

by Anonymousreply 1808/09/2011

Critics are still reviewing movies every day, and probably in much the same way. I liked the look-behind-the-scenes.

by Anonymousreply 1908/09/2011

Bump for this week's show where the replay a 1982 show on homosexuality in movies!

by Anonymousreply 2009/09/2011

During which time Siskel doesn't reveal he is gay, and Ebert while no homophobe, just doesn't seem to like any of the movies, even nastily criticizing the ones he says he liked.%0D

by Anonymousreply 2109/09/2011

Still for 1982 in Chicago, which was then a Closet City, it was bold.

by Anonymousreply 2209/09/2011

Ebert liked Personal Best, Victor/Victoria, Taxi Zum Klo, La Cage aux Folles and Boys in the Band.%0D %0D He disliked Cruising, Making Love, Partners and Staircase because of their shallow characterizations and trite storytelling.%0D %0D And he hoped that gay themes and storylines were here to stay, but Gene thought they might be a fad, like black movies or Viet Nam movies.%0D %0D Worth checking out!

by Anonymousreply 2309/10/2011

The show is in trouble. I actually have grown to appreciate it a lot, but I have to watch it online because my local PBS station opted to not carry it.

by Anonymousreply 2411/07/2011

This is a pity, because it has found a groove and Christy and Ignatiy (what a pairing of names) are doing a good job.

Hope they get the funding and more stations to pick it up.

by Anonymousreply 2511/07/2011

I couldn't stand Christy at first but I think she's gotten a little bit better. I love Ignatiy. And I like how they bring in a bunch of different voices each episode - hey Chaz! - although I want to stick that kid critic's head in a toilet.

by Anonymousreply 2611/07/2011

[quote]That film was awful and Ebert gave it 3.5 stars?

I never trusted Ebert again after he gave A CHORUS LINE a four out of four stars rating.

by Anonymousreply 2711/07/2011

Gene Siskel was gay?

by Anonymousreply 2811/07/2011

Ebert is a talented guy and he seems nice but it's time for this show to die already. He can stick with his writing gigs, right?

by Anonymousreply 2911/07/2011

Ebert and Siskel had an interesting tussle over "Taxi Zum Klo". Siskel basically saying that it was homophobic, and Ebert saying that because the guy made it about his life, it was authentic. But Ebert went too far and made it sound as if all gay men lived that way. This is my recollection from the original broadcast, anyway.

I agreed with was the "Suddently, Last Summer" of its generation.

by Anonymousreply 3011/07/2011

More bad news. It looks like they weren't kidding around with the previous concern that the show is in financial trouble.

Enjoy your reviews of the Oscar contenders as they are released through December because the show will be on hiatus (sounds like for an indefinite amount of time) in January.

by Anonymousreply 3112/02/2011

Ignatiy Vishnevetsky is the only reason why I watch the show. Christy is nowhere near his league in terms of the vast knowledge he holds on film history. Whether it's silent cinema, Hollywood golden age, or foreign films, that boy is a walking cinematic encyclopedia. Plus, it doesn't hurt that he loves Jean-Luc Godard as much as me and he's super cute.

I wonder why he never decided to become an American citizen. He's been in America most of his life, definitely looks and sounds as American as the next person, and has an American wife. Culturally speaking, he's an American, but he refuses to naturalize.

by Anonymousreply 3212/02/2011

Have the played the last episode? I checked the website and I can't find anywhere the announced date for the final show before indefinite (and possibly permanent) hiatus.

by Anonymousreply 3312/24/2011

The show is done...for now. I'm guessing the ratings must be dismal if nobody wants to take on sponsorship/underwriting of the program. It sure can't be expensive to produce.

I watch it every week, but online only because my local PBS station doesn't carry it. If someone thought those expensive ABC soap operas could have new life on the web, I'm surprised Ebert's program can't make a go of it online only.

by Anonymousreply 3412/31/2011

I just watched the repeat of their 'best/worst movies' show. Good fucking lord. They need some hosts that have at least some connection to people who actually watch movies instead of study movies. I don't think I'd even heard of eight of the movies they picked as their top ten. It was just ridiculous. The movies they picked probably showed in three theaters throughout the entire country.

by Anonymousreply 3512/31/2011

I know what you mean, r35. This was the first year I hadn't heard of most of their choices.

At least Ebert's picks had theatrical releases and some familiarity.

by Anonymousreply 3601/01/2012

Why should they spoonfeed you R35? If those are their top choices, then that is what they should say. There are plenty of shitty shill critics who can satisfy your need to be validated in your pedestrian taste. You LOVED "Bridesmaids", didn't you?

by Anonymousreply 3701/01/2012

Actually, R37, Bridesmaids was just okay and got way too much praise as far as I'm concerned.

I bet you don't even know which movies they picked for their lists. Of course, now you'll quickly go and look them up to try to prove your superiority. Funny that your obsession with proving your superiority in an area as simplistic as movie preference shows you to be a very, very insecure person. The fact that you do it anonymously on a message board is even worse and makes me pity you.

by Anonymousreply 3801/02/2012

It looks like the TV review show will never be revived now.

And Ebert is cutting back on his workload altogether because now he is battling another round of cancer.

by Anonymousreply 3904/03/2013

Damn it! Now this program will never be revived.

by Anonymousreply 4004/04/2013
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!