Siskel and Ebert: Resurrected (1 Viewer)

[DavidJ]

Could you explain this or provide a link to the information you read? Thanks.

 

[MikeM]

Ebert: No Thumbs, Up or Down, on TV Show

LOS ANGELES -- Roger Ebert has turned thumbs down on thumb reviews for "At the Movies with Ebert & Roeper."

Ebert, who is negotiating a new contract with the syndicated TV show's distributor, Disney-ABC Domestic Television, is a copyright holder on the signature "thumbs up-thumbs down" judgment that's part of each film review.

He has "exercised his right to withhold use of the `thumbs' until a new contract is signed," the Walt Disney Co.-owned company said in a statement released Friday to The Associated Press.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...082402077.html

 

[Radioman970]

Great announcement. These will be fun to see again.

Hoping for more uncensered stuff. Those guys are funny! I know how they feel. Ive been working with the same schmucks for 12 years now and have kept my tongue in place. If I could just unload once in a while like they do....

 

[Scott-S]

What kind of world do we live in when someone can copyright giving a thumbs up?

sigh.

I hardly ever agreed with Ebert anyway. I usually don't agree with most "critics". They always seem to like the artsy stuff, and mostly hate horrors and comedies.

I always thought that critics should only review the types of movies they actually like. That way, I could find one that likes the type of movies I do and would trust the review more.

 

[Jason Seaver]

Except Ebert (and most critics I've dealt with) love horror and comedy and sci-fi and adventure. They've just seen enough that they have little patience with mediocrity.

As I like to say: "I don't ask that an action film be Citizen Kane. But I do expect it to at least try to be Die Hard."

 

[Henry Gale]

I've found that listening to critics is often a good way to avoid wasting my time & money on....crap.
They're not flawless.
My favorite example of that is Blade Runner.
I remember very clearly that it was panned by the great majority of critics.
I just kept going back to see it again and again and again.

 

[Garrett Adams]

In regards to SciFi, Ebert really loved Dark City. He even did the commentary on the DVD.

 

[DavidJ]

Thanks for posting that. I do hope they get something worked out soon. I'm not sure I'm happy they are sticking with Wilonsky for the first couple of months.

As far reviews in general, I sure don't always agree with Ebert, but I have always enjoyed hearing and reading his reviews and over the years I have been able to pretty accurately gauge whether I'm going to want to see something based on his review (either good or bad).

 

[Lee Jamilkowski]

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/33784

Ebert did not get rid of the thumbs; Disney is the one responsible.

 

[Marty M]

Here is a portion of Roger Ebert's response from the link in the previous posting. Maybe it's because I am a fellow midwesterner, but I find myself agreeing with Roger's reviews a lot.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

He actually named it the best film of 1998.

On a related note, Siskel named Babe 2: Pig In The City as the best film of 1998. So he didn't exactly go artsy-fartsy either.

Incidentally, those were my two favorite films of 1998 (which is why I remember this).

 

[Scott-S]

Wow, 1998 must have been a really bad year for films. LOL

Dark City was ok, but Babe 2?, that is a pretty wierd choice!

(now I got to go see what other movies came out in 1998)

 

[Aaron Silverman]

I think Saving Private Ryan and Shakespeare In Love were Oscar contenders that year.

I liked them, but not as much as the other two.

Babe 2 seems to be a real love-it-or-hate-it film (partly because it's so different from the original). Personally, I was shocked by how much I liked it.