When Gene Siskel died, Roger Ebert was left without a co-host on their weekly movie review show. For awhile, it got a bit interesting, as Ebert welcomed other film critics to appear with him. On one great episode, Bill Clinton even sat in to talk cinema. And then, finally, it was decided that Richard Roeper would feature permanently as co-host, and the respectability of "two thumbs up" went away forever. Now, with Ebert in the hospital for awhile, the show is in need of guest co-hosts once again. But instead of getting primarily critics this time, the show is featuring a few people even less qualified than Roeper to stick out their thumbs. So far Jay Leno, Kevin Smith and screenwriter/novelist John Ridley have appeared, and in the next few weeks we will be seeing entertainment reporter Toni Senecal, actress Aisha Tyler (on two episodes) and actor Fred Willard. As much as I find Willard to be funny in everything he's in (hmm, I should write a guilty pleasure post about Moving Violations), I don't really see how he fits here. He's not as bad a choice as Leno, who can't be too harsh a critic since his regular job is to kiss entertainers' asses, but really why should we be interested in his opinions of new films? At least one of the scheduled hosts is Michael Phillips, who reviews movies for Ebert's paper's rival (just as Siskel had), the Chicago Tribune. Be sure to check your local listings to see who is hosting when. You know, so you can avoid watching the show until Ebert returns.
_thumbnail.jpg)
Discuss: So, How Was 'Twilight'?
Quizzimatical: Vampire Movies
Insert Caption: Twilight
Fan Made: 'Twilight' Cookies
Cinematical Seven: Great Exports from Down Under
_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg){kind=spacer}
_thumbnail.jpg "Watchmen Storyboards")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
8-21-2006 @ 8:54PM
Scott Weinberg said...
Aisha Tyler. The hottie from Talk Soup.
Sheesh.
Reply
8-22-2006 @ 11:13AM
Jack said...
What the hell is your problem with Richard Roeper?
Roeper has done a good job of filling the void left by Siskel.
Reply
8-22-2006 @ 11:28AM
Richard von Busack said...
Yes, in the sense that he's every bit as uninformed as Siskel was.
The show has been most bizarre lately, the dumb leading the blind; Ridley saying "I'm a filmmaker" as justification for liking Accepted...who do you have to be to dislike it?
Actually, Willard (like Martin Mull) is not as obtuse as he looks. I can't wait to see what he has to say; I imagine that he has the power to damn a film with faint praise...
Reply
8-22-2006 @ 12:50PM
Cath said...
Hmmm... Even less qualified than Roeper. Maybe they can start pulling in NASCAR drivers or professional athletes during off season. At least Willard could puncture Roeper's ego every now and then and provide some levity that has been sorely lacking since Gene's demise.
Reply
8-22-2006 @ 1:00PM
Michael West said...
What's wrong with Richard Roeper?
A few years ago, his 10 Best List included Shallow Hal. SHALLOW HAL! Granted, he has improved in both his taste and his ability to express his justifications since then, but he will never NEVER live that down.
Reply
8-22-2006 @ 1:14PM
jack said...
Roeper has been good host next to Ebert. The two have different contrasting personalities, which makes the show good.
Reply
8-22-2006 @ 1:21PM
Charles said...
I agree. Gene Siskel was a very good film critic, but Roeper is lacking, in my opinion. The tension between Siskel and Ebert was one the things that made the show interesting and Ebert's views were sometimes tempered nicely by Siskel's sensitivity. This dynamic is completely lacking in the current duo; the show is too one-sided in favor of Ebert.
Reply
8-22-2006 @ 3:21PM
ihatemovies said...
No offense to Ebert (I hope he gets well soon), but...people still watch this show? Why?
Reply
8-22-2006 @ 4:42PM
Jack said...
All these people who bash Roeper, like christoper campbell, and say the show sucks, probably have been watching the show for the 6 years he's been on.
Reply
8-22-2006 @ 5:41PM
Christopher Campbell said...
I don't know about the other bashers, but I haven't actually been watching. Not only do I not ever know when it is on (it always changed times when I did watch and I could never keep up), but I don't think I get any channels that it is on.
Reply
8-22-2006 @ 6:00PM
Steve Rhodes said...
You don't have to watch it, you can listen to the podcast.
Which is fine since the only real visuals are movie clips you've probably seen already (though Willard will actually be worth watching).
Reply
8-22-2006 @ 8:56PM
Aaron said...
I totally agree with you about Roeper. He liked The Village, way back when and I've never been able to trust the man after that. Did you ever see a little movie called "Church Ball" That had Fred Willard in it, and he wasn't funny in that. I couldn't believe he did that movie, but it was horrible. Anyway, I can't wait until Ebert returns either.
Aaron.
Reply