Ebert & Roeper quit, new replacements named

[LockedOut]

Well Ebert's been gone for awhile but now Roeper is quitting after the season ends in August. Disney names 2 new hosts who I've never heard of. No indication what the show is going to be called. I guess it'll be "At the Movies with...".

http://www.cbc.ca/arts/tv/story/2008...rt-roeper.html

[ernie]

Originally Posted by LockedOut

Well Ebert's been gone for awhile but now Roeper is quitting after the season ends in August. Disney names 2 new hosts who I've never heard of. No indication what the show is going to be called. I guess it'll be "At the Movies with...".

http://www.cbc.ca/arts/tv/story/2008...rt-roeper.html

Yes Ebert has been gone for a couple of years with his health and surgery issues. He has no voice from what I understand.

It looks like Roeper wanted more money on his contract renewal than what they were prepared to offer. Of course I can't help but think they were looking at moving in a different direction given the replacements were named very very soon after Roeper said he wouldn't be coming back. May simply be an issue of wanting two full time hosts instead of Roeper and a special guest.

I was never really a fan of Roeper and stopped watching the show at all when Ebert went on leave.

Also gone will be the thumbs up/down rating system as Ebert and the late Gene Siskel own that rating system.

[Mike F]

What was the "new direction" for the show that Ebert referred to?

[OilKiller]

Originally Posted by ernie

I was never really a fan of Roeper and stopped watching the show at all when Ebert went on leave.

And I'm just the opposite. If Roeper gets his own show, I'll be watching it for sure. Don't think I will bother with this one anymore now that both Ebert and Roeper will be gone.

[MissTeeks]

Originally Posted by Mike F

What was the "new direction" for the show that Ebert referred to?

I heard they want to make it more into an Entertainment Tonight type show instead of the old format. Just what the world needs, another Entertainment Tonight . My sister and I were weird kids, we used to never miss Siskel & Ebert when it was on. We would also spend a lot of nights watching Matlock, but that's another story.

[fatso]

That's too bad. I always liked 'Siskel & Ebert' and thought Roeper and various other co-hosts did a very good job. It was nice having a program that focussed on movies and the art of film-making, as opposed to all the hoopla and merchandising of those other shows.

It would be nice to see Roeper come back with his own show, with the blessing and guidance of Ebert.

[octothorp]

The article alludes to the fact that Roeper is going to go be the host of a new show that honors the traditions of Siskel and Ebert, which to me suggests that Ebert is going to be producing his own show with Roeper as the cohost. Should be good, certainly will be better than whatever Disney decides to put out. Even though I'm a fan of Ebert and his written reviews are still one of the few I read religiously, Michael Phillips really grew on me as a replacement host, and I wouldn't mind seeing him continue with a new, Ebert-produced show either.

[Got Miikka?]

You can still read Ebert's reviews online here. For me Ebert holds the distinction as the one critic who, even if I disagree with his opinion, I always respect his perspective on a movie because he is able to critique them from such an educated, experienced point of view (I would venture he's likely seen more movies than anyone on the planet, lol) and he does so objectively. I can't recall him for being much of a cynic or making things personal as is the style of many film critics; having said that his Movie Glossary is spot-on for cinematic reduction.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by OilKiller

And I'm just the opposite. If Roeper gets his own show, I'll be watching it for sure. Don't think I will bother with this one anymore now that both Ebert and Roeper will be gone.

I feel the same way. Always liked Roeper and his reviews.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Good move if they are starting a new show. Recently Roeper and the new guy have been using a skip it or watch it thing instead of the thumbs, glad to see that the new show will bring it back.

Roeper the the other guy are good hosts, and I hope the new show has them together.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Got Miikka?

You can still read Ebert's reviews online here. For me Ebert holds the distinction as the one critic who, even if I disagree with his opinion, I always respect his perspective on a movie because he is able to critique them from such an educated, experienced point of view (I would venture he's likely seen more movies than anyone on the planet, lol) and he does so objectively. I can't recall him for being much of a cynic or making things personal as is the style of many film critics; having said that his Movie Glossary is spot-on for cinematic reduction.

Ebert also has an amazing ability to put movies into context. He judges a popcorn flick as a popcorn flick and nothing more. Some critics can't realize that review Iron Man should not be the same exercise as reviewing Gone Baby Gone.

[Bobblehead]

The good thing about Siskel and Ebert (and the substitutes) is they were often at odds, and were able to respectfully state why they felt the way they did. By giving their reasoning, I was able to get an idea of whether or not I would like it. And with 2 of them there, I could get an idea if it truly was a flaw in the film or more of a personal dislike of a performance. There are a few times I would see one say, "I didn't believe Actor S's performance", while the other would say, "But by doing it like that, it fit the story, and that is why I do like it". And often they agreed to disagree. So the explanation of why or why not is what makes (made?) the show compelling.

[ricoFlame]

don't really care about the show, but i must admit, the whole "two thumbs up" thing really became a tool that many people used to gauge if they'd go see a movie or not.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by OilKiller

And I'm just the opposite. If Roeper gets his own show, I'll be watching it for sure. Don't think I will bother with this one anymore now that both Ebert and Roeper will be gone.

Agreed. I think Roeper is one of few critics that review movies for what its supposed to be. Hes not one of those critics thats too stuck up to admit a Will Ferrel movie is funny, or that Transformers was entertaining. Like, guy, I dont care what you thought of the plotline of Anchorman, I want to know if its funny! Roepers ones of the best for it I think and I usually trust his opinion