Roger Ebert: Back to the future of film criticism

It would be fair to say that I'm not an objective observer when it comes to the news that Roger Ebert and Richard Roeper have quit their longtime gig as hosts of "At the Movies," Disney/ABC's weekly TV review show. When I was a young pup in film school in Chicago, Roger Ebert was already a prince in the critical pantheon, first from his perch as critic at the Chicago Sun-Times, then as a TV reviewer (with Gene Siskel) on their original PBS movie review show. Roger's writing--crisp, spare, seemingly effortless, opinionated but never mean-spirited--was a huge inspiration to all of us young writers. He was also generous with his time. When the college arts series I ran was losing money, bankrupted by a series of hapless, hopelessly pretentious theater productions, we staged a Russ Meyer Film Festival, with Roger generously agreeing to take the stage and introduce the first night's proceedings. The sex films played to a packed house, teaching us a valuable lesson about showbiz success--you can never aim too low.

More recently, Roger came to my defense when I got into a spitting match with comedy second-banana Rob Schneider, who took out a series of full-page ads in the trades deriding me after I made a sarcastic quip about his film, "Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo," saying it was "sadly overlooked at Oscar time because apparently nobody had the foresight to invent a category for Best Running Penis Joke Delivered by a Third-Rate Comic." Schneider blasted me in his ads, saying I'd never won a Pulitzer Prize either. This inspired Ebert to end his review of its sequel "European Gigolo," by saying: "As chance would have it, I have won the Pulitzer Prize, and so I am qualified. Speaking in my official capacity as a Pulitzer Prize winner, Mr. Schneider, your movie sucks."

The news that Ebert and Roeper are quitting the TV series is being played as yet another instance of the dumbing down of media culture, which is no doubt a fair explanation. They are being replaced by younger talent with considerably less stature; Ben Lyons, who's been reviewing films for "E! News," and Ben Mankiewicz, who's been a talking head at Turner Classic Movies and hosts a pop culture show for Sirius Satellite Radio. Frankly, it's understandable that ABC would seek a younger generation of critics in its effort to liven up an aging show, especially in an era where critics are embattled and far less influential than ever before. It's also hardly a news flash that Ebert would have to step down sooner or later. Having battled health problems over the past few years, including a bout with throat cancer, he is unable to speak, making it impossible to handle a TV gig.

But I don't see this as the end of Western Civilization, Part 983, and here's why:

   

The future of criticism, be it reviews of movies, pop music, theater, dance or video games, is not inextricably linked to television. In fact, the success of the original "Siskel and Ebert at the Movies" was a fluke, owing more to the engaging personalities of the two critics than their actual opinions. Siskel and Ebert, though trained as ink-stained wretch newspaper men, turned out to be a great showbiz buddy team, the film-critic version of Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau. They had a chemistry on screen that transcended critical heft. Siskel was no Pauline Kael-style deep thinker, but on camera, he had verve and a dry wit. Tall and slender, Siskel was Stan Laurel to Ebert's chubby Oliver Hardy. They were song and dance men, even when reviewing the drekiest of summer trash. As much as I admire Ebert, once Siskel was gone--he died in 1999--the show lost momentum. The magic was gone. Teaming Ebert with Roeper, with all due respect, was like putting Walter Matthau on screen with Greg Kinnear--a respectable match, but not one made in heaven.

Television is a performance medium. Criticism is about words and ideas, which is why it belongs on the page, be it in a newspaper or on a computer screen. As a fan of Ebert, I'm delighted to see him abandoning TV and putting all his energy into writing again. It's where he belongs. He recently launched a blog, called Roger Ebert's Journal, which has been an absolute delight to read, with Roger weighing in on everything from Robert Downey Jr. to Werner Herzog to the F-word (and I don't mean film) to Studs Terkel, Chicago's greatest living cultural artifact next to Ernie Banks. Writing about Terkel's insatiable curiosity, even in the twilight of his life--Terkel is 96--Ebert said: "You hear about people retiring and then dying a month later, maybe because their life has lost its purpose for them. The lesson Studs teaches me every day is that to live is to live is to live."

Maybe that's why I'm not crying in my beer about Ebert and Roeper leaving "At the Movies." As long as Roger keeps writing, the future of criticism will still be in good hands.

Here, proving they could've been a great comedy team, is a funny clip of Siskel and Ebert doing the dozens in an outtake from a promo session for the show:

Here, also from their heyday, is a classic "Siskel and Ebert" review of "Pulp Fiction:"

 

Photo of Roger Ebert and Richard Roeper from Fred Jewell; Gene Siskel and Ebert from Buena Vista Television

Comments

[Binh Ho]

This is a sad day.. I hope Roger can handle his health concerns of the past couple of years because I am looking forward to reading his movie reviews for a long time.. If it wasn't for Rogers website, I would've been stuck watching the watered down, dumb popcorn movies of the current instead of being introduced to many of the great films of the past.. Keep watching and reviewing Roger.. You have a legion of dedicated fans who value your opinion..

[J Rond]

The passing of "Ebert & Roeper" (and the finality of Gene Siskel) is a melancholy moment. For a movie-obsessed lad in West Podunk, Gene and Roger gave insight to films before the super duper age of information. Another reminder of days passed and past.
Not that it wasn't overdue, as recent months proved. The "Three to See" and "See, Rent, Skip It" set of ratings seemed so ordinary. Hmm, just like Jeffrey Lyons' show. No wonder the boy got the gig. I've seen both Bens on television with no interest to see more. Alas.

I remember living in Los Angeles in '91 (or '92) awaiting Gene and Roger's "If We Picked the Oscars" episode. That Sunday, a minor (and I do mean MINOR) earthquake happened in the morning. KABC decided to spend the next 9 hours with live -nothing- coverage preempting the boys. As a measure of their power at the time, KABC ran the show the following week. Only in L.A. I suppose.

So long, fellas.

[Carol Livingston]

Heaven forbid the powers that be offer a woman a critic's spot on TV.

[Rick Brown]

Mr. Goldstein,

It would seem that Mr. Ebert's style has likewise embraced you. In the realm of cultural criticism, your effort lives in the high-rent district. My spirits have been lifted by your remarks - their content, and their tone. I despair that "crisp, spare, seemingly effortless, opinionated but never mean-spirited" criticism is becoming increasingly rare, and more difficult to access for the casual reader. This morning, there is a glimmer of hope.

[Alan Deane]

Give Ben Mankiewicz a try. He is the perfect replacement, really a brilliant, engaging, hilarious guy.

[Alan Deane]

Give Ben Mankiewicz a try. He is the perfect replacement. Really a brilliant, knowledgeable, funny guy with a long personal and family history in the medium. And not to belabor the point, but his radio show is not "pop culture"... It's mainly political commentary, peppered with sports commentary, peppered with pop culture.

[ginny]

Oh no!! I watch AT THE MOVIES every Sunday. I will miss the show.

[Arye Michael Bender]

Few people know that 'At The Movies (w/Siskel & Ebert)' was born in San Francisco, not in Chicago. And it was created before Siskel and Ebert were cast. WTTW in Chicago ran with the concept, cast it perfectly, and produced the the first -and best- TV movie show.

Small bit of trivia, the pilot was called 'The Popcorn Movie Revue', directed by Robert Zagone and shot entirely at the (then) newly renovated Castro Theater, where the balcony was always open.

Robert Zagone went on to discover Danny Glover, and starred him in the little known feature, 'The Stand In'.

My sprockets holes, and the shows about them, live forever!

[Quan]

They will be missed. Roeper never had any chemistry with Ebert. I think it's partly because of the age/power difference. Michael Phillips is a much better match, IMHO. I think they finally found their groove and now this. Let's hope the show doesn't turn out to be a long commercial for the movie studios, with no useful information for the viewer (e.g., good/bad, acting, cinematography, etc.)

[Mike Ross]

Patrick, I think that you should have won a Pulitzer for your notes on "comedian" Rob Schneider's "Deuce Bigalow, European Gigolo." Schneider and several other of his SNL alumni have been stinking up the field of motion picture comedy for far too long. Schneider even managed to ruin what would have been an otherwise watchable action pic, "Judge Dread," with Sylvester Stallone, with his unwatchable, inept, beneath-amateurish attempt at "dramatic" acting. Hollywood is full of talented, young, attractive and very funny actors who would just love to get a crack a lead in a feature - and make it soar. But overrated hacks like Schneider (plus, Will Ferrell, Jimmy Fallon, Tina Fey, Amy Poller, and lately, Bill Murray) should have been cashiered back into flipping burgers long after they'd blown their chances with the crap they've been starring in. Roger was spot on with his review of Schneider, but I wonder if the Disneyfication of the film industry - and its reviewers - wasn't part of his and Richard's reason for leaving.