After the death of Gene Siskel, Roger Ebert invited a series of guest critics to come on his show. After a year an a half of rotating guest critics, Ebert finally settled on a co-host, fellow Chicago Sun Times columnist Richard Roeper.
I wasn't crazy about the choice of Richard Roeper to take over for the late Gene Siskel as co-host of this show but over-time he grew on me and now I view him as a hip, young moviegoing type who says what he means, means what he says and I am glad he's there in Roger's absence.
While Ebert and Roeper don't have the same zeal as Gene and Roger did, I don't watch the show for the personalities (only) I'm here for the reviews which are intelligent, informative and often funny.
With Roger out on sick leave, I have enjoyed those who have taken his place most especially Michael Phillips, a very funny, very informed, often acerbic critic (he reminds me a little of Gene).
if you are ever wondering what movie to watch, this is the show to watch. Ebert and Roeper are some of the most well known and liked critics in the world, with there trend setting point counter point review style. While many may not appreciate their work, they often have opinions that most would agree with, and if you don't agree with one, you can always listen to the other. This show is very informative, and I always love to tune in and see how recent movies are. Ebert Roeper and the late Siskel are all great critics and have gained my trust and viewership.
This show, aye, I only watch it now if its the only thing on and I'm bored. This show, I disagree with the stupid Roeper guy so much that I turn of the tv cause he's giving such stupid reviews. I used to watch this show every week but now I skip it every week knowing I'm going to regret watching it, don't watch this show really.
Once in a great while, I tune in to "Ebert and Roeper," even if I'm a film critic for another web site. In addition to mwatching 'Ebert and Roeper" on television, I get The Chicago sun-times every Friday morning to read the latrst reviews from Roger Ebert. I check out his reviews to see if we agree or disagree. I long time ago, I follow the reviews of Gene Siskel. when he died in 1999, it was a sad day for me. I haven't see Roger Ebert since his cancer operation. but I hope he returns soon. From one film critic to another, I hope he made a full recovery. The best of health.
If you are like me, who considers if somethings is worth paying money for, this is an somewhat of an informative show. If you think the thumbs mean anything you are dead wrong. Even the pair admitted that the thumbs just mean the show is above or below average. Unless you are ready to hear them out during their show don't bother with this show. Many of the things that they base their critics on are highly controversial to the point where it seems so inconsistant. This is truely the case for comedies and action movies. Most likely you have an alternate review source, jsut stick with them. I just watch to see the bickering and the cynical nature of the duo.
It seems like Ebert and Roeper always know what to say. When I come home I can always trust them in what they say because most of the time they arre right. I like to hear what other people have to say about movies so if i am trying to figure out what movie to watch, Ebert and Roeper can give you a general idea of what you should watch and what you shouldn't. Though they have made some mistakes. For intance they gave Star Wars 2 thumbs down and look at the movie now. Also some movies like Last Holiday I didn't like and they gave it 2 thumbs up. Anyway it is still an informative show.
Needless to say, this show is absolutly stupid. Put anybody on there and they can do a proformance 10 better then anyone else. Their reviews are pointless and half the time, they don\'t know what they are talking about.
Take the movie \"Saw\" for instance. Their review didn\'t make any sence! They clearly didn\'t understand where Jigsaw was coming from and they didn\'t know why he was doing what he was doing.
Now don\'t get me wrong, they can have some good reviews. Not great, but good. I serously doubt that just because they gave \"Brokeback Mountin\" two thumbs up that I\'m going to go see it. Who wants to see a movie about 2 queers?
This show is terrible even though it can have its moments.
"Ebert and Roeper" is a great, informative show that informs its viewers of movies that are liked (and not liked) by its two hosts: Roger Ebert and Richard Roeper. They rate everything two thumbs up, two thumbs down, or they split (one liked a movie, the other didn't). Ebert originally hosted the show with the late Gene Siskel, but he passed away in 1999. So now Roeper hosts the show with him. It's nice to hear what other people, professionals, think of movies, rather than what one of your friends would think of it. This show is informative, and the only reason I would miss it is if I didn't have time or something. But other than that, I never miss a show. This show is good for people who like movies.
Movies are all about taste, it doesn't matter all the things you might know about the technical aspect, nobody goes to a movie because the grip was really great, even if he/she was, that's at least not why people review movies. I'm NOT trying to say that every person isn't important, the background people are more important just not paid as well, (and then Hollywood asks people to give them money to send these people to college, when they could just take a paycut) anyways.. They reviewed a movie that was just birds flying and said it was great, they love the artsy fartsy movies, which is fine but some don't that is why critics jobs are pointless, they ususally just make people mad or cause people to see the opposite of what the critic picks. They gave Farenheit 9/11 2 thumbs up, and that was proven to be some false and misleading information in that movie. I wa suprised with all the integrity Michael Moore has (HA HA)I love sarcasm, anyways they didn't review the rebuttal movies to Moore's 9/11 suprisingly, since one (Roeper) works or worked for CBS. (AGAIN SARCASM)I ususally go with Roeper over Ebert as I used to do when Siskel was alive, these shows are getting to be pointless, just as this review is. I will go because like the show this isn't getting anyone anywere.
Please read the following before uploading
Do not upload anything which you do not own or are fully licensed to upload. The images should not contain any sexually explicit content, race hatred material or other offensive symbols or images. Remember: Abuse of the TV.com image system may result in you being banned from uploading images or from the entire site – so, play nice and respect the rules!