Worst of 2000: We Hated Hated Hated These Movies!
Battlefield Earth, The Grinch, Road Trip, Ready to Rumble, Beautiful, Miss Congeniality, Little Nicky, What Planet Are You From? Gone in 60 Seconds, What Lies Beneath, Isn’t She Great, The Next Best Thing, Mission Impossible: 2, Scream 3
finally I found it!!!!! this special worst of show was never included in any of the old siskel,ebert and roeper websites!
Appreciate these 2000 uploads as a historical record and once-off viewing for me personally. But I find Roeper to be an unbearable douche hack, and a very poor excuse for Gene Siskel. I think of all the other potential candidates he had guesting on the show, there were certainly more worthy contenders in there than this smirking muppet.
I want to wait to see if any more of those guest episodes show up before I say who I think should have been picked. But, in Ebert’s defense, 1999 wasn’t much different from 1975 in that most of the esteemed movie critics were stiffs on tv. And, if they weren’t exactly stiffs, they came across as unlikeable–Rex Reed and Jeffrey Lyons (and for some people, Richard Roeper) are examples of that. Today’s environment is much different thanks to podcasts, and there is actually a large pool to choose from, not that anyone is looking to put a movie review show on tv anymore. Siskel and Ebert benefited from the early days of the show, back when, let’s face it, they weren’t very good but with time they learned to converse in front of the camera and the chemistry developed.
Appreciate your opinion Jay, he even nominated some movies on this episode that I actually rather liked.
I partially agree with Jay Lee on Richard Roeper. I do however appreciate his fervour, knowledge, and wit.
I would have picked either Michaela Pereira or Joyce Kulhawik, as they were not as aware of their image or glamour. They were there to provide serious insight, opinion, and wit, not deliver one-liners to show off. I think those two were finalists in a way, because they were frequently rotated, even right before Richard was chosen.
I do find the 1999-2002 years nostalgic, as I was still quite young, and I have a lot of fond memories from my life then. I was also aware of a lot of the movies that came out then, even though I didn’t watch them at that time. I always associate those movie memories with my concurrent youth.
Joyce was terrible. She liked Gladiator and was probably thrilled it won Best Picture, when it shouldn’t have.
I don’t mind Roeper. He can be funny at times. Granted, he’s no Gene Siskel, but who is? Nobody can come close to the chemistry Gene and Roger had. Roger and Richard’s did get a little better with more shows. I found other critics far more insufferable, such as Rex Reed.
This may horrify Ebert and Roeper, but I actually saw The Grinch in theaters. I was 5 years old.
I don’t like The Grinch, but The Cat in the Hat was far worse, IMO! Dr. Seuss’ estate should sue!
Neither do I, though I like Jim Carrey.
I had no problem with Richard either. Yes, he wasn’t Gene (who could be?) but as time went on, he got better and better and did say some things on the show Gene would’ve probably said, like with White Chicks.
Richard originally wasn’t the final choice. At first, Roger really didn’t want him because he also worked for the Sun Times and thought of him as a columnist but people were telling him to put Richard on and after he did everyone told Roger he should be the permanent co-host.
Roger Ebert is being a hypocrite in his review of What Lies Beneath, considering that some of his reviews themselves contain spoilers.
In their Grinch review, I’m surprised Roger didn’t attack the press for reporting the opening weeks grosses, which I’m sure convinced more people to see The Grinch.
Pingback: Ebert & Roeper and the Movies 2001 – Siskel and Ebert Movie Reviews