5 Awesome Siskel and Ebert Fights

Today over 20 years of cinematic bitching and moaning hits the web.  Siskel and Ebert’s review library, dating back to the mid 80’s, has been posted on-line and to celebrate moment I’m making final rulings on five of their most infamous fights.

KIDS IN THE HALL: BRAIN CANDY

THE ARGUMENT:  Siskel thinks that the Kids take on 90’s drug culture is destined to become a midnight movie classic.  Ebert hates it.

WINNER: SISKEL – If you ever asked yourself who was hipper; Siskel or Ebert (and come on, who hasn’t asked themselves that at some point) this review should be considered a definitive answer.  Getting the Kids in the Hall required a weirder, slightly off beat sensibility.  But Ebert just can’t seem to wrap his head around their irreverent, ultra specific humor.  He can’t even seem to articulate a cohesive opinion about the film and just spits out a bunch of meaningless adjectives.  The super cool Gene Siskel, however, is hip to the Kids and the cultural institutions they’re lampooning.  That’s why he wins this round. Film critics need to be able to recognize something new and brilliant when it comes along, the second they can’t is the second their opinions start to become irrelevant. 

FULL METAL JACKET

THE ARGUMENT - Ebert thinks this is one of Stanley Kubrick’s lesser films.  Siskel thinks it’s amazing.

WINNER: EBERT – Film lovers can have trouble faulting their idols.  But we should expect critics to view the work of the masters a little more objectively.  Siskel was a known fan of the great Stanley Kubrick and that probably played into his overly positive review a little more than he’d like to have let on.  It’s not even like Ebert really trashes Full Metal Jacket. He simply points out that it’s one of Kubrick’s lesser films, which it is.

COP AND A HALF

THE ARGUMENT:  Ebert thinks this is a pretty smart kid’s movie.  Siskel says Ebert is pretty dumb for thinking that

WINNER: SISKEL – As insipid as this movie sounds I’m almost inclined to hand this victory over to Ebert.  I mean, look at that clip they show of Burt Reynolds blowing cigar smoke into the face of his annoyingly precocious nine year old co-star Norman D. Golden .  How is that kind of brazen child abuse not funny?  

Ultimately though I’m forced to declare Siskel the winner, not because of anything said during the review, but because of some awesome off-screen antics.  A famous Siskel and Ebert story goes that a few days after the review Siskel mailed Ebert a phony autograph from Norman D. Golden thanking the kindly fat man for his positive review.  Ebert was in a pretty good mood about his grateful little fan until Siskle gleefully informed him that it was a big ol’ prank.  As practical jokes go it may not be so clever but the fact that he would do anything at all is pretty amazing.  Siskel’s behavior reminds us that movies aren’t just worth fighting over their worth getting malicious over.  

BROKEN ARROW

THE ARGUMENT:  Siskel kind of likes this brainless action flick until Ebert convinces himself to turn his thumb down.

WINNER: EBERT (OBVIOUSLY) – One of the great things about Gene Siskel was his willingness to praise what other critics wrote off as mindless junk.  Die Hard 2, Wayne’s World and Back to the Future all made it onto his top ten list of their respective years.  So why does he let Ebert talk him into a southern thumb just because this isn’t a freaking Bergman film?

And regardless the last thing we want to see either of these guys doing is kowtowing to the other.  Once they articulate an opinion I want them to stick to it regardless of how stupid it is.  Their greatness lay in their stubbornness.  I would loose so much respect for Ebert if he ever cam out and said “you know what, I was wring, Garfield does kind of suck.”

THUMBS SIDEWAYS

THE ARGUMENT:  On an episode of Sesame Street Oscar the Grouch suggests the critics institute a “thumb sideways” policy for mediocre movies.  Ebert loves the idea, Siskel hates it.

WINNER: OSCAR THE GROUCH – Oscar plays Siskle and Ebert like a couple of chumps and soon the two critics are at each other throats.   I say the grumpy green Muppet should start stirring shit up on Ebert and Roper.  Maybe his malevolent influence will give the show back a bit of its Siskel-era energy.  These days the guest critics seem so interested in kissing each others asses that they never want to engage in any real conflict.  

The heated arguments were what made Siskel and Ebert so great.  And not just because it’s fun to see two grown men acting like fourth graders.  Their arguments were reminders that a film was something worth getting passionate about.  The more audiences are encouraged to sit back and placidly accept whatever trash is thrown up on the screen the more we need influences like Siskel and Ebert.  Oscar wins this round because he knows that their arguments are what really deserve a big thumbs up.