movie reviews siskel and ebert

23 Great Films Favored By Roger Ebert & Gene Siskel

Anyone lucky enough to have been a movie fan at some point during the three decades between 1969 and 1998 probably saw Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert review movies on television (even though they did not make their TV debut until 1975). They did so with such passion and precision, in small sound bites but with humor, intelligence, and insight, that they taught all of us how to look at movies.

It was fun to see them tear a bad movie to bits, but it was also fun to see them fight over a movie, disagreeing with one another with a vengeance. They had a particular charisma together that could not be replicated by others, and could not be replicated by Ebert once Siskel died in 1998.

A particularly special time was when they both loved a movie so dearly and deeply that you could feel it flowing from the TV screen. Some of these reviews are available to see again on YouTube, but for the record, here are the 23 films that the team loved the best.

23. Shoah (1985)

Ebert: In a class by itself. Siskel: #1 movie of 1985, and #2 movie of the decade.

Claude Lanzmann’s 9-1/2 hour documentary on the Holocaust was made when many participants and survivors in that horrific chapter of history were still alive, but in a time before the internet or phone cameras. So Lanzmann put in an enormous amount of painful, exacting work, tracking down, interviewing, and filming anyone and everyone he could on this subject. The results are, if nothing else, powerful, and essential.

Siskel called it “the greatest use of film I’ve ever seen.” Ebert agreed, and his written review is just as awed. “For more than nine hours I sat and watched a film named Shoah, and when it was over, I sat for a while longer and simply stared into space, trying to understand my emotions.”

At the end of the year, Siskel named it the year’s best, but Ebert did not include it on his list. “Obviously it belongs at the top of the list,” he said, but did not feel right with the year’s ordinary films, so he left it off and placed it in “a special category.” His decision was controversial among list-mongers, and it’s the reason Shoah places so low on this list.

22. House of Games (1987)

Ebert: #1 movie of 1987 and #10 movie of the decade. Siskel: #3 movie of 1987

Playwright and screenwriter David Mamet made his directorial debut with one of the original “twisty” thrillers, a tale of con men in which the cons unfold inside of other cons. Lindsay Crouse plays a psychiatrist who learns that one of her patients may be in danger over a gambling debt.

In a move probably not endorsed by psychiatry school, she goes to the gambler (Joe Mantegna) and asks him to erase the debt. He agrees, but only if she’ll help him pull off an elaborate con. Along the way, the audience learns all about conning and lying and “tells,” told to the rhythm of Mamet’s singular, dialogue with its punchy, repeating chunks.

Ebert wrote that “this movie is alive,” but years later admitted that he loved it because it seemed so fresh upon its initial release. Today’s movie fans may be able to spot the twists early on, but in its day House of Games was a brainy treat.

21. Hannah and Her Sisters (1986)

Ebert: #3 movie of 1986 Siskel: #1 movie of 1986

Woody Allen was on a roll when he made this great New York comedy-drama about a handful of characters connected to three sisters, cooking up with so many great characters, performances, situations, and dialogue.

Allen plays an ex-husband who searches for meaning in life through religion; in one scene he brings home a cross and a loaf of Wonder Bread. Michael Caine, as the married intellectual who is married to one sister but falls for another, and Dianne Wiest as the kooky, single third sister, both won Oscars.

Allen’s brilliant, novelistic screenplay, which takes place over a year’s time, starting and ending at Thanksgiving, won a third Oscar. Siskel said that “it’s the most life-affirming film that Woody Allen has done since Annie Hall. This is the work of a happy filmmaker, and one of the greatest that this country has produced.” Ebert agreed, adding that it was the best movie Allen ever made.

20. The Color Purple (1985)

Ebert: #1 movie of 1985 Siskel: #3 movie of 1985

It’s hard to imagine a time when Steven Spielberg was struggling to be taken seriously. But if you’d made some of the top box office attractions, rollercoaster-like rides and movies for younger viewers, then you’d find it hard to be considered a “grownup” filmmaker as well. In recent years, Spielberg has managed that nicely, but The Color Purple was his first attempt.

Adapted from an acclaimed Alice Walker novel, the film takes some tough material and makes it both sweet and heartbreaking. The movie was famous for being one of the most-nominated films at the Oscars without winning a single thing. It’s also famous for Spielberg’s Best Director snub, although he was dropped to allow in Akira Kurosawa for Ran, so it was a fair trade.

In his Sun-Times review, Ebert wrote, “The Color Purple is not the story of her suffering but of her victory, and by the end of her story this film had moved me and lifted me up as few films have. It is a great, warm, hard, unforgiving, triumphant movie, and there is not a scene that does not shine with the love of the people who made it.”

19. The Emigrants (1971) & The New Land (1972)

Ebert: #3 movie of 1973 Siskel: #1 movie of 1973, and one of the ten best movies of the 1970s

This two-parter was a giant-sized Swedish epic, running over six hours, released in U.S. theaters in 1973, although it has been largely absent from home video for a generation. It was based on a set of four novels by Vilhelm Moberg, and as the titles suggest, depicts the trials and tribulations of a Swedish family as they journey from Sweden to the United States.

It was directed by Jan Troell, a filmmaker that had been endorsed by none other than Ingmar Bergman. Despite its length and subject matter — and subtitles — it was a success and received universal acclaim and many Oscar nominations. Siskel and Ebert hadn’t begun their TV show yet, and writing for competing papers, they each selected the films together as a major benchmark of the year. In 1979, on a special episode of the show, Siskel mentioned the films as among the best of the decade.

18. Claire’s Knee (1971)

Ebert: #3 movie of 1971 Siskel: #1 movie of 1971

The French director Eric Rohmer was a film critic for Cahiers du Cinema in the 1950s, and a colleague of Francois Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard, and the others. While they began making films in the early 1960s and creating the “French New Wave,” Rohmer was something of a late bloomer, not finding his stride until the late 1960s and early 1970s.

With films like Claire’s Knee, he specialized in relaxed, summery films about romance among intelligent people, and their intellectual attempts to try and understand romance and all its strange nuances. In the movie, an older man on the verge of marrying becomes entranced by a young woman and entertains a notion to caress her knee. His writer friend encourages his behavior, looking for fodder for her writing; and, in fact, the film plays out in novelistic “chapters.”

“Claire’s Knee is a movie for people who still read good novels, care about good films, and think occasionally,” wrote Ebert.

17. Terms of Endearment (1983)

Ebert: #2 movie of 1983 Siskel: #2 movie of 1983

James L. Brooks exploded right out of a television career to make this feature directorial debut, based on Larry McMurtry’s novel. Like Woody Allen’s Hannah and Her Sisters, it’s a deft mix of comedy and drama, with strong characters and dialogue that slip effortlessly back and forth between funny and painful. The performances are all terrific; Shirley MacLaine and Jack Nicholson won Oscars and Debra Winger and John Lithgow received nominations. Siskel wrote,

“The goal is — I suspect — to reflect life with all of its energy, missed opportunities, warmth, cruelty, joy and bad luck.” It’s a very good movie, if a tad overpraised. Yet, perhaps in part because of Siskel and Ebert, or perhaps because of a subplot involving cancer that switched it from a mere character study to an Important Film, Terms of Endearment went on to win the Oscars for Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Screenplay.

20 Replies to “23 Great Films Favored By Roger Ebert & Gene Siskel”

I truly miss Sneak Previews and At The Movies. When they championed a movie, a smaller film could get distributed to little towns and actually make money!

…and of course, you can see most of the reviews here at http://siskelandebert.org/

I was a colleague of Roger and Gene’s and a film critic in Chicago (1993-1997). My picks for the years 1968-1998 are: 1. One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest 2. Jaws 3. Alien 4. ET: The Extraterrestrial 5. The Shawshank Redemption 6. 2001: A Space Odyessy 7. The English Patient 8. Out Of Africa 9. The Lion King 10. Star Wars I notice none of these are on your list. That’s the problem with “lists” of these kinds. They’re so subjective. How can you say this is the best movie of all time or this is the best song or the most handsome actor of all time when there are sooo many. For its time perhaps but not all time. ~Kilburn Hall American Author

These lists are obviously subjective.

Your list is very commercial. It looks like you chose a few top box office hits which tells me you didn’t see many other movies. What mean to say is what are the odds that the best movies in a given year are also the most popular? Virtually zero. And what constitutes a good movie is not “subjective.” What do you think they teach in Film School? Clearly, there is a large body of work that’s been compiled that demonstrates what makes up a great movie.

My favorite part is how you end your list with a criticism on the merit of lists.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Jaws, Alien, 2001: A Space Odyssey and Star Wars belong in the pantheon of great films, commercial or not. The others you mention are high caliber, and far better than average.

[…] Gene Siskel and Robert Ebert did not agree on much in their film reviews, but tasteofcinema.com recently revealed 23 films that they both agreed were great. As you may recall, I thank Siskel and Ebert for honing my love for movies at an early age so I publish this list with the utmost respect and agreement. You can check out the original article here. […]

Oh yeah…One False Move. What a sleeper. Thanks for mentioning it…it does belong on this great film list.

[…] And if you have some free time, check out 23 Great Films according to Ebert and Siskel […]

Just one question: how can Ebert have called Raging Bull the #2 film of its year, but the #1 film of the decade?! How does that work? How can it not be the best of the year but still be best of the decade? Very incoherent…

You do realize opinions can grow and change right? They’re not set in stone.

“though he later admitted his mistake”

According to Ebert’s site he prefered Crimes and Misdmeanors over Hannah and her Sisters

Claire’s Knee was a trifle compared to all the other heavy hitters on this list. Beautiful? Yes. Significant? Hardly.

[…] Source: https://www.tasteofcinema.com///2014/23-great-films-favored-by-roger-ebert-gene-siskel/ […]

I concur with pretty much everything you said there about the lists ! You know I was surprised that Godfather , Heat of the Night , or Legends of the Fall weren’t anywhere and these definitely carried some credentials ! Or ‘ Dogday Afternoon ‘ with Al Pacino ! God they knew how to make some great movies back then . Now it’s pretty much dead !!!

Yes opinions can most certainly change over time but regardless what Brian is saying makes sense because it’s contradictory saying the film was only number two once in the same year that ultimately is within that ten year period which claims the number 1 spot or place . Because at this point is it the number one of that decade or not ? To be the best film of the decade you pretty much have to be number one every year in my opinion’.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Find anything you save across the site in your account

Siskel, Ebert, and the Secret of Criticism

By Richard Brody

Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel, who went on the air together for the first time in 1975, have been off the air for a long time now. Siskel died in 1999, and Ebert bowed out in 2011, two years before his death. But, for many people, they remain the very exemplars of film criticism. Fellow-critics still admire their vigorous, wide-ranging discussions while, for the public at large, their thumbs-up/thumbs-down gimmick, which they came up with in 1982, has proved indelible. The story of their rise to fame is told in enticing detail by Matt Singer in a joint biography titled—what else?—“ Opposable Thumbs .” For Singer, the critic at ScreenCrush and the current chairperson of the New York Film Critics Circle, the book is clearly a labor of love. He writes that his own aspiration to be a critic was sparked by their show, which he began watching obsessively as a middle schooler, in the early nineteen-nineties.

Singer’s admirably fanatical research renders this obsession tangible. He seems to have absorbed every moment that the duo spent onscreen, whether on their own show or other people’s. (They were Johnny Carson and David Letterman regulars for years). He has combed his heroes’ writings and interviewed their colleagues, friends, family, and fellow-critics. But, more than merely gathering this material, he has thought deeply about it, and the best thing about the book is the way that it highlights some of the basic quandaries that critics confront (or avoid) daily. These fundamental conundrums of criticism involve questions about specialism, authority, personality, art, and business. And, with Siskel and Ebert, these dilemmas came into play long before the duo joined forces on television. Both Illinois natives, the two men came to their critical careers by very different paths, but they had one crucial thing in common: neither had set out to be a film critic.

Ebert, born in Urbana in 1942, was one of those precocious journalists who seem to have printer’s ink in his veins. As a high-school sports reporter, he won an Associated Press prize for professional (not just student) journalists. He edited his college daily at the University of Illinois and, in 1966, having begun a doctorate at the University of Chicago, took a day job as a reporter at the Chicago Sun-Times . The next year, when the newspaper’s veteran movie critic retired, he was tapped as her replacement, having written a few film-related reports. (A publicist recommended him.) In his wise and engaging autobiography, “ Life Itself ,” he recalls that he didn’t intend to stay in the job long: “My master plan was to become an op-ed columnist and then eventually, of course, a great and respected novelist.” But within a decade he’d become the first film critic to win a Pulitzer Prize for criticism.

Siskel, in contrast, came to journalism more or less by happenstance. Born in Chicago, in 1946, he majored in philosophy at Yale and planned on a career in law and politics. That changed when, needing to avoid the draft, he joined the Army Reserves. He wound up as an Army journalist at a base in Indiana, and, when he got out of the service, in 1969, he took a job with the Chicago Tribune . He’d been there only eight months when the paper’s movie critic took a leave. Siskel, who’d written a few pieces about the movie world, put himself forward and got the job.

Now the two men were in direct competition: doing the same job at Chicago’s two great rival papers. But, as much as they often clashed, there was another key thing they shared: neither was a movie person. Not only was neither a cinema-studies major (such a thing barely existed in their day) but also neither fit the profile of the cinephile, hanging out at repertory theatres and taking sides in the debates then raging over the so-called auteur theory . They were just regular moviegoers who managed to find a journalistic application for their pleasure. Their paths to television were separate but symmetrical, each maintaining print journalism as the solid basis of his activity. In 1973, Ebert hosted a series of Ingmar Bergman films on television, which scored an Emmy nomination. Then Siskel started delivering brief movie reviews on a local station. Then, in late 1975, the Chicago public station WTTW paired them up for a joint movie-review program.

The breakthrough took a while. Though PBS broadcasts in markets such as New York and Los Angeles brought national attention, by 1981, as Singer tells it, Siskel and Ebert were getting frustrated with the over-rehearsed nature of the show. The pair, encouraged by the assistant producer Nancy De Los Santos, decided to give free rein to everything else—the discussions and arguments, the slips and flubs, the spontaneity and authenticity of their interactions. Rather than an entente between rivals, the format became gladiatorial. Critics on TV weren’t new, as Singer notes; most of them would do a few minutes during news broadcasts. Siskel and Ebert were different. Individually, they remained writers first, transferring the essence of their columns to the screen, but the show as a whole was TV first and foremost, with all the showmanship of the commercial medium. Predictably, their burgeoning fame attracted a backlash. In 1990, decrying the state of film criticism in the august pages of Film Comment , Richard Corliss dismissed the show as “a sitcom . . . starring two guys who live in a movie theater and argue all the time. Oscar Ebert and Felix Siskel.” Singer differs: “To a generation of up-and-coming cinephiles, it was their first taste of film school.”

Singer correctly identifies the show’s crucial ingredient: the two stars’ clashing personalities and relentless competitiveness. As rival newspaper critics, they’d been striving to outdo each other for the best part of a decade. Now they were in the same room. In his memoir, Ebert writes:

In the television biz, they talk about “chemistry.” Not a thought was given to our chemistry. We just had it, because from the day the Chicago Tribune made Gene its film critic, we were professional enemies. We never had a single meaningful conversation before we started to work on our TV program.

Ebert’s expansive, jovial character immediately comes across in this memoir and in other published portraits. Siskel remains more of an enigma, because he died young and also because he was a far more private individual, rarely speaking of his personal life. The portrait of Siskel that emerges in Singer’s telling is fascinating. A former Yale roommate declared him “the most competitive person I’ve ever run across—more so than Michael Jordan or Bill and Hillary Clinton.” Ebert said so, too: “Gene was the most competitive man I ever met.” Ebert may have been intensely conscious of a rivalry with Siskel, but Siskel’s competitive ferocity and confrontational chutzpah were on another level. When asked by his first boss at the Tribune what his ultimate goal was, Siskel answered, “Your job.” (When a colleague expressed shock, Siskel replied, “Candor. It is powerful. It knocks people off their feet. They are not used to it. Try it some day. If you’ve got the guts.”)

In print, Ebert and Siskel competed for scoops and for celebrity interviews, a rivalry that Siskel carried to absurd extremes. He would stop at nothing to find out who was on Ebert’s schedule—once, he posed as an assistant cancelling an Ebert interview—all of which drove Ebert to cover his tracks with complicated ruses of his own. Siskel boasted, “I have the ability to look this guy straight in the eye and lie to him and he can’t tell.” Siskel’s biggest win involved nothing less than the duo’s name: of course, both men wanted their name to come first, but Siskel, with a blend of aesthetic acuity and brazen self-interest, assured his partner that “Siskel and Ebert” sounded better.

Just as André Malraux, in a celebrated piece of film criticism from 1939, reminded readers smitten with the art of movies that “Moreover, the cinema is a business,” so it’s worth emphasizing that criticism, as earnestly devoted to the cult of art as it may be, is also journalism. Ebert and Siskel were hardly the last critics to be also active movie-industry reporters, but they’re among the last major ones to come up as generalists. Exuding the worldly rough-and-tumble of the journalistic profession, they bucked the stereotype of film critics as—to quote Letterman’s on-air characterization—“kind of goofy, too esoteric, too intellectual.” Corliss wasn’t totally wrong to compare their show to a sitcom, but “The Odd Couple” is a red herring: it was more like “The Mary Tyler Moore Show,” an inside-TV story whose comic spontaneity naturally evoked the tangle of backstage life. More than that, though, “Siskel and Ebert” wasn’t a TV show so much as a movie . Siskel and Ebert were living incarnations of “The Front Page” dragged into the cathode-tube era, bringing classic-movie values to the television talk show. They may not have known as much about movies as some more fanatically cinephile critics did, but they belonged to the movies. Even if they weren’t movie people, they were movie characters.

Criticism is a fraught profession because it’s parasitical. It depends on the work of artists, without which criticism couldn’t exist. A critic who acknowledges and accepts the fact of this dependence is trying to salvage the dignity of the activity; critics who don’t are just trying to salvage their own dignity. That’s one reason that I’m wary of critics talking about criticism: they so often discuss the enterprise in terms that define the surpassing merit of their own efforts. And even the most earnest self-deprecation can contain the seeds of vanity. Still, all work is interesting to contemplate—a philosopher friend of mine used to say, “It’s a miracle that anyone does anything”—and criticism has the contemplation built in. Because critics are in the habit of discussing the way that others work, it’s just a turn of the screw for them to scrutinize their own practices.

As Singer’s book documents, Siskel and Ebert’s frequent riffs about their show amount to a rough-and-ready touchstone—even a questionnaire—for critics of all stripes to ponder. Take, for example, the so-called Gene Siskel Test, glossed by Singer as “Is this film more interesting than a documentary of the same actors having lunch?” (I’d say it depends on who directed the documentary.) Provocative on its own terms, the test becomes even more so when folded back on itself: If Siskel and Ebert were just having lunch instead of discussing movies, would the show be more interesting or less? Perhaps, too, the imagined lunch documentary exemplifies yet another dimension to movie reviewing. Seen this way, a critic’s job is to imagine not just the actors’-lunch documentary but also one about the director thinking through the project, and what it must have felt like to make the movie, and to have had the urge to do so in the first place. Siskel’s test, far from having any practical application, is a vivid thought-experiment to shift a viewer’s emphasis toward the real lives of a movie’s creators and the inner lives that the finished work reflects.

The peculiarity of the critical condition, its combination of imaginative sympathy and gimlet-eyed judgment, of advocacy and exploration, comes across in a diptych of Siskel and Ebert quips reported by Singer:

In a 1996 interview, Siskel said that he told readers that by going to movies they “are spending something more valuable than money—your life,” and if a movie didn’t work after an hour they should “get up and leave.” Of the crummy 1990 thriller Lisa , Ebert mused, “If the two hours you spend in front of the screen are not as interesting as two hours you could spend outside the theater, why spend your money?”

So it depends on how interesting you find your life. I recall discussing superhero movies with my older daughter as the genre was rising to prominence, wondering why audiences go for them. “They don’t have enough drama in their lives,” she said. Sure, one could say the same about other genres (maybe any genre); the real value of this test is to acknowledge the fundamentally personal aspect of a viewer’s responses. The great contribution of Siskel and Ebert, disagree with them as I might about any individual film, was to embody, however histrionically, the personality, the character, and the humanity that’s an inescapable part of the critic’s activity. Singer records Ebert giving voice to this notion in a TV interview:

“When you disagree on a movie,” Ebert said, “you’re not disagreeing on the movie. You’re disagreeing on who you are. If I don’t like a movie and he does, then I’m not saying that the movie is flawed, I’m saying that he’s flawed.”

There’s an aspect of criticism that inherently aims, however ironically, to repair the flaws of others—to improve the world through aesthetic judgment. I feel that just about any movie that sparks the energy to write about it in detail is worth seeing—but, after I’d written a negative review, someone asked me whether I was suggesting that they not see the movie, and I responded, “No, I’m suggesting that you not enjoy it.” The flipside of this is that movie critics also get to suggest enjoyment. Sharing enthusiasm is the far more gratifying (and, happily, more frequent) part of the job.

And there are many ways to share it. Plenty of criticism is neither written nor spoken to camera. Indeed, seen from a certain perspective, everything is criticism—the insightful pairing in a repertory cinema’s program, photographs taken on a movie set, essay-films about other films, profiles, and interviews. It’s in this domain that Ebert’s legacy—Siskel died too young for a second act—goes beyond the show and the thumbs. Though he didn’t start as a movie person, he became one, with fervor. In 1999, he and his wife, Chaz Ebert, launched a film festival, now known as Ebertfest , at his alma mater, the University of Illinois; it’s scheduled to celebrate its twenty-fifth anniversary next year. Even more vitally, he launched, in 2002, a Web site that both houses his own archive of work and commissions new pieces from writers. Unlike, say, Pauline Kael , who extended her influence via a society of acolytes (“Paulettes”), Ebert opened his pages to a wide range of young critics who may not have shared his views but whose work he admired. It has been a crucial showcase for the writing of several generations of critics and has helped make American film criticism today better than it has ever been. It may be his greatest act of criticism—and the apotheosis of the best of what he and Siskel were getting at with their show. ♦

New Yorker Favorites

Why facts don’t change our minds .

The tricks rich people use to avoid taxes .

The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool .

How did polyamory get so popular ?

The ghostwriter who regrets working for Donald Trump .

Snoozers are, in fact, losers .

Fiction by Jamaica Kincaid: “Girl”

Sign up for our daily newsletter to receive the best stories from The New Yorker .

By signing up, you agree to our User Agreement and Privacy Policy & Cookie Statement . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

By Jia Tolentino

By Kristen Roupenian

By Rebecca Mead

• Craft and Criticism
• Fiction and Poetry
• News and Culture
• Lit Hub Radio
• Reading Lists

• Literary Criticism
• Craft and Advice
• In Conversation
• On Translation
• Short Story
• From the Novel
• Bookstores and Libraries
• Film and TV
• Art and Photography
• Freeman’s
• The Virtual Book Channel
• Behind the Mic
• Beyond the Page
• The Cosmic Library
• The Critic and Her Publics
• Emergence Magazine
• Fiction/Non/Fiction
• First Draft: A Dialogue on Writing
• Future Fables
• The History of Literature
• I’m a Writer But
• Just the Right Book
• Lit Century
• The Literary Life with Mitchell Kaplan
• New Books Network
• Tor Presents: Voyage Into Genre
• Windham-Campbell Prizes Podcast
• Write-minded
• The Best of the Decade
• Best Reviewed Books
• BookMarks Daily Giveaway
• The Daily Thrill
• CrimeReads Daily Giveaway

How Siskel & Ebert Brought Movies to the People

Matt singer on the bygone era before movie clips.

Today, everyone—myself included—just calls it Siskel & Ebert.

That’s become the default name everyone uses when talking about the influential movie review show that aired on public television and in syndication from 1975 to 1999. But the reality is that “Siskel & Ebert” was technically only titled Siskel & Ebert for the second half of its run on television. When the Chicago Tribune ’s film critic, Gene Siskel, and the Chicago Sun-Times ’ film critic, Roger Ebert, debuted on Chicago’s WTTW, their show originally went by the name Opening Soon… at a Theater Near You. Before long, that was changed to Sneak Previews. When Siskel and Ebert jumped ship to syndication in 1982, the new show was called At the Movies With Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert , or At the Movies for short.

Certainly the various name changes reflect how famous Siskel and Ebert themselves became over the course of their run on television. But they also speak to a reality that many younger and more casual fans who only know them from their later years might not realize: That Siskel and Ebert were anything but the gold standard of film criticism on TV when they started. In fact, if the series had depended on the charisma of its two leads to draw viewers in its early days , Opening Soon … would have surely closed soon after it opened.

To see what I am talking about, watch any episode from the early days of Siskel and Ebert. The two men would later confess they felt terrified at those first tapings; Ebert claimed they were so “petrified” by the prospect of filming an Opening Soon… episode that they would stretch out their pre-recording cup of coffee as long as possible. Coffee wasn’t allowed in the WTTW studio, so as long as there was some java left in their cups, Gene and Roger could postpone the impending disaster for a little while longer.

And it was often a disaster. On Opening Soon… at a Theater Near You , Siskel and Ebert didn’t look terrified; they mostly seemed bored. There was no energy to their reviews, or to the back-and-forth “crosstalk” debates that became their trademark. Former New York Times film critic (and former Ebert replacement host on At the Movies ) A.O. Scott told me “if you look at the early tapes from the PBS era, you cannot believe that this has any future.” If anything, he’s underselling it.

So why, if Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert were so bad, did the show endure long enough for them to get so good that they became one of the most recognizable onscreen duos in TV history? The answer lies in those early titles: Opening Soon… at a Theater Near You and Sneak Previews. In those days, Siskel and Ebert were arguably not even the stars of the show. The true stars were the film clips.

To understand why, you need to recognize just how different the movie world is today, some 45 years later. If someone wants to watch a trailer for a movie now—almost any movie from the entirety of cinema history, no matter how obscure—it takes exactly as long as the time needed to type the film’s title into Google or YouTube to find it. (Even if the title is The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies , we’re only talking a matter of seconds.) If you’re not by a computer, you can watch trailers or clips from films anywhere at anytime on a smartphone. Hundreds (if not thousands) of websites, blogs, YouTube channels, and podcasts deliver daily and sometimes hourly updates about movies big and small, new and old. On social media, the conversation around movies never stops.

That’s today. In 1975, none of those things existed. When Opening Soon… at a Theater Near You premiered on WTTW in November of 1975, no one in the audience owned a VCR. VHS tapes hadn’t even been invented yet.

That is the world where Siskel & Ebert took root—in large part because information about and clips from new movies were so hard to come by in those days. Opening Soon… at a Theater Near You filled that void by presenting lengthy scenes from the titles that Siskel and Ebert discussed. Sneak Previews was never quite an accurate title for the show, because Siskel and Ebert reviewed rather than previewed films. But for many in the audience in the 1970s, the show served the same basic essential function as a sneak preview: It gave them their first glimpse of a movie they might want to see.

This period was so much the Wild West of TV coverage of movies, in fact, that these clips were not even provided by the movie studios. Today, every major film release comes with an “electronic press kit” or “EPK” which includes trailers and short scenes from the movie that broadcasters can use as part of their news pieces and reviews. Not in 1975. Back then, if Sneak Previews wanted to show a scene from a movie during a review, they had to make it themselves.

That’s precisely what they did. When Gene and Roger attended press screenings, a member of the Sneak Previews production staff accompanied them with a notepad and a stopwatch. When either man saw a scene they thought they might want to talk about on the show, they called out to the staffer, who made a note of the timecode. They also had to keep track of the reel changes that would appear intermittently in the top corner of the screen because—oh by the way—digital film projection was still a few decades away, so knowing which reel of celluloid 35mm film the clips appeared on was essential for the next step in the process.

After the screening ended, the Sneak Previews producer would take the specific reels of film featuring the scenes Siskel and Ebert selected, trudge them across Chicago to a transfer house, dub the scenes to videotape, and return the huge 20-pound film cans to whatever screening room or movie theater they had borrowed them from in the first place. It was an absurdly labor-intensive process, but it was the one that gave Sneak Previews its first major selling point: Scenes from new movies you couldn’t see anywhere else, carefully chosen by the show’s critics to illustrate their on-camera arguments.

You can watch the movie world shift around Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert over a quarter century.

If you do what I did, and watch hundreds of hours of Sneak Previews episodes chronologically (something, believe it or not, I would recommend!) you can watch the movie world shift around Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert over a quarter century. The show charts the introduction of music videos, the explosive growth of camcorders, the rise of the American independent film movement, and so much more. Home video debuts and then grows into a major financial force in Hollywood. VHS begets LaserDiscs, which then evolved into DVDs.

Gene and Roger evolved too. They learned to translate their combative off-screen energy into a compelling onscreen dynamic, and became popular TV stars. When they left At the Movies to launch a third review series at Buena Vista Television in 1986, the initially called it Siskel & Ebert & the Movies. After a year under that title, the final three words were dropped. Siskel & Ebert was finally, officially born. By that time, that—even more than the clips—was who people were tuning in to watch. And that was the way things remained until Gene Siskel’s death in 1999.

Today, there isn’t a Siskel & Ebert type show on television—although you can certainly find similarly styled debate series about sports and politics all over your cable package. To some degree that makes sense. You can watch those all-important clips anywhere and anytime now. And you can’t do Siskel and Ebert without Siskel & Ebert.

___________________________

  Opposable Thumbs: How Siskel & Ebert Changed Movies Forever by Matt Singer is available now from Putnam.

• Share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)

Matt Singer

Previous article, next article, support lit hub..

Join our community of readers.

to the Lithub Daily

Popular posts.

Follow us on Twitter

A Cartogropher’s Glorious Paean to the Landscape of Connemara

• RSS - Posts

Literary Hub

Created by Grove Atlantic and Electric Literature

Sign Up For Our Newsletters

How to Pitch Lit Hub

Advertisers: Contact Us

Privacy Policy

Support Lit Hub - Become A Member

Become a Lit Hub Supporting Member : Because Books Matter

For the past decade, Literary Hub has brought you the best of the book world for free—no paywall. But our future relies on you. In return for a donation, you’ll get an ad-free reading experience , exclusive editors’ picks, book giveaways, and our coveted Joan Didion Lit Hub tote bag . Most importantly, you’ll keep independent book coverage alive and thriving on the internet.

Become a member for as low as $5/month

10 Action Movies Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert Both Loved

Siskel and Ebert didn't always agree on action movies, but when they did they were right on the money.

When Die Hard was released in 1998, Roger Ebert gave it two stars out of four, calling John McClane "Another one of those Hollywood action roles where the hero's shirt is ripped off in the first reel...." So Ebert's opinion didn't always match up with the consensus, nor did Gene Siskel 's. Furthermore, sometimes their opinions didn't even line up with one another's on At the Movies , and when they didn't, there would be shouting matches. For the most part, however, they did agree, and this includes action films. For instance, both gave "Two Thumbs Down" to 1998's big-budget Hard Rain , starring Christian Slater and Morgan Freeman, and "Two Thumbs Up" to Slater's 1990 rebellious minor classic Pump Up the Volume .

On the opposite side of the coin, Siskel and Ebert knew an action classic when they saw it and were always quick to tell people to head for the theaters. And thanks to the internet those recommendations and warnings are digitally archived, perfect for those nostalgic for the days of Blockbuster and VHS tapes. Note that war films such as Saving Private Ryan and gangster-themed crime films such as The Godfather were excluded in favor of more straightforward action fare.

10 Natural Born Killers

Oliver Stone's controversial yet still-relevant analysis of humanity's depravity, Natural Born Killers , is an extremely divisive film and will remain as such. It follows Woody Harrelson and Juliette Lewis' Mickey and Mallory Knox, a disturbed and bloodthirsty couple storming their way across the country more violently than Bonnie and Clyde. And the film doesn't shy away from showing their deeds, which has the potential to ruffle a viewer's feathers. But both of the Chicago-based critics got a lot out of it at the time.

Roger Ebert wrote that to see it once was to not see it properly. In his words, "The first time is for the visceral experience, the second time is for the meaning." Siskel agreed, calling it "Visually complex and thematically simple." Furthermore, Siskel felt that the scene featuring comedian Rodney Dangerfield as serial killer Mallory Knox's abusive father was a standout.

9 The Fugitive

One of the 1990s' most intense and memorable films, Andrew Davis' The Fugitive stands alongside 21 Jump Street as a definitive example of how to adapt a TV series . With breakneck pacing and highpoint performances from Harrison Ford and Tommy Lee Jones, it's one of the '90s' best, regardless of genre. It also features some terrific stunt work and a handful of classic scenes, most notably when Ford's Dr. Richard Kimble holds his hands above his head and yells "I didn't kill my wife!" to Jones' Deputy Marshal Samuel Gerard behind him, who simply responds with a flat "I don't care!"

Ebert gave the film a perfect score, calling it "one of the best entertainments of the year" and "a tense, taut and expert thriller that becomes something more than that, an allegory about an innocent man in a world prepared to crush him." Siskel was also a big fan, writing "I've already seen The Fugitive twice" shortly after its release, followed with "I'll probably see it again."

Jan de Bont's Speed is one of the 1990s' most exhilarating and re-watchable action films. The same can't be said of its sequel, but considering Keanu Reeves is up for it and Sandra Bullock is still filming athletics-requiring movies such as The Lost City , perhaps that cruise ship disaster could be erased from memory.

Roger Ebert gave the film a perfect review of four stars, calling it "An ingenious windup machine" and "a smart, inventive thriller...." For his part, Siskel wrote that Speed "ranks with the fun-loving excitement of the Die Hard pictures." He also called Reeves "absolutely charismatic" as his LAPD SWAT team member Jack Traven "jumps through elevator shafts, under a bus speeding through the L.A. freeway system, and atop a subway train."

7 Die Hard 2: Die Harder

While Bruce Willis initially wanted the sequel to be more straightforward and serious than the original, Die Hard 2: Die Harder is still fairly in line tonally. But it's also a rehash at its core. A fun rehash, but a rehash nonetheless.

This is what makes it so surprising that Roger Ebert (and Gene Siskel) took to Die Harder but not the superior Die Hard . In his words: " Die Hard 2 is as unlikely as the Bond pictures, and as much fun." Siskel agreed with the comparison, writing that " Die Hard 2 matches James Bond at his best."

6 Goldfinger

Arguably the best James Bond film in a litany, Goldfinger features every aspect of the franchise that works. From gorgeous cinematography to an on-point performance from Sean Connery as 007, the third film in the superspy saga set a ridiculously high bar that only Casino Royale has neared.

Ebert wrote that "Of all the Bonds, Goldfinger is the best, and can stand as a surrogate for the others...and [it] contains all the elements of the Bond formula that would work again and again." Siskel also loved Goldfinger , citing it as a highpoint in his less positive reviews for both On Her Majesty's Secret Service and GoldenEye .

5 Raiders of the Lost Ark

Even in a filmography as jaw-droppingly solid as Steven Spielberg's, Raiders of the Lost Ark ranks high. It was and remains the ultimate adventure film, consistently oozing love for serials through every frame. It's gone on to inspire countless other filmmakers and stands as a masterclass on how to keep the pace moving.

In his review, Ebert gave the film the highest score possible and wrote that the movie "Plays like an anthology of the best parts from all the Saturday matinee serials ever made." Siskel also gave the film a perfect score and wrote " Raiders ...is, in fact, about as entertaining as a commercial movie can be...It's the kind of movie that first got you excited about movies when you were a kid."

4 Seven Samurai

Akira Kurosawa's Seven Samurai was released the same year as Ishirō Honda's Gojira and stands as an equal testament to the strength of Japanese cinema in the 1950s. The plot of the film concerns a group of farmers who seek a group of trained swordsmen to stave off further attacks from the local criminal population and this central concept would go on to inspire countless other classics, most notably The Magnificent Seven .

Ebert wrote that Seven Samurai is "not only a great film in its own right, but the source of a genre that would flow through the rest of the century." Siskel was a major fan of the important film as well, to the point that, after his passing, the Siskel Center held a Kurosawa double feature, featuring Seven Samurai .

3 The Negotiator

When Siskel and Ebert reviewed the Samuel L. Jackson and Kevin Spacey-led thriller The Negotiator on At the Movies , the latter called it a "tightly-wound and effective police thriller." It certainly is that, and has a twist that still pays off over 25 years later. He went on to praise the direction and the writing before citing Jackson and Spacey as "At the top of their form."

Siskel chimed in with admiration for the film's unpredictability and general reluctance to delve into cliché. In his words: "You have a real chess game. Played at high stakes with high tension, and it works." The Negotiator is an underseen late '90s minor action classic. And, even if it's a bit uncomfortable to watch Spacey after all his controversy, the viewer will be too wrapped up in Jackson's committed performance to notice.

2 The Hunt for Red October

The Hunt for Red October is the benefactor of multiple masterful technical elements coalescing into a classic final product. From the music, tight direction by Predator 's John McTiernan, one of the best film scores of the '90s , to the steely performances from Alec Baldwin and Sean Connery, it was and remains the best Tom Clancy adaptation to date.

Roger Ebert called it a "skillful, efficient film that involves us in the clever and deceptive game being played...." This thought was largely mirrored by Siskel, as was the praise given to the film's onscreen talent and overall adherence to the intricacy of Clancy's novel.

Before Sam Raimi was tackling the world's most famous wall-crawler in Spider-Man he was directing a pre-A-list Liam Neeson and Frances McDormand in his original superhero film , Darkman . It's a film whose quality makes it obvious why the director got a higher budget gig down the line, as there's as much focus to building up the characters as there is building up the tension via set pieces and face swaps.

In their review of Raimi's film, Ebert praised the film for "having a lot of original twists to it" while simultaneously admitting the narrative didn't "compel" him. But, in the end, he gave it a recommendation in the form of calling Raimi's direction "worth seeing." Siskel agreed with the latter point but went a step further by calling the film and its title character "interesting."

• Copy from this list
• Report this list

Movies on Siskel and Ebert's Best Films Ever

Each year, Siskel and Ebert would each give a Top 10 list of the best films of the year. These are the films. Currently 1998-1992.

• Instant Watch Options
• Movies or TV
• IMDb Rating
• In Theaters
• Release Year

1. Babe: Pig in the City (1998)

PG | 97 min | Adventure, Comedy, Drama

Babe, fresh from his victory in the sheepherding contest, returns to Farmer Hoggett's farm, but after Farmer Hoggett is injured and unable to work, Babe has to go to the big city to save the farm.

Director: George Miller | Stars: Magda Szubanski , Elizabeth Daily , Mickey Rooney , James Cromwell

Votes: 35,420 | Gross: $18.32M

Siskel's choice for the best film of 1998. Ebert's 7th best film of 1998.

2. Dark City (1998)

R | 100 min | Fantasy, Mystery, Sci-Fi

A man struggles with memories of his past, which include a wife he cannot remember and a nightmarish world no one else ever seems to wake up from.

Director: Alex Proyas | Stars: Rufus Sewell , Kiefer Sutherland , Jennifer Connelly , William Hurt

Votes: 211,989 | Gross: $14.38M

Ebert's choice for the best film of 1998.

3. The Thin Red Line (1998)

R | 170 min | Drama, History, War

Adaptation of James Jones ' autobiographical 1962 novel, focusing on the conflict at Guadalcanal during the second World War.

Director: Terrence Malick | Stars: Jim Caviezel , Sean Penn , Nick Nolte , Kirk Acevedo

Votes: 199,324 | Gross: $36.40M

Siskel's 2nd best film of 1998.

4. Pleasantville (1998)

PG-13 | 124 min | Comedy, Drama, Fantasy

Two 1990s teenage siblings find themselves transported to a 1950s sitcom where their influence begins to profoundly change that colorless, complacent world.

Director: Gary Ross | Stars: Tobey Maguire , Jeff Daniels , Joan Allen , William H. Macy

Votes: 136,181 | Gross: $40.57M

Ebert's 2nd best film of 1998 Siskel's 3rd best film of 1998

5. Saving Private Ryan (1998)

R | 169 min | Drama, War

Following the Normandy Landings, a group of U.S. soldiers go behind enemy lines to retrieve a paratrooper whose brothers have been killed in action.

Director: Steven Spielberg | Stars: Tom Hanks , Matt Damon , Tom Sizemore , Edward Burns

Votes: 1,494,042 | Gross: $216.54M

Ebert's 3rd best film of 1998 Siskel's 4th best film of 1998

6. A Simple Plan (1998)

R | 121 min | Crime, Drama, Thriller

Three blue-collar acquaintances come across millions of dollars in lost cash and make a plan to keep their find from the authorities, but it isn't long before complications and mistrust weave their way into the plan.

Director: Sam Raimi | Stars: Bill Paxton , Billy Bob Thornton , Bridget Fonda , Brent Briscoe

Votes: 76,031 | Gross: $16.31M

Ebert's 4th best film of 1998

7. Shakespeare in Love (1998)

R | 123 min | Comedy, Drama, History

The world's greatest ever playwright, William Shakespeare , is young, out of ideas and short of cash, but meets his ideal woman and is inspired to write one of his most famous plays.

Director: John Madden | Stars: Gwyneth Paltrow , Joseph Fiennes , Geoffrey Rush , Tom Wilkinson

Votes: 234,133 | Gross: $100.32M

Siskel's 5th best film of 1998 Ebert's 8th best film of 1998

8. Happiness (1998)

NC-17 | 134 min | Comedy, Drama

The lives of several individuals intertwine as they go about their lives in their own unique ways, engaging in acts which society as a whole might find disturbing in a desperate search for human connection.

Director: Todd Solondz | Stars: Jane Adams , Jon Lovitz , Philip Seymour Hoffman , Dylan Baker

Votes: 74,327 | Gross: $2.81M

Ebert's 5th best film of 1998

9. The Truman Show (1998)

PG | 103 min | Comedy, Drama

An insurance salesman discovers his whole life is actually a reality TV show.

Director: Peter Weir | Stars: Jim Carrey , Ed Harris , Laura Linney , Noah Emmerich

Votes: 1,193,337 | Gross: $125.62M

Siskel's 6th best film of 1998

10. Elizabeth (1998)

R | 124 min | Biography, Drama, History

The early years of the reign of Elizabeth I of England and her difficult task of learning what is necessary to be a monarch.

Director: Shekhar Kapur | Stars: Cate Blanchett , Liz Giles , Rod Culbertson , Paul Fox

Votes: 105,004 | Gross: $30.08M

Ebert's 6th best film of 1998

11. Antz (1998)

PG | 83 min | Animation, Adventure, Comedy

A rather neurotic ant tries to break from his totalitarian society while trying to win the affection of the princess he loves.

Directors: Eric Darnell , Tim Johnson | Stars: Woody Allen , Sharon Stone , Gene Hackman , Sylvester Stallone

Votes: 163,915 | Gross: $90.76M

Siskel's 7th best film of 1998

12. Simon Birch (1998)

PG | 114 min | Comedy, Drama, Family

A young boy with stunted growth is convinced that God has a great purpose for him.

Director: Mark Steven Johnson | Stars: Ian Michael Smith , Joseph Mazzello , Ashley Judd , Oliver Platt

Votes: 22,190 | Gross: $18.25M

Siskel's 8th best film of 1998

13. There's Something About Mary (1998)

R | 119 min | Comedy, Romance

A man gets a chance to meet up with his dream girl from high school, even though his date with her back then was a complete disaster.

Directors: Bobby Farrelly , Peter Farrelly | Stars: Cameron Diaz , Matt Dillon , Ben Stiller , Lee Evans

Votes: 328,489 | Gross: $176.48M

Siskel's 9th best film of 1998

14. Life Is Beautiful (1997)

PG-13 | 116 min | Comedy, Drama, Romance

When an open-minded Jewish waiter and his son become victims of the Holocaust, he uses a perfect mixture of will, humor and imagination to protect his son from the dangers around their camp.

Director: Roberto Benigni | Stars: Roberto Benigni , Nicoletta Braschi , Giorgio Cantarini , Giustino Durano

Votes: 741,979 | Gross: $57.60M

Ebert's 9th best film of 1998

15. Waking Ned Devine (1998)

PG | 91 min | Comedy

When a lottery winner dies of shock, his fellow townsfolk attempt to claim the money.

Director: Kirk Jones | Stars: Ian Bannen , David Kelly , Fionnula Flanagan , Susan Lynch

Votes: 28,014 | Gross: $24.79M

Siskel's 10th best film of 1998

16. Primary Colors (1998)

R | 143 min | Comedy, Drama

A man joins the political campaign of a smooth-operator candidate for President of the United States of America.

Director: Mike Nichols | Stars: John Travolta , Emma Thompson , Kathy Bates , Larry Hagman

Votes: 30,079 | Gross: $38.97M

Ebert's 10th best film of 1998

17. The Ice Storm (1997)

R | 112 min | Drama

In suburban New Canaan, Connecticut, 1973, middle-class families experimenting with casual sex and substance abuse find their lives beyond their control.

Director: Ang Lee | Stars: Kevin Kline , Joan Allen , Sigourney Weaver , Henry Czerny

Votes: 59,911 | Gross: $7.84M

Siskel's choice for the best film of 1997

18. Eve's Bayou (1997)

R | 108 min | Drama

What did little Eve see--and how will it haunt her? Husband, father and womanizer Louis Batiste is the head of an affluent family, but it's the women who rule this gothic world of secrets, lies and mystic forces.

Director: Kasi Lemmons | Stars: Samuel L. Jackson , Jurnee Smollett , Meagan Good , Lynn Whitfield

Votes: 11,584 | Gross: $14.82M

Eberts choice for the best film of 1997

19. L.A. Confidential (1997)

R | 138 min | Crime, Drama, Mystery

As corruption grows in 1950s Los Angeles, three policemen - one strait-laced, one brutal, and one sleazy - investigate a series of murders with their own brand of justice.

Director: Curtis Hanson | Stars: Kevin Spacey , Russell Crowe , Guy Pearce , Kim Basinger

Votes: 616,863 | Gross: $64.62M

Siskel's 2nd best film of 1997 Ebert's 7th best film of 1997

20. The Sweet Hereafter (1997)

A bus crash in a small town brings a lawyer to defend the families, but he discovers everything isn't what it seems.

Director: Atom Egoyan | Stars: Ian Holm , Sarah Polley , Caerthan Banks , Tom McCamus

Votes: 36,708 | Gross: $3.25M

Ebert's 2nd best film of 1997 Siskel's 7th best film of 1997

21. Wag the Dog (1997)

R | 97 min | Comedy, Drama

Shortly before an election, a spin-doctor and a Hollywood producer join efforts to fabricate a war in order to cover up a Presidential sex scandal.

Director: Barry Levinson | Stars: Dustin Hoffman , Robert De Niro , Anne Heche , Woody Harrelson

Votes: 88,397 | Gross: $43.02M

Siskel's 3rd best film of 1997 Ebert's 10th best film of 1997

22. Boogie Nights (1997)

R | 155 min | Drama

Back when sex was safe, pleasure was a business and business was booming, an idealistic porn producer aspires to elevate his craft to an art when he discovers a hot young talent.

Director: Paul Thomas Anderson | Stars: Mark Wahlberg , Julianne Moore , Burt Reynolds , Luis Guzmán

Votes: 281,699 | Gross: $26.40M

Ebert's 3rd best film of 1997

23. In the Company of Men (1997)

Two business executives--one an avowed misogynist, the other recently emotionally wounded by his love interest--set out to exact revenge on the female gender by seeking out the most innocent, uncorrupted girl they can find and ruining her life.

Director: Neil LaBute | Stars: Aaron Eckhart , Matt Malloy , Stacy Edwards , Michael Martin

Votes: 14,271 | Gross: $2.86M

Siskel's 4th best film of 1997 Ebert's 8th best film of 1997

24. Maborosi (1995)

Not Rated | 110 min | Drama

A young woman's husband apparently commits suicide without warning or reason, leaving behind his wife and infant.

Director: Kore-eda Hirokazu | Stars: Makiko Esumi , Takashi Naitô , Tadanobu Asano , Gohki Kashiyama

Votes: 7,301

Ebert's 4th best film of 1997

25. The End of Violence (1997)

R | 122 min | Drama, Thriller

Mike is a successful Hollywood producer of violent movies. Then he himself experiences extreme violence, goes missing, joins some Latino gardeners and reviews his life.

Director: Wim Wenders | Stars: Traci Lind , Rosalind Chao , Bill Pullman , Andie MacDowell

Votes: 5,175 | Gross: $0.28M

Siskel's 5th best film of 1997

26. Jackie Brown (1997)

R | 154 min | Crime, Drama, Thriller

A flight attendant with a criminal past gets nabbed by the ATF for smuggling. Under pressure to become an informant against the illegal arms dealer she works for, she must find a way to secure her future without getting killed.

Director: Quentin Tarantino | Stars: Pam Grier , Samuel L. Jackson , Robert Forster , Bridget Fonda

Votes: 374,245 | Gross: $39.67M

Ebert's 5th best film of 1997

27. The Full Monty (1997)

R | 91 min | Comedy, Drama

Six unemployed steel workers form a male striptease act. The women cheer them on to go for "the full monty" - total nudity.

Director: Peter Cattaneo | Stars: Robert Carlyle , Tom Wilkinson , Mark Addy , Wim Snape

Votes: 113,988 | Gross: $45.95M

Siskel's 6th best film of 1997

28. Fast, Cheap & Out of Control (1997)

PG | 80 min | Documentary

An exploration of the careers of four unrelated professionals: a lion tamer, a robotics expert, a topiary gardener, and a naked mole rat specialist.

Director: Errol Morris | Stars: Dave Hoover , George Mendonça , Rodney Brooks , Raymond A. Mendez

Votes: 3,977 | Gross: $0.83M

Ebert's 6th best film of 1997

29. Good Will Hunting (1997)

R | 126 min | Drama, Romance

Will Hunting, a janitor at M.I.T., has a gift for mathematics, but needs help from a psychologist to find direction in his life.

Director: Gus Van Sant | Stars: Robin Williams , Matt Damon , Ben Affleck , Stellan Skarsgård

Votes: 1,065,359 | Gross: $138.43M

Siskel's 8th best film of 1997

30. Mrs. Brown (1997)

PG | 101 min | Biography, Drama, History

When Queen Victoria's husband Prince Albert dies, she finds solace in her trusted servant, Mr. John Brown, but their relationship also brings scandal and turmoil.

Director: John Madden | Stars: Judi Dench , Billy Connolly , Geoffrey Palmer , Antony Sher

Votes: 15,562 | Gross: $9.22M

Siskel's 9th best film of 1997

31. Titanic (1997)

PG-13 | 194 min | Drama, Romance

A seventeen-year-old aristocrat falls in love with a kind but poor artist aboard the luxurious, ill-fated R.M.S. Titanic.

Director: James Cameron | Stars: Leonardo DiCaprio , Kate Winslet , Billy Zane , Kathy Bates

Votes: 1,277,964 | Gross: $659.33M

Ebert's 9th best film of 1997

32. As Good as It Gets (1997)

PG-13 | 139 min | Comedy, Drama, Romance

A single mother and waitress, a misanthropic author, and a gay artist form an unlikely friendship after the artist is assaulted in a robbery.

Director: James L. Brooks | Stars: Jack Nicholson , Helen Hunt , Greg Kinnear , Cuba Gooding Jr.

Votes: 317,981 | Gross: $148.48M

Siskel's 10th best film of 1997

33. Fargo (1996)

R | 98 min | Crime, Thriller

Minnesota car salesman Jerry Lundegaard's inept crime falls apart due to his and his henchmen's bungling and the persistent police work of the quite pregnant Marge Gunderson.

Directors: Joel Coen , Ethan Coen | Stars: William H. Macy , Frances McDormand , Steve Buscemi , Peter Stormare

Votes: 725,445 | Gross: $24.61M

Siskel and Ebert's choice for the best film of 1996

34. Secrets & Lies (1996)

R | 136 min | Comedy, Drama

Following the death of her adoptive parents, a successful young black optometrist establishes contact with her biological mother -- a lonely white factory worker living in poverty in East London.

Director: Mike Leigh | Stars: Timothy Spall , Brenda Blethyn , Phyllis Logan , Claire Rushbrook

Votes: 47,111 | Gross: $13.42M

Siskel's 2nd best film of 1996 Ebert's 3rd best film of 1996

35. Breaking the Waves (1996)

R | 159 min | Drama

Oilman Jan is paralyzed in an accident. His wife, who prayed for his return, feels guilty; even more, when Jan urges her to have sex with another.

Director: Lars von Trier | Stars: Emily Watson , Stellan Skarsgård , Katrin Cartlidge , Jean-Marc Barr

Votes: 71,490 | Gross: $4.04M

Ebert's 2nd best film of 1996 Siskel's 3rd best film of 1996

36. The English Patient (1996)

R | 162 min | Drama, Romance, War

At the close of World War II, a young nurse tends to a badly burned plane crash victim. His past is shown in flashbacks, revealing an involvement in a fateful love affair.

Director: Anthony Minghella | Stars: Ralph Fiennes , Juliette Binoche , Willem Dafoe , Kristin Scott Thomas

Votes: 200,235 | Gross: $78.65M

Siskel's 4th best film of 1996

37. Lone Star (1996)

R | 135 min | Drama, Mystery, Western

When the skeleton of his murdered predecessor is found, Sheriff Sam Deeds unearths many other long-buried secrets in his Texas border town.

Director: John Sayles | Stars: Chris Cooper , Elizabeth Peña , Stephen Mendillo , Stephen J. Lang

Votes: 32,267 | Gross: $13.27M

Ebert's 4th best film of 1996 Siskel's 5th best film of 1996

38. Welcome to the Dollhouse (1995)

R | 88 min | Comedy, Drama

An awkward seventh-grader struggles to cope with inattentive parents, snobbish class-mates, a smart older brother, an attractive younger sister and her own insecurities in suburban New Jersey.

Director: Todd Solondz | Stars: Heather Matarazzo , Christina Brucato , Victoria Davis , Christina Vidal

Votes: 37,109 | Gross: $4.77M

Ebert's 5th best film of 1996 Siskel's 8th best film of 1996

39. Looking for Richard (1996)

PG-13 | 111 min | Documentary, Drama

Al Pacino's deeply-felt rumination on Shakespeare's significance and relevance to the modern world through interviews and an in-depth analysis of "Richard III."

Director: Al Pacino | Stars: Al Pacino , Alec Baldwin , Kevin Spacey , Frederic Kimball

Votes: 8,566 | Gross: $1.36M

Siskel's 6th best film of 1996

40. Bound (1996)

R | 109 min | Crime, Thriller

Tough ex-con Corky and her lover Violet concoct a scheme to steal millions of stashed mob money and pin the blame on Violet's crooked boyfriend Caesar.

Directors: Lana Wachowski , Lilly Wachowski | Stars: Jennifer Tilly , Gina Gershon , Joe Pantoliano , John P. Ryan

Votes: 60,626 | Gross: $3.80M

Ebert's 6th best film of 1996 Siskel's 10th best film of 1996

41. Lost Paradise (1997)

119 min | Drama, Romance

Kuki is a veteran newspaper reporter who has been shuffled off to a book-development branch and finds escape in an illicit relationship with Rinko. Together they find the passion no longer present in their marriages.

Director: Yoshimitsu Morita | Stars: Koji Yakusho , Hitomi Kuroki , Akira Terao , Toshio Shiba

Siskel's 7th best film of 1996

42. Hamlet (1996)

PG-13 | 242 min | Drama

Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, returns home to find his father murdered and his mother remarrying the murderer, his uncle. Meanwhile, war is brewing.

Director: Kenneth Branagh | Stars: Kenneth Branagh , Julie Christie , Derek Jacobi , Kate Winslet

Votes: 40,013 | Gross: $4.41M

Ebert's 7th best film of 1996

43. Everyone Says I Love You (1996)

R | 101 min | Comedy, Musical, Romance

A New York girl sets her father up with a beautiful woman in a troubled marriage while her stepsister gets engaged.

Director: Woody Allen | Stars: Woody Allen , Goldie Hawn , Julia Roberts , Edward Norton

Votes: 39,359 | Gross: $9.71M

Ebert's 8th best film of 1996

44. Kingpin (1996)

PG-13 | 114 min | Comedy, Sport

A star bowler whose career was prematurely "cut off" hopes to ride a new prodigy to success and riches.

Directors: Bobby Farrelly , Peter Farrelly | Stars: Woody Harrelson , Randy Quaid , Bill Murray , Vanessa Angel

Votes: 90,911 | Gross: $24.94M

Siskel's 9th best film of 1996

45. Heidi Fleiss: Hollywood Madam (1995 TV Movie)

Not Rated | 106 min | Documentary, Biography

A documentary crew from the BBC arrives in L.A. intent on interviewing Heidi Fleiss, a year after her arrest for running a brothel but before her trial. Several months elapse before the ... See full summary  »

Director: Nick Broomfield | Stars: Nick Broomfield , Nina Xining Zuo , Madam Alex , Corinne Bohrer

Ebert's 9th best film of 1996

46. Big Night (1996)

R | 109 min | Drama, Romance

New Jersey, 1950s. Two brothers run an Italian restaurant. Business is not going well as a rival Italian restaurant is out-competing them. In a final effort to save the restaurant, the brothers plan to put on an evening of incredible food.

Directors: Campbell Scott , Stanley Tucci | Stars: Tony Shalhoub , Stanley Tucci , Marc Anthony , Larry Block

Votes: 22,785 | Gross: $11.88M

Ebert's 10th best film of 1996

47. Crumb (1994)

R | 119 min | Documentary, Biography, Comedy

An intimate portrait of controversial cartoonist Robert Crumb and his traumatized family.

Director: Terry Zwigoff | Stars: Robert Crumb , Aline Kominsky-Crumb , Charles Crumb , Maxon Crumb

Votes: 21,564 | Gross: $3.17M

Siskel's choice for the best film of 1995 Ebert's 2nd best film of 1995

48. Leaving Las Vegas (1995)

R | 111 min | Drama, Romance

Ben Sanderson, a Hollywood screenwriter who lost everything because of his alcoholism, arrives in Las Vegas to drink himself to death. There, he meets and forms an uneasy friendship and non-interference pact with prostitute Sera.

Director: Mike Figgis | Stars: Nicolas Cage , Elisabeth Shue , Julian Sands , Richard Lewis

Votes: 134,422 | Gross: $32.03M

Ebert's choice for the best film of 1995 Siskel's 6th best film of 1995

49. Toy Story (1995)

G | 81 min | Animation, Adventure, Comedy

A cowboy doll is profoundly threatened and jealous when a new spaceman action figure supplants him as top toy in a boy's bedroom.

Director: John Lasseter | Stars: Tom Hanks , Tim Allen , Don Rickles , Jim Varney

Votes: 1,066,816 | Gross: $191.80M

Siskel's 2nd best film of 1995

50. Nixon (1995)

R | 192 min | Biography, Drama, History

A biographical story of former U.S. President Richard Nixon , from his days as a young boy, to his eventual Presidency, which ended in shame.

Director: Oliver Stone | Stars: Anthony Hopkins , Joan Allen , Powers Boothe , Ed Harris

Votes: 32,683 | Gross: $13.56M

Siskel's 3rd best film of 1995 Ebert's 4th best film of 1995

51. Dead Man Walking (1995)

R | 122 min | Crime, Drama

A nun, while comforting a convicted killer on death row, empathizes with both the killer and his victim's families.

Director: Tim Robbins | Stars: Susan Sarandon , Sean Penn , Robert Prosky , Raymond J. Barry

Votes: 101,660 | Gross: $39.39M

Ebert's 3rd best film of 1995 Siskel's 5th best film of 1995

52. Babe (1995)

G | 91 min | Comedy, Drama, Family

Gentle farmer Arthur Hoggett wins a piglet Babe at a county fair. Narrowly escaping his fate as Christmas dinner, Babe bonds with motherly border collie Fly and discovers that he too can herd sheep. But will the other animals accept him?

Director: Chris Noonan | Stars: James Cromwell , Magda Szubanski , Christine Cavanaugh , Miriam Margolyes

Votes: 133,954 | Gross: $66.60M

Siskel's 4th best film of 1995

53. Casino (1995)

R | 178 min | Crime, Drama

In Las Vegas, two best friends - a casino executive and a mafia enforcer - compete for a gambling empire and a fast-living, fast-loving socialite.

Director: Martin Scorsese | Stars: Robert De Niro , Sharon Stone , Joe Pesci , James Woods

Votes: 562,916 | Gross: $42.44M

Ebert's 5th best film of 1995

54. Apollo 13 (I) (1995)

PG | 140 min | Adventure, Drama, History

NASA must devise a strategy to return Apollo 13 to Earth safely after the spacecraft undergoes massive internal damage putting the lives of the three astronauts on board in jeopardy.

Director: Ron Howard | Stars: Tom Hanks , Bill Paxton , Kevin Bacon , Gary Sinise

Votes: 315,066 | Gross: $173.84M

Ebert's 6th best film of 1995 Siskel's 9th best film of 1995

55. The American President (1995)

PG-13 | 114 min | Comedy, Drama, Romance

A widowed U.S. President running for reelection and an environmental lobbyist fall in love. It's all above-board, but "politics is perception," and sparks fly anyway.

Director: Rob Reiner | Stars: Michael Douglas , Annette Bening , Martin Sheen , Michael J. Fox

Votes: 60,579 | Gross: $65.00M

Siskel's 7th best film of 1995

56. Exotica (1994)

R | 103 min | Drama

A man plagued by neuroses frequents the club Exotica in an attempt to find solace, but even there his past is never far away.

Director: Atom Egoyan | Stars: Bruce Greenwood , Elias Koteas , Don McKellar , David Hemblen

Votes: 21,065 | Gross: $4.18M

Ebert's 7th best film of 1995 Siskel's 8th best film of 1995

57. My Family/Mi familia (1995)

R | 128 min | Drama

A man makes his way from Mexico to Los Angeles in the 1920s and gets married and raises a big family there. The movie follows the children until they get married and start their families in the 1960s.

Director: Gregory Nava | Stars: Jimmy Smits , Esai Morales , Edward James Olmos , Rafael Cortes

Votes: 4,488 | Gross: $11.08M

Ebert's 8th best film of 1995

58. Carrington (1995)

R | 121 min | Biography, Drama, Romance

The platonic relationship between artist Dora Carrington (Dame Emma Thompson) and writer Lytton Strachey (Jonathan Pryce) in the early twentieth century.

Director: Christopher Hampton | Stars: Emma Thompson , Jonathan Pryce , Steven Waddington , Samuel West

Votes: 5,768 | Gross: $3.24M

Ebert's 9th best film of 1995

59. Les Misérables (1995)

R | 175 min | Drama, History

A variation on Victor Hugo's classic novel by means of the story of a man whose life is affected by and somewhat duplicated by the Hugo story of the beleaguered Jean Valjean.

Director: Claude Lelouch | Stars: Jean-Paul Belmondo , Michel Boujenah , Alessandra Martines , Salomé Lelouch

Votes: 3,999 | Gross: $1.04M

Siskel's 10th best film of 1995

60. A Walk in the Clouds (1995)

PG-13 | 102 min | Drama, Romance

Paul Sutton, a young married soldier, befriends a pregnant lady who is petrified her father will disown her, and agrees to pose as her boyfriend. As time passes, they start growing fond of each other.

Director: Alfonso Arau | Stars: Keanu Reeves , Aitana Sánchez-Gijón , Anthony Quinn , Giancarlo Giannini

Votes: 36,567 | Gross: $50.01M

Ebert's 10th best film of 1995

61. Hoop Dreams (1994)

PG-13 | 170 min | Documentary, Drama, Sport

A film following the lives of two inner-city Chicago boys who struggle to become college basketball players on the road to going professional.

Director: Steve James | Stars: William Gates , Arthur Agee , Emma Gates , Curtis Gates

Votes: 27,985 | Gross: $7.83M

Siskel and Ebert's choice for the best film of 1994.

62. Pulp Fiction (1994)

R | 154 min | Crime, Drama

The lives of two mob hitmen, a boxer, a gangster and his wife, and a pair of diner bandits intertwine in four tales of violence and redemption.

Director: Quentin Tarantino | Stars: John Travolta , Uma Thurman , Samuel L. Jackson , Bruce Willis

Votes: 2,214,849 | Gross: $107.93M

Siskel's 2nd best film of 1994 Ebert's 3rd best film of 1994

63. Three Colors: Blue (1993)

R | 94 min | Drama, Music, Mystery

A woman struggles to find a way to live her life after the death of her husband and child.

Director: Krzysztof Kieslowski | Stars: Juliette Binoche , Zbigniew Zamachowski , Julie Delpy , Benoît Régent

Votes: 110,340 | Gross: $1.32M

Ebert's 2nd best film of 1994* *shared with "Three Colors: White" and "Three Colors: Red"

64. Three Colors: White (1994)

R | 92 min | Comedy, Drama, Romance

After his wife divorces him, a Polish immigrant plots to get even with her.

Director: Krzysztof Kieslowski | Stars: Zbigniew Zamachowski , Julie Delpy , Janusz Gajos , Jerzy Stuhr

Votes: 79,482 | Gross: $1.46M

Ebert's 2nd best film of 1994* *shared with "Three Colors: Blue" and "Three Colors: Red"

65. Three Colors: Red (1994)

R | 99 min | Drama, Mystery, Romance

A model discovers a retired judge is keen on invading people's privacy.

Director: Krzysztof Kieslowski | Stars: Irène Jacob , Jean-Louis Trintignant , Frédérique Feder , Jean-Pierre Lorit

Votes: 109,866 | Gross: $4.04M

Ebert's 2nd best film of 1994* *shared with "Three Colors: Blue" and "Three Colors: White"

66. Ed Wood (1994)

R | 127 min | Biography, Comedy, Drama

Ambitious but troubled movie director Edward D. Wood Jr. tries his best to fulfill his dreams despite his lack of talent.

Director: Tim Burton | Stars: Johnny Depp , Martin Landau , Sarah Jessica Parker , Patricia Arquette

Votes: 183,827 | Gross: $5.89M

Siskel's 3rd best film of 1994

67. Thirty Two Short Films About Glenn Gould (1993)

Not Rated | 98 min | Biography, Drama, Music

A collection of vignettes highlighting different aspects of the life, work, and character of the acclaimed Canadian classical pianist.

Director: François Girard | Stars: Colm Feore , Derek Keurvorst , Katya Ladan , Devon Anderson

Votes: 3,914 | Gross: $1.57M

Siskel's 4th best film of 1994

68. Forrest Gump (1994)

PG-13 | 142 min | Drama, Romance

The history of the United States from the 1950s to the '70s unfolds from the perspective of an Alabama man with an IQ of 75, who yearns to be reunited with his childhood sweetheart.

Director: Robert Zemeckis | Stars: Tom Hanks , Robin Wright , Gary Sinise , Sally Field

Votes: 2,251,819 | Gross: $330.25M

Ebert's 4th best film of 1994 Siskel's 6th best film of 1994

69. Quiz Show (1994)

PG-13 | 133 min | Biography, Drama, History

A young lawyer, Richard Goodwin, investigates a potentially fixed game show. Charles Van Doren, a big time show winner, is under Goodwin's investigation.

Director: Robert Redford | Stars: Ralph Fiennes , John Turturro , Rob Morrow , Paul Scofield

Votes: 73,258 | Gross: $24.82M

Siskel's 5th best film of 1994 Ebert's 10th best film of 1994

70. The Last Seduction (1994)

R | 110 min | Crime, Drama, Romance

A devious sexpot steals her husband's drug money and hides out in a small town where she meets the perfect dupe for her next scheme.

Director: John Dahl | Stars: Linda Fiorentino , Peter Berg , Bill Pullman , Michael Raysses

Votes: 25,750 | Gross: $6.14M

Ebert's 5th best film of 1994

71. Fresh (1994)

R | 114 min | Crime, Drama, Thriller

Death and violence anger a twelve-year-old drug courier, who sets his employers against each other.

Director: Boaz Yakin | Stars: Sean Nelson , Giancarlo Esposito , Samuel L. Jackson , N'Bushe Wright

Votes: 14,559 | Gross: $8.09M

Ebert's 6th best film of 1994

72. Vanya on 42nd Street (1994)

PG | 119 min | Comedy, Drama, Romance

New York actors rehearse Chekhov's "Uncle Vanya" in a dilapidated theatre.

Director: Louis Malle | Stars: Wallace Shawn , Phoebe Brand , George Gaynes , Jerry Mayer

Votes: 5,152 | Gross: $1.75M

Siskel's 7th best film of 1994

73. The Blue Kite (1993)

140 min | Drama, History

The lives of a Beijing family throughout the 1950s and 1960s, as they experience the impact of the Hundred Flowers Campaign, the Great Leap Forward, and the Cultural Revolution.

Director: Zhuangzhuang Tian | Stars: Tian Yi , Wenyao Zhang , Xiaoman Chen , Liping Lü

Votes: 3,252 | Gross: $0.36M

Ebert's 7th best film of 1994

74. The Shawshank Redemption (1994)

R | 142 min | Drama

Over the course of several years, two convicts form a friendship, seeking consolation and, eventually, redemption through basic compassion.

Director: Frank Darabont | Stars: Tim Robbins , Morgan Freeman , Bob Gunton , William Sadler

Votes: 2,882,750 | Gross: $28.34M

Siskel's 8th best film of 1994

75. Natural Born Killers (1994)

R | 119 min | Action, Crime, Romance

Two victims of traumatized childhoods become lovers and psychopathic serial murderers irresponsibly glorified by the mass media.

Director: Oliver Stone | Stars: Woody Harrelson , Juliette Lewis , Tom Sizemore , Rodney Dangerfield

Votes: 251,469 | Gross: $50.28M

Ebert's 8th best film of 1994

76. Red Rock West (1993)

R | 98 min | Crime, Drama, Thriller

Upon arriving to a small town, a drifter is mistaken for a hitman, but when the real hitman arrives, complications ensue.

Director: John Dahl | Stars: Nicolas Cage , Dennis Hopper , Lara Flynn Boyle , Craig Reay

Votes: 25,127 | Gross: $2.50M

Siskel's 9th best film of 1994

77. The New Age (1994)

R | 112 min | Comedy, Drama

Episodic story about a yuppie couple who're going broke, and can't decide if they want to stay together - but openly sleep around and experiment with different lifestyles, or not.

Director: Michael Tolkin | Stars: Peter Weller , Judy Davis , Patrick Bauchau , Rachel Rosenthal

Votes: 1,260 | Gross: $0.25M

Ebert's 9th best film of 1994

78. Little Women (1994)

PG | 115 min | Drama, Family, Romance

The March sisters live and grow in post-Civil War America.

Director: Gillian Armstrong | Stars: Susan Sarandon , Winona Ryder , Kirsten Dunst , Claire Danes

Votes: 63,494 | Gross: $50.08M

Siskel's 10th best film of 1994

79. Schindler's List (1993)

R | 195 min | Biography, Drama, History

In German-occupied Poland during World War II, industrialist Oskar Schindler gradually becomes concerned for his Jewish workforce after witnessing their persecution by the Nazis.

Director: Steven Spielberg | Stars: Liam Neeson , Ralph Fiennes , Ben Kingsley , Caroline Goodall

Votes: 1,447,855 | Gross: $96.90M

Siskel and Ebert's choice for the best film of 1993

80. Short Cuts (1993)

R | 188 min | Comedy, Drama

The day-to-day lives of several suburban Los Angeles residents.

Director: Robert Altman | Stars: Andie MacDowell , Julianne Moore , Tim Robbins , Bruce Davison

Votes: 47,343 | Gross: $6.11M

Siskel's 2nd best film of 1993

81. The Age of Innocence (1993)

PG | 139 min | Drama, Romance

A tale of nineteenth-century New York high society in which a young lawyer falls in love with a woman separated from her husband, while he is engaged to the woman's cousin.

Director: Martin Scorsese | Stars: Daniel Day-Lewis , Michelle Pfeiffer , Winona Ryder , Linda Faye Farkas

Votes: 67,660 | Gross: $32.20M

Ebert's 2nd best film of 1993 Siskel's 7th best film of 1993

82. The Piano (1993)

R | 121 min | Drama, Music, Romance

In the mid-19th century a mute woman is sent to New Zealand along with her young daughter and prized piano for an arranged marriage to a farmer, but is soon lusted after by a farm worker.

Director: Jane Campion | Stars: Holly Hunter , Harvey Keitel , Sam Neill , Anna Paquin

Votes: 95,011 | Gross: $40.16M

Siskel and Ebert's 3rd best film of 1993

83. Farewell My Concubine (1993)

R | 171 min | Drama, Music, Romance

Two boys meet at an opera training school in Peking in 1924. Their resulting friendship will span nearly 70 years and endure some of the most troublesome times in China's history.

Director: Kaige Chen | Stars: Leslie Cheung , Fengyi Zhang , Gong Li , You Ge

Votes: 33,042 | Gross: $5.22M

Siskel's 4th best film of 1993

84. The Fugitive (1993)

PG-13 | 130 min | Action, Crime, Drama

Dr. Richard Kimble, unjustly accused of murdering his wife, must find the real killer while being the target of a nationwide manhunt led by a seasoned U.S. Marshal.

Director: Andrew Davis | Stars: Harrison Ford , Tommy Lee Jones , Sela Ward , Julianne Moore

Votes: 318,106 | Gross: $183.88M

Ebert's 4th best film of 1993 Siskel's 6th best film of 1993

85. Menace II Society (1993)

R | 97 min | Crime, Drama, Thriller

A young street hustler attempts to escape the rigors and temptations of the ghetto in a quest for a better life.

Directors: Albert Hughes , Allen Hughes | Stars: Tyrin Turner , Larenz Tate , June Kyoto Lu , Toshi Toda

Votes: 64,362 | Gross: $27.90M

Siskel's 5th best film of 1993 Ebert's 8th best film of 1993

86. The Joy Luck Club (1993)

R | 139 min | Drama

The life histories of four East Asian women and their daughters reflect and guide each other.

Director: Wayne Wang | Stars: Tamlyn Tomita , Rosalind Chao , Kieu Chinh , Tsai Chin

Votes: 18,211 | Gross: $32.86M

Ebert's 5th best film of 1993 Siskel's 8th best film of 1993

87. Kalifornia (1993)

R | 117 min | Crime, Drama, Thriller

A journalist duo go on a tour of serial killer murder sites with two companions, unaware that one of them is a serial killer himself.

Director: Dominic Sena | Stars: Brad Pitt , Juliette Lewis , Kathy Larson , David Milford

Votes: 58,092 | Gross: $2.40M

Ebert's 6th best film of 1993

88. Like Water for Chocolate (1992)

R | 105 min | Drama, Romance

When tradition prevents her from marrying the man she loves, a young woman discovers she has a unique talent for cooking.

Director: Alfonso Arau | Stars: Marco Leonardi , Lumi Cavazos , Regina Torné , Mario Iván Martínez

Votes: 18,825 | Gross: $21.67M

Ebert's 7th best film of 1993

89. King of the Hill (1993)

PG-13 | 103 min | Drama, History

A young boy struggles on his own in a run-down hotel after his parents and younger brother are separated from him in 1930s Depression-era Midwest.

Director: Steven Soderbergh | Stars: Jesse Bradford , Jeroen Krabbé , Lisa Eichhorn , Karen Allen

Votes: 8,814 | Gross: $1.30M

Siskel's 9th best film of 1993

90. What's Love Got to Do with It (1993)

R | 118 min | Biography, Drama, Music

The story of singer Tina Turner 's rise to stardom and how she gained the courage to break free from her abusive husband, Ike Turner .

Director: Brian Gibson | Stars: Angela Bassett , Laurence Fishburne , RaéVen Kelly , Virginia Capers

Votes: 24,543 | Gross: $39.10M

Ebert's 9th best film of 1993

91. Map of the Human Heart (1992)

R | 109 min | Adventure, Drama, Romance

Arctic, 1965: Avik tells his story starting in 1931. A mapmaker flies Avik, then a preteen Eskimo boy with TB, to a hospital in Montreal where he meets Albertine. They meet again when Avik joins World War II in the UK.

Director: Vincent Ward | Stars: Jason Scott Lee , Anne Parillaud , Patrick Bergin , Robert Joamie

Votes: 3,428 | Gross: $2.81M

Siskel's 10th best film of 1993

92. Ruby in Paradise (1993)

R | 114 min | Drama, Romance

A young woman struggles for independence and identity in a small Florida tourist town.

Director: Victor Nunez | Stars: Ashley Judd , Todd Field , Bentley Mitchum , Allison Dean

Votes: 3,262 | Gross: $1.00M

Ebert's 10th best film of 1993

93. One False Move (1991)

R | 105 min | Crime, Drama, Thriller

A small town police chief awaits the arrival of a gang of killers.

Director: Carl Franklin | Stars: Bill Paxton , Billy Bob Thornton , Cynda Williams , Michael Beach

Votes: 13,909 | Gross: $1.54M

Siskel's choice for the best film of 1992 Ebert's 2nd best film of 1992

94. Malcolm X (1992)

PG-13 | 202 min | Biography, Drama, History

Biographical epic of the controversial and influential Black Nationalist leader, from his early life and career as a small-time gangster, to his ministry as a member of the Nation of Islam and his eventual assassination.

Director: Spike Lee | Stars: Denzel Washington , Angela Bassett , Delroy Lindo , Spike Lee

Votes: 101,915 | Gross: $48.17M

Ebert's choice for the best film of 1992 Siskel's 5th best film of 1992

95. The Player (1992)

R | 124 min | Comedy, Crime, Drama

A Hollywood studio executive is being sent death threats by a writer whose script he rejected, but which one?

Director: Robert Altman | Stars: Tim Robbins , Greta Scacchi , Fred Ward , Whoopi Goldberg

Votes: 65,678 | Gross: $21.71M

Siskel's 2nd best film of 1992 Ebert's 8th best film of 1992

96. Howards End (1992)

PG | 142 min | Drama, Romance

Set in the early 20th century, class distinctions and troubled relations affect the relationship between two families and the ownership of a cherished British estate known as Howards End.

Director: James Ivory | Stars: Anthony Hopkins , Emma Thompson , Vanessa Redgrave , Helena Bonham Carter

Votes: 35,779 | Gross: $25.97M

Siskel and Ebert's 3rd best film of 1992

97. The Crying Game (1992)

R | 112 min | Crime, Drama, Romance

A British soldier kidnapped by the IRA soon befriends one of his captors, who then becomes drawn into the soldier's world.

Director: Neil Jordan | Stars: Stephen Rea , Jaye Davidson , Forest Whitaker , Miranda Richardson

Votes: 59,995 | Gross: $62.55M

Siskel's 4th best film of 1992 Ebert's 5th best film of 1992

98. Flirting (1991)

R | 99 min | Drama, Romance

Two freethinking teenagers - a boy and a girl - confront with authoritarian teachers in their boarding schools. The other students treat this differently.

Director: John Duigan | Stars: Noah Taylor , Thandiwe Newton , Nicole Kidman , Bartholomew Rose

Votes: 6,395 | Gross: $2.42M

Ebert's 4th best film of 1992

99. The Hairdresser's Husband (1990)

R | 82 min | Comedy, Drama, Romance

Antoine has always been fascinated by a hairdresser's delicate touch, the beguiling perfume and the enticing figure of a woman with an opulent bosom. After all, he always knew he would marry one, completing his idealised love fantasy.

Director: Patrice Leconte | Stars: Jean Rochefort , Anna Galiena , Roland Bertin , Maurice Chevit

Votes: 10,348 | Gross: $1.16M

Siskel's 6th best film of 1992 Ebert's 7th best film of 1992

100. Damage (1992)

A Member of Parliament falls passionately in love with his son's girlfriend despite the obvious dangers.

Director: Louis Malle | Stars: Jeremy Irons , Juliette Binoche , Miranda Richardson , Rupert Graves

Votes: 20,495 | Gross: $7.53M

Ebert's 6th best film of 1992 Siskel's 7th best film of 1992

List Activity

Tell your friends, other lists by garfield2710.

Recently Viewed

13 Facts About Siskel and Ebert At the Movies

By jennifer m wood | sep 13, 2016.

While 1986 was a big year for films—with a varied slate of movies including Top Gun , Platoon , Back to School , Aliens , and Ferris Bueller’s Day Off dominating the box office—it was an even bigger year for film critics. On September 13, 1986, Siskel and Ebert and the Movies  (which was later renamed Siskel and Ebert At the Movies ) made its television debut, and turned arguing about films into a national pastime.

1. IT WASN’T THE FIRST TIME GENE SISKEL AND ROGER EBERT DISAGREED ABOUT MOVIES ON TELEVISION.

Throughout its lifespan, what eventually became known as At the Movies adopted (and discarded) a variety of titles. Though the iconic film review series began its run on September 13, 1986 as Siskel and Ebert and the Movies , it wasn’t the first time Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert had collaborated on a television program. From 1975 to 1982, the two critics had co-hosted the PBS series Sneak Previews . And yes, they often disagreed about the quality of the movies they reviewed.

2. A COIN TOSS DETERMINED WHOSE NAME WOULD BE LISTED FIRST IN THE TITLE.

According to the Archive of American Television , Siskel and Ebert determined whose name would come first in the title of their new show in the fairest, most democratic way they knew how: a coin toss.

3. THEY USED TO HAVE A DOG SIDEKICK, THEN A SKUNK.

For all their intelligent opinions about movies, Siskel and Ebert weren’t above using a fun little gimmick here and there—going all the way back to Sneak Previews . First there was Spot the Wonder Dog, who helped the duo declare the worst movie of the week (a.k.a. the “dog”). When asked about the canine cineaste, Ebert told The Washington Post , "You want the story of Spot, I'll tell you the story of Spot. Spot was fired by PBS because of his salary demands. He was getting $40 a week." There were other dogs, and then Aroma the skunk, who introduced the critics’ Stinker-of-the-Week.

4. THEY TRADEMARKED THE PHRASE “TWO THUMBS UP.”

Siskel and Ebert popularized the concept of a thumbs up/thumbs down rating system, with “two thumbs up” being the holy grail for any filmmaker lucky enough to have his or her film reviewed by the duo. To maintain the sanctity of that glowing accolade, Siskel and Ebert trademarked the phrase. "We made television history, and established the trademarked catch-phrase 'Two thumbs up,'” Ebert once explained .

5. DISNEY CLAIMED THAT EBERT FORCED THEM TO PULL THOSE THUMBS DURING ONE HEATED CONTRACT NEGOTIATION.

In 2007, Disney-ABC Domestic Television issued a statement claiming that Ebert had forced them to pull the thumbs from the show (which, by that time, was At the Movies with Ebert & Roeper ) in the midst of a contract negotiation. In response, Ebert claimed that he "had made it clear the Thumbs could remain during good-faith negotiations," despite what the press release said. He went on to explain that, "They made a first offer on Friday which I considered offensively low. I responded with a counteroffer. They did not reply to this, and on Monday ordered the Thumbs removed from the show. This is not something I expected after an association of over 22 years.” When Ebert eventually ended his association with the show, the thumbs went with him.

6. THEIR FREQUENT DISAGREEMENTS WERE THE SHOW’S MAIN DRAW.

Any fan of Siskel and Ebert and the Movies can tell you that some of its best moments came when the critics were in serious disagreement about a movie. And while the critics themselves knew that their frequent differences of opinion were one of the show’s main draws, their relationship was based on fierce mutual respect.

“Gene Siskel and I were like tuning forks,” Ebert wrote on the 10th anniversary of his longtime partner’s passing. “Strike one, and the other would pick up the same frequency. When we were in a group together, we were always intensely aware of one another. Sometimes this took the form of camaraderie, sometimes shared opinions, sometimes hostility. But we were aware. If something happened that we both thought was funny but weren't supposed to, God help us if one caught the other's eye. We almost always thought the same things were funny. That may be the best sign of intellectual communion.”

7. THEY FOUGHT HARDER FOR EACH OTHER THAN THEY DID AGAINST EACH OTHER.

Though Ebert acknowledged that he and Siskel often disagreed on movies, when it came to real life, they always had each other’s backs. “In my darkest and moodiest hours, when all my competitiveness and resentment and indignation were at a roiling boil, I never considered [going our separate ways],” Ebert wrote . “I know Gene never did either. We were linked in a bond beyond all disputing. 'You may be an a**hole,' Gene would say, 'but you're my a**hole.' If we were fighting—get out of the room. But if we were teamed up against a common target, we were fatal. When we were on his show, Howard Stern never knew what hit him. He picked on one of us, and we were both at his throat."

8. IN ADDITION TO REVIEWING MOVIES, THEY TALKED ABOUT THE STATE OF MOVIEMAKING.

Though reviews were their main business, Siskel and Ebert worked hard to develop an appreciation for the art of cinema itself in their viewers. In an editorial for Film Comment in 1990, Ebert reminded readers of the many themed issues he and Siskel had produced where they delved into issues facing moviemakers of the day, including the colorization of films, the virtues of letterboxing, the art of black-and-white cinematography, and why the MPAA was the same as censorship.

" Siskel & Ebert was the first, and often the only, television show of any kind to deal with many of these subjects,” Ebert wrote. “It would be fair to say that most mainstream Americans who have formed an opinion on colorization and letterboxing were inspired to do so because of our program. (Video retailers say the Siskel & Ebert program on letterboxing caused a noticeable swing in the opinions of their customers on the subject.)"

9. THEY FILMED AN EPISODE IN BLACK AND WHITE.

To illustrate that aforementioned point about black and white cinematography, Siskel and Ebert filmed an entire episode in black and white.

10. THEY TURNED AUDIENCES ON TO A NUMBER OF INDEPENDENT FILMS AND DOCUMENTARIES.

While much of the show was dedicated to major Hollywood movies, Siskel and Ebert made a point to review smaller films, including foreign films, arthouse movies, and documentaries. Many people credit the critics with pointing audiences toward the documentary Hoop Dreams , and they were very early champions of Spike Lee’s Do the Right Thing . (Ebert was also a huge fan of Michael Moore’s Roger & Me .)

"They'll talk about art-house films I wouldn't have fathomed seeing, like Heavenly Creatures , and I will give them the benefit of the doubt and go see or rent them," one twenty-something film fan told the Los Angeles Times . "But they could say what they want about Interview With the Vampire or Desperado , and a pack of wolves couldn't keep me away from either. There are some actors I will see anything that they do." (We're thinking she was an Antonio Banderas fan.)

11. A BAD REVIEW OF THE FISHER KING LED TO A VILLAIN NAMED SISKEL IN THE REF .

Ahead of the 1992 Academy Awards, Siskel and Ebert ran a pre-Oscars special in which they discussed that year’s nominees and Siskel declared Terry Gilliam’s The Fisher King , written by Richard LaGravenese, among the least deserving nominees. "I thought it was overwrought," Siskel told the Los Angeles Times .

Two years later, while at a press screening of Ted Demme’s The Ref , also penned by LaGravenese, Siskel noticed something odd: The bad guy’s name was Siskel. The critic had no idea why the screenwriter would have any ill will toward him, until LaGravenese confirmed through a publicist his reasons for using Siskel’s name.

"I think it's a strange form of revenge,” Siskel said. “I don't know that it's the most effective form of protest. He may have sabotaged those scenes in which it's used, dramatically, by causing you to suspend disbelief by bringing the 'reality' of my name into the mix. I think people may be waiting for a Roger Ebert joke after that." (Always a critic.)

12. SISKEL LIKED JOHN WOO’S BROKEN ARROW , UNTIL EBERT DIDN’T.

One of the duo’s most memorable reviews was, ironically, of a pretty unmemorable movie: John Woo’s Broken Arrow . It marked the only time on the series where Siskel changed his opinion (and the direction of his thumb) after hearing Ebert’s take on a film. He changed his thumbs up to a thumbs down on the air to make it a unanimous stinker.

But it wasn’t the only time that one of the critics swayed the other to a new way of thinking about a movie. “I was far more enthusiastic about Babe than Roger was, and he’s come around,” Siskel told Entertainment Weekly in 1996, before explaining that he “was sort of on the fence about Broken Arrow , and when he made his comments, right then and there I turned my thumb down.” Ebert had his mind changed, too. “I changed my mind on Unforgiven ,” he said in the same interview. “I gave it only two-and-a-half stars [in the Chicago Sun-Times ]. I wasn’t thinking very well when I reviewed that.”

13. THE BALCONY SEATS WERE EVENTUALLY DESTROYED.

Like many movie props before them, the balcony seats the film critics occupied for so many years were eventually destroyed. Ebert was not happy. He wrote about how “one of the most iconic set ideas in ... television history, which had survived for more than half of the life of the medium”—and which he believed belonged in the Smithsonian—were instead thrown “in a dumpster in the alley.”

Film critics Siskel and Ebert couldn't stand each other. That's what made their show great

W e called one of them “Fatty” and the other one “Skinny,” and surely we weren’t the only ones. When it came to our moviegoing habits, their word was the beginning and the end.

My mother, my sister and I watched “ Sneak Previews ” religiously when I was a child, transfixed by the sensation of seeing two people speak intelligently about movies on television. Our dependence led to some awkward moments, like when the three of us went to a matinee showing of “Blow Out,” the 1982 Brian De Palma thriller that begins with the dubbing of a porno movie. I was only 11, but both Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel had given the film enthusiastic “Yes" votes (they hadn’t yet adopted the whole thumbs thing). And so, “Blow Out,” with its ample nudity, violence and scariness, it was.

Such incidents might lead to sizable therapy bills. They might also help create a future critic.

Matt Singer, author of the new joint biography “ Opposable Thumbs ,” had his own formative experiences with Siskel and Ebert, who, as the book’s subtitle puts it, “changed movies forever.” As a middle school kid in suburban New Jersey, he would tell his parents he was going to sleep on a Sunday night, turn out the lights, and patiently wait until midnight, when the show, now simply called “Siskel & Ebert, ” would air in his market. By then the hosts had moved from PBS to the more lucrative pastures of syndication. Singer, another future critic, was hooked.

“Loving the show was just a fact of life for me,” he says over Zoom from his Brooklyn home. “I felt like it was this thing that I was obsessed with that nobody else cared about. It seemed very mine."

Of course, Siskel, who died of brain cancer in 1999, and Ebert, who died in 2013 after his own harrowing cancer battle, which ultimately left him unable to speak, were hardly an obscure passion. Millions tuned in every week to see where their hugely powerful thumbs would point, and — just as important — to see them argue with each other in often shockingly personal tones. Frequent guests on late-night talk shows, where they always appeared as a package deal, they became celebrities to rival the stars about whom they opined.

But to a young person starting to develop a passion for movies, they were indeed a revelation: populist intellectuals, engaging and accessible, highly visible proof that one could actually get paid to write about movies. This in itself qualified as something strange and wonderful.

“Opposable Thumbs,” a lively accounting of the men and the various versions of their show, makes the author’s admiration for his subjects clear. But the book isn’t just a fan’s note. Incorporating thorough reporting and research, including hundreds of hours watching clips on YouTube, Singer gets at what made their partnership unique and far ahead of its time.

Untelegenic movie critics for rival newspapers — Ebert with the Chicago Sun-Times , Siskel with the Chicago Tribune — they were thrown together in 1975 for what was then a radical new format on Chicago’s PBS affiliate, WTTW. The show’s awkward initial title: “Opening Soon … at a Theater Near You.” As Singer writes, “They didn’t know how to work on television, and they didn’t know how to work with each other.” They weren’t sure how to write for their new medium or how to use a teleprompter. The production lights glared off of Ebert’s humongous eyeglasses. It’s safe to say there was a learning curve.

Something else was abundantly clear from the start: These guys didn‘t like each other. This was decades before sports networks like ESPN began packaging screaming, combative hosts to manufacture hot takes for the sake of hot takes. Siskel and Ebert were highly competitive — especially Siskel, who couldn’t stand the fact that Ebert had become the first movie critic to win a Pulitzer Prize , also in 1975.

According to a Tribune editor quoted in the book, when Siskel would scoop his rival in print, he’d exult: “Take that, Tubby, I got him again.” Onscreen their rivalry gave the show an irresistible frisson, which I recall as a scary thrill for a childhood viewer: Are these guys about to throw down on TV? As late as 1987, when Ebert made Siskel apoplectic by giving a thumbs up to “ Benji the Hunted ” but not “ Full Metal Jacket ,” a sense of animosity lingered in the air.

“The tension was definitely real, and it absolutely made the show better,” Singer says. “There was drama and excitement. You didn't know what they were going to say, and they genuinely didn't know what each other was going to say. You’re watching their genuine reactions to each other, and sometimes they are horrified that they're being blindsided.”

But when they closed ranks, they could be a mighty force, especially when they advocated for films that might otherwise get lost in the Hollywood shuffle. Among the small movies they pushed toward big audiences were Errol Morris ’ “Gates of Heaven“ (1978), Louis Malle ’s “ My Dinner With Andre ” (1981), and Steve James’ “ Hoop Dreams ” (1994). When they championed such films, they banged the drum for them over and over, through multiple episodes and features. “They gave me a career,” Morris says in the book. “Quite simply, I loved them.”

Ebert and Siskel grew closer over the years, though that original competitive fire kept burning. And after Siskel died, as Singer points out, that chemistry proved unrepeatable. Ebert’s Sun-Times colleague Richard Roeper joined him for a spell, but they were friends, and you could tell. The beefs just weren’t as tasty. Once Ebert’s ailments forced him to step down, various iterations of the show appeared, some hosted by great critics, including A.O. Scott , Michael Phillips and Christy Lemire. But nothing could recapture that old black magic.

Singer has especially nice things to say about Phillips, of the Chicago Tribune (and formerly the L.A. Times ), and Scott, of the New York Times, who co-hosted the show from 2009 to 2010. “They were extremely nice and thoughtful and good on camera,” he says. “But they didn't have that tension, and it's hard to fake that. If you like somebody, it's tough to really go after them in that way that made the show so much fun to watch.”

Through all the replacements and imitations, it became clear that Siskel and Ebert were sui generis. Today you can go online and find umpteen pairs talking about movies, maybe even arguing about them. Most lack the seriousness of purpose, knowledge base and oil-and-water relationship of the original model.

Siskel and Ebert bustled into the world at a time when movie critics mattered more, before the culture fragmented into a million voices and “influencers,” and they ruled that world with iron thumbs. In this sense Singer’s book is a time capsule of a bygone era every bit as irreplicable as the partnership at its core.

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times .

Movie Reviews

Tv/streaming, collections, great movies, chaz's journal, contributors.

Now streaming on:

Every once in a while I have what I think of as an out-of-the-body experience at a movie. When the ESP people use a phrase like that, they're referring to the sensation of the mind actually leaving the body and spiriting itself off to China or Peoria or a galaxy far, far away. When I use the phrase, I simply mean that my imagination has forgotten it is actually present in a movie theater and thinks it's up there on the screen. In a curious sense, the events in the movie seem real, and I seem to be a part of them.

"Star Wars" works like that. My list of other out-of-the-body films is a short and odd one, ranging from the artistry of " Bonnie and Clyde " or " Cries and Whispers " to the slick commercialism of " Jaws " and the brutal strength of " Taxi Driver ." On whatever level (sometimes I'm not at all sure) they engage me so immediately and powerfully that I lose my detachment, my analytical reserve. The movie's happening, and it's happening to me.

What makes the "Star Wars" experience unique, though, is that it happens on such an innocent and often funny level. It's usually violence that draws me so deeply into a movie -- violence ranging from the psychological torment of a Bergman character to the mindless crunch of a shark's jaws. Maybe movies that scare us find the most direct route to our imaginations. But there's hardly any violence at all in "Star Wars" (and even then it's presented as essentially bloodless swashbuckling). Instead, there's entertainment so direct and simple that all of the complications of the modern movie seem to vaporize.

"Star Wars" is a fairy tale, a fantasy, a legend, finding its roots in some of our most popular fictions. The golden robot, lion-faced space pilot, and insecure little computer on wheels must have been suggested by the Tin Man, the Cowardly Lion, and the Scarecrow in " The Wizard of Oz ." The journey from one end of the galaxy to another is out of countless thousands of space operas. The hardware is from " Flash Gordon " out of " 2001: A Space Odyssey ," the chivalry is from Robin Hood, the heroes are from Westerns and the villains are a cross between Nazis and sorcerers. "Star Wars" taps the pulp fantasies buried in our memories, and because it's done so brilliantly, it reactivates old thrills, fears, and exhilarations we thought we'd abandoned when we read our last copy of Amazing Stories .

The movie works so well for several reasons, and they don't all have to do with the spectacular special effects. The effects are good, yes, but great effects have been used in such movies as " Silent Running " and " Logan's Run " without setting all-time box-office records. No, I think the key to "Star Wars" is more basic than that.

The movie relies on the strength of pure narrative, in the most basic storytelling form known to man, the Journey. All of the best tales we remember from our childhoods had to do with heroes setting out to travel down roads filled with danger, and hoping to find treasure or heroism at the journey's end. In "Star Wars," George Lucas takes this simple and powerful framework into outer space, and that is an inspired thing to do, because we no longer have maps on Earth that warn, "Here there be dragons." We can't fall off the edge of the map, as Columbus could, and we can't hope to find new continents of prehistoric monsters or lost tribes ruled by immortal goddesses. Not on Earth, anyway, but anything is possible in space, and Lucas goes right ahead and shows us very nearly everything. We get involved quickly, because the characters in "Star Wars" are so strongly and simply drawn and have so many small foibles and large, futile hopes for us to identify with. And then Lucas does an interesting thing. As he sends his heroes off to cross the universe and do battle with the Forces of Darth Vader, the evil Empire, and the awesome Death Star, he gives us lots of special effects, yes -- ships passing into hyperspace, alien planets, an infinity of stars -- but we also get a wealth of strange living creatures, and Lucas correctly guesses that they'll be more interesting for us than all the intergalactic hardware.

The most fascinating single scene, for me, was the one set in the bizarre saloon on the planet Tatooine. As that incredible collection of extraterrestrial alcoholics and bug-eyed martini drinkers lined up at the bar, and as Lucas so slyly let them exhibit characteristics that were universally human, I found myself feeling a combination of admiration and delight. "Star Wars" had placed me in the presence of really magical movie invention: Here, all mixed together, were whimsy and fantasy, simple wonderment and quietly sophisticated storytelling.

When Stanley Kubrick was making "2001" in the late 1960s, he threw everything he had into the special effects depicting outer space, but he finally decided not to show any aliens at all -- because they were impossible to visualize, he thought. But they weren't at all, as "Star Wars" demonstrates, and the movie's delight in the possibilities of alien life forms is at least as much fun as its conflicts between the space cruisers of the Empire and the Rebels.

And perhaps that helps to explain the movie's one weakness, which is that the final assault on the Death Star is allowed to go on too long. Maybe, having invested so much money and sweat in his special effects, Lucas couldn't bear to see them trimmed. But the magic of "Star Wars" is only dramatized by the special effects; the movie's heart is in its endearingly human (and non-human) people.

(See Ebert's review of "The Hidden Fortress," which inspired Lucas.)

Roger Ebert

Roger Ebert was the film critic of the Chicago Sun-Times from 1967 until his death in 2013. In 1975, he won the Pulitzer Prize for distinguished criticism.

Now playing

Disappear Completely

Brian tallerico.

The Listener

Matt zoller seitz.

Tomris Laffly

Asphalt City

Glenn kenny.

Glitter & Doom

Sheila o'malley.

In Restless Dreams: The Music of Paul Simon

Clint worthington, film credits.

Star Wars (1977)

121 minutes

Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker

Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia

Harrison Ford as Han Solo

Alec Guinness as Obi-Wan Kenobi

David Prowse as Darth Vader

James Earl Jones as Vader's Voice

Kenny Baker as R2D2

Anthony Daniels as C3PO

Directed by

• George Lucas

Produced by

Screenplay by, latest blog posts.

Until It’s Too Late: Bertrand Bonello on The Beast

O.J. Simpson Dies: The Rise & Fall of A Superstar

Which Cannes Film Will Win the Palme d’Or? Let’s Rank Their Chances

Second Sight Drops 4K Releases for Excellent Films by Brandon Cronenberg, Jeremy Saulnier, and Alexandre Aja

Siskel and Ebert Movie Reviews

Original movie reviews untainted by time!

The Jack (Nicholson) of All Films, 1985

Little Shop of Horrors, Easy Rider, Five Easy Pieces, The Last Detail, Carnal Knowledge, Chinatown, One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest, Terms of Endearment, Prizzi’s Honor

• Blink, Naked, Blue, I’ll Do Anything, The Thing Called Love, 1994
• Oscar Surprises for 1988, 1989

One thought on “ The Jack (Nicholson) of All Films, 1985 ”

Pingback: The Tribune Years – 1985 – Siskel and Ebert Movie Reviews

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.