Siskel & Ebert (1990): King of New York, Pacific Heights, Miller's Crossing & Texasville

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 8 май 2021
  • 0:00 intro
    0:52 Pacific Heights: 👎👎
    4:18 King of New York: 👎👎
    6:42 Miller's Crossing: 👍👍
    11:43 Texasville: 👍👍
    16:11 Henry & June movie & Rating system
    19:28 Home Video
    The Last Picture Show (1971)
    19:54 The reviews

Комментарии • 18

  • @TheMarc388
    @TheMarc388 3 года назад +3

    Plenty of great Michael Keaton reviews uploaded tonight. Keep em comin!

  • @dannyneville1310
    @dannyneville1310 Год назад +2

    Wrong on King of New York. RIP boys, I hope you're up there enjoying life with greats of cinema.

  • @sha11235
    @sha11235 6 месяцев назад +1

    Notice how Roger's voice changes when the X rating is on the screen vs. the NC-17 rating?

    • @Tubewings
      @Tubewings 2 месяца назад +1

      I'm guessing he didn't mention "X" in the original taping and he had to do it in post.

  • @Jbaxter85
    @Jbaxter85  3 года назад +2

    Texasville 👍🌟🌟🌟
    Miller's Crossing 👍🌟🌟🌟

  • @richardcahill1234
    @richardcahill1234 Год назад

    9:50 lol. Isn't Ebert describing The Godfather there, which he considered a masterpiece?

  • @jamesmitchell8922
    @jamesmitchell8922 20 дней назад

    Unfortunately, the NC-17 rating doesn't help resolve the problem of mature adult viewing

  • @ricardocantoral7672
    @ricardocantoral7672 3 года назад +3

    I thought Miller's Crossing was okay. I don't think it was a convincing period film and I think it was ultimately burdened by it's circuitous plot.

  • @cblack4413
    @cblack4413 3 года назад +6

    'Pacific Heights" very entertaining,and enjoyable.

  • @teppeiando
    @teppeiando 3 года назад +1

    Ebert is being a grouch about Miller's Crossing, I wonder if he would have had a different opinion on 2nd watch.

  • @nebulous6660
    @nebulous6660 3 года назад +2

    Miller’s Crossing was mostly style with an uninteresting story. Pacific Heights was a very entertaining movie.

  • @justinkennedy2930
    @justinkennedy2930 11 месяцев назад +1

    Siskel's so off with his "that made women look fragile and was tasteless" comment. He failed to recognize that for its time (1990), that Melanie Griffith becoming the force of action who is able to get back at Keaton was actually a pretty progressive portrayal of women-at the least, it made her look intelligent and resourceful, whereas so many movies from the past have consistently featured the damsel in distress who can't do anything. Ebert's wisecrack about "it's always the cat" is almost as contrived and stereotypical of a comment as what he personally thinks of that scene. This movie was a fun watch, not the best film ever, but a pretty cool time capsule, especially when Keaton assaults the husband to the tune of Soundgarden's "Hands All Over" lol. I think sometimes with these two critics, they would nitpick on movies just because they felt they needed to for whatever reason as these are definitely not valid complaints. Rather, the film should be noted for its realistic and interesting depiction of someone utilizing legal bureaucracy to their advantage. The court scenes that played out and trouble with the police showed public services that were obviously not in true service of the public. In a sense, I would argue that it was a low-key slightly right-of-center criticism of the fallacies of those very institutions-by the movie's warning, they can be used against us quickly and without hesitation. The fact that the couple were "unmarried yuppies" also seems to hint at something-definitely that era's differing views of that particular demographic. Anyway my rating for Siskel and Evert's rating? Two Thumbs Down👎👎

    • @daughterofolaf
      @daughterofolaf 6 месяцев назад

      Pacific Heights is a mediocre thriller to me. I like how passionate you are about defending it though and the deep thought you put into it and you make some valid points (I’m not being sarcastic, FYI). I think it’s a good idea with a lot of really stupid elements to it and in the end it’s an okay movie. I don’t think this movie makes women look fragile at all. I do agree that comment is off base. Maybe it’s just Melanie Griffith’s subpar acting and her mousy voice that he is reacting to subconsciously.

  • @ernestolombardo5811
    @ernestolombardo5811 3 года назад +5

    Well... Ebert was so very, very wrong about Miller's Crossing, which I saw and loved in the theater when it came out, and which gets better in both memory and rewatches over time.
    Ebert put words in Siskel's mouth then cut him off. Bad form, Roger.
    Ebert missed the pitch-black comedy elements of the film. And paid no attention whatsoever to the bonkers dialogue.
    Swing and a miss, Rog. Swing and a miss.

    • @ricardocantoral7672
      @ricardocantoral7672 3 года назад +3

      Any dark comedy elements were few and far in-between. Ebert was right about the film which was choking on it's own heavy, convoluted plot. I am surprised he even recommended the film. The only great thing about MC is the Barry Sonnenfeld's photography.