Book Review- OPPOSABLE THUMBS: HOW SISKEL & EBERT CHANGED MOVIES FOREVER (2023)

October 23, 2023

By Matt Singer

Published by Penguin Random House, 2023

Ah yes, the memories of spending so much time glued to that portable 13 inch black and white TV perched on a folding chair in my dorm room watching and listening intently as film critics Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert discussed, debated, and dissected the latest movie releases. Of course, by then I had watched hundreds of movies and fully subscribed to the magic of cinema. However, we all knew there was something different with this weekly PBS show featuring these two men who were so opinionated, yet so knowledgeable about film. As a bonus, we were never sure if they were friends or not… this despite their weekly lessons on how we should discuss movies with our own friends.  

This background and the following years until Gene Siskel’s death in 1999 are the reason Matt Singer’s new book was a must read for me. Nostalgia can be a comforting thing, and Singer’s work perfectly captures the history and memories of what made the show so special. Singer is a passionate film critic, and that passion shines through in his admiration and respect for the two men who inspired folks like him (and me) to better understand the art form and ultimately write about our own feelings and observations driven by the movies we watch.

Structurally, the book outlines the chronological order of the Siskel and Ebert partnership, while specific examples, quotes, or other input is frequently used to reinforce the progression. The awkward beginnings that led to the 1975 pilot are detailed, as are behind-the-scenes challenges such as contract disputes, rehearsals, lunch menus, seating positions, number of words spoken, seats on talk shows, and the order of the names. Yes, these two men who argued about movies also argued about most everything associated with the show. Singer makes the point that the two men were direct competitors in the Chicago newspaper world and were constantly looking for ways to ‘win’ or one up the other.  What also becomes crystal clear as we read the book is that both men cared very much for the show and the integrity of their work.

Pitting rivals against each other in such a debate format was a new thing at the time, although as author Singer points out, it has become quite common in TV news, sports, politics, and entertainment … most of these owing a debt to Siskel and Ebert. Singer walks us through the evolution of the show and its many producers, titles, and distributors. From “Sneak Previews” to “At the Movies” to “Siskel & Ebert” (amongst others), and from PBS to the Disney Corporation, the show itself remained true to the two stars, regardless of what was happening off screen. Gene and Roger never wavered from their commitment to honesty with the viewers.

Their show ran in one form or another, and on one channel or hundreds, from 1975 to 1999. The book details how their chemistry changed (and how it didn’t) over the many years. While the memories come racing back through some of the stories, the real gems here are the behind-the-scenes tales of how these two men perfected the presentation, while earning the respect of the rival/partner seated across the aisle.

The first ten chapters make for fascinating and entertaining reading, but just as occurred in real life, the book shifts suddenly. Siskel’s passing meant the show lost its spark. Ebert remained a stellar film critic, of course, but the relentless pursuit of a new partner or format was as painful to read about as it was to experience at the time. By this time, other film critic duos had been given a shot at replicating the success, yet none created the magic of Siskel & Ebert – and that included Ebert and anyone else who joined him in the balcony. Why none of these other attempts clicked is understandable when Singer provides perspective: Siskel & Ebert were a team for as many years as Abbott & Costello. These final two chapters chronicle Ebert’s own health struggles, as well as his excellent memoir and subsequent documentary, both entitled “Life Itself”.

Should anyone doubt the unique accomplishments of the show, consider that the Siskel & Ebert audience was composed of not just cinephiles and movie lovers, but also those who had little interest in movies and tuned in solely for the entertainment value of watching two articulate and knowledgeable experts go at each other verbally. Most were either Team Gene or Team Roger. As for me, I found myself more often in agreement with Siskel on movies, while probably learning more from Ebert. These two men, along with Louis Black (co-founder of both “The Austin Chronicle” and the SXSW festival), taught me how to watch movies, how to think about what is on screen, while inspiring me to put my own observations in writing. Matt Singer’s book will be a cruise through nostalgia for many, yet the structure will make it just as easy for those who are just learning about the origin of those almighty thumbs.

Available October 24, 2023

Review by David Ferguson


LIFE ITSELF (2014, doc)

July 26, 2014

life itself Greetings again from the darkness. Director Steve James is well known for his heralded documentary Hoop Dreams, released 20 years ago. Film Critic Roger Ebert was one of that film’s earliest and loudest champions. Now, Mr. James returns the favor with a tribute to the life of Roger Ebert, based on the memoir of the same name.

James struggles a bit with the film’s structure because there is so much story to Ebert’s life, and the director’s access to the challenges faced by Ebert during his last months of life make for a story unto itself. No punches are pulled, and this is one of the most head-on presentations of illness and dying that we have ever witnessed on screen. Ebert’s cancer took his jaw and his recognizable voice, but this man would not be silenced. He passionately embraced social media and blogging to become even more relevant than ever.

It’s fun to see the love-hate relationship between Ebert and his TV co-host Gene Siskel. This was the best kind of rivalry – one that brought at the best in both. I was fortunate enough to be exposed to them via PBS in 1975, their first year broadcasting together. I’ve said it before, but these two guys taught me how to watch a movie … how to appreciate what story was being told, and how it was being told. Their brief verbal jousts showed me that opinions can vary widely on movies and that it’s not just OK, but actually fun to debate the merits.

As much fun as their show was, what I really enjoyed was reading their full reviews in the Chicago newspapers. My trips to the library were often for the sole purpose of digging out the latest reviews (this was prior to internet). Whle I more often agreed with Siskel, it was Ebert’s stunning writing skills that really hit home with me. It wasn’t until many years later that I learned he won a Pulitzer at age 26, and had grown up as a journalist. His words could translate what his senses took in.

Because of all that, this documentary is very personal to me … as I’m sure it is to the entire community of film lovers that Siskel and/or Ebert inspired. The interviews with Werner Herzog, Martin Scorsese and Errol Morris (plus others) clearly display the impact of Ebert. But as personal as it is to these men as filmmakers and to me as a movie blogger, that’s nothing like the personal level we witness between Roger and Chaz, his wife. Roger’s health issues and numerous operations and rehabilitation stints show the courage and love of these two. This was heart-warming and gut-wrenching all at the same time … the kind of movie that Roger would have given a big thumbs up.

Here is what I posted the day after Roger Ebert died:  https://moviereviewsfromthedark.com/2013/04/05/

watch the trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9ud1HUHgug

 

 


ROGER EBERT remembered

April 5, 2013

ebert2 Greetings again from the darkness. We never really know how one person can influence our life.  In the late 1970’s I stumbled upon a PBS show called “Sneak Previews”. In those days, we only had 3 network channels and PBS (Fox did not exist, and neither did cable), so the cheesy yet catchy opening to the show really caught my eye.  And then the magic started. Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert began discussing, analyzing, and even arguing about movies.  I was mesmerized. These men were making sense of all the garbled thoughts going on in my own mind in regards to movies. Their televised verbal jousting provided the outlet I had unknowingly craved.

Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert were film critics for cross-town rival newspapers, The Chicago Tribune and The Chicago Sun-Times. In 1975, they started a show for the local PBS affiliate.  It was called “Opening Soon at a Theater Near You” and was an immediate hit in Chicago. Soon enough the awful title was changed to “Sneak Previews” and other PBS stations across the country began to pick up the show. Tribune siske and ebertEntertainment recognized the potential, and in 1982 syndicated the show nationally as “At the Movies”, and after a contract dispute, they signed with Disney for “Siskel & Ebert and the Movies”.  This show ran until Gene Siskel’s death (brain tumor) in 1999.  That is the background, but certainly not the story.

Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert taught me (and others) how to watch movies … how to think about movies … how to discuss and debate movies. Their passion for movies was undeniable and contagious. It was a common link we shared … maybe even a curse. Some people can watch a movie and be entertained – satisfied that it’s an escape from everyday life.  Those of us afflicted with the movie curse tend to be absorbed by the cinematic experience. We need to analyze why a specific camera angle was used, why the volume of the musical score was bumped for a scene, what was the motivating factor for the disloyalty shown by lead character’s best friend, and how does this fit in with the history of films that have come before.  We the afflicted make no apologies for our obsessions.  It’s just who we are. Siske and Ebert not only shared this condition, they guided us through the process of dealing with it.  They showed us that what mattered was emotion and passion.  There was no right and wrong in how a movie impacted us.

ebert3 Roger Ebert’s lasting impact on me may be best understood by the fact that I more often sided with Gene Siskel in my movie preferences and opinions. Ebert did not “like” some of my favorites such as Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, The Usual Suspects, Full Metal Jacket.  Yet, Ebert’s arguments were so well articulated that he mentored me not just in movie opinions, but in general debate.  The other guy can disagree with you and not necessarily be wrong!  It was a life lesson, not just a lesson in movie criticism. This also explains how Ebert (a Pulitzer Prize winner in 1975) was able to take the influence of Pauline Kael, the famous film critic of The New Yorker, and make movie reviews accessible for the mainstream public.  Ms. Kael had long been worshipped by the New York pseudo-intellectuals, and certainly she was a brilliant writer, but her approach was never really about the love of movies in the way that Roger Ebert’s was.

Ebert’s life lessons did not end there. After Gene Siskel died, Ebert never missed an opportunity to speak highly of his former TV partner … always praising him for his integrity and love of film. When cancer first struck Ebert in 2002, he took it head on and was outfront in his battle. In 2006, his battle took a turn for the worse, and a portion of his jaw was removed. It was a dramatic physical change to someone we had shared time with for 30 years. Still, he didn’t hide away. He continued to make public appearances, determined not to be a recluse. Ebert fully embraced the power of the internet and became an influencer through Facebook, Twitter and most effectively, his blogging. The man was a prolific writer with more than 7200 published reviews, 38 published books and an unspecified number of blogs and tweets. Again, our opinions often clashed, but we never doubted where he stood on an issue.

Martin Scorcese is producing a documentary called Life Itself. It is based on Ebert’s memoirs of the same title, and Roger had remained very involved in the process. The filmmakers have already stated that the project will be finished and will premiere later this year. It will be a fitting tribute … a movie about the man who was about movies.  I hope it gets “two thumbs up”.

I would encourage you to read this interview/profile from Esquire magazine published in 2010. It’s the best I’ve read on Mr. Ebert.

http://www.esquire.com/features/roger-ebert-0310

ebert4