There were a lot of nice things said about Ebert here when he died. Who are you reading for movie reviews, besides W_Z , to replace the legend?

thanks, ed.

you know, you bring up an interesting point. there are still some good critics out there, like lisa schwartzbaum, some of the writers at salon.com...but I have to say, I really miss the fact that when I look up reviews for movies, his name won't come up anymore. Void is a good word for that. that's exactly what it feels like.

None of them.

_________________

_________________
This is my signature...

Sure there are other reviewers out there, but none on a TV show that will ever be quite like Siskel & Ebert. I did think that Richard Roeper and Michael Phillips were the best duo of the replacement hosts, but they don't do the show anymore.

If you go online you can actually see all of the reviews from Siskel & Ebert. It's kind of interesting to see how they didn't care for some of my favorite movies from 80s and 90s.

In terms of movie reviews on the radio I don't think anyone does it quite as well as Nick DiGilio.

_________________
To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

I wish that WZ was published somewhere because his stuff is as good as any out there.
He knows movies and moviemaking and he has an entertaining writing style.
I don't always agree with his opinions but I respect his critiques.

_________________
Host of the weekly "We Fish ASA" podcast
Weekly columnist for the Northwest Herald
Bi-monthly columnist for Illinois Outdoor News magazine
Former host of The Outdoors Experience on WIND and The Great Outdoors on CLTV
http://www.wefishasa.com

Totally agree. The Midnight Movie Review segment on Nick's Friday night show is great. My only complaint is the podcast used to be posted Saturday morning. Lately, it doesn't show up until midweek. It used to be my Saturday morning staple, along with my coffee and morning constitution.

I like Nick, but he seems to have difficulty articulating more than one or two simple thoughts about a movie. He doesn't really ever offer what one would call an interpretation of a film. Film critics used to do this kind of thing in the 80s and early 90s--back when I was a youngster, I remember reading some masterful reviews by Dave Kerr in the Tribune--but a lot of what is published today is simplistic dreck. The idea of seriously analyzing film seems to have disappeared in many quarters of our popular culture. So has seriousness in general, though, I guess.

_________________

thank you, steve! i wish the same thing sometimes...

TM - i agree with you on a lot of that. i think in some ways it's also hard to find films that deserve that kind of interpretation. the product is diluted. we're definitely far removed from a great film age.