Films/DVD Asylum

The new "At The Movies"....uugghh

75.84.161.44

DWPC

Sunday evening. Sat down to watch the "At The Movies" not knowing it was the new version with all traces of the Roeper & Ebert format & class obliterated. Horrible attempt to be hip. The team of "critics" are way too young authoritatively to critique anything except MTV. What a shameful thing to do a 20+ year winning format and great talent. I'm outta there.

As the guy who jumped off the 20-story building shouted as he passed the 10th Floor "So far..so good!"

Edits: 09/07/08 09/07/08 09/07/08

Follow Ups:

What about Tory Shulman? I like her.. - PhilJ 18:20:32 09/09/08 (0)
"The team of "critics" are way too young authoritatively to critique anything except MTV."

In some ways the team of critics helps to pin down the qualities of the movies, though nothing special for sure...

thanks

Phil
Any legit alternatives? - Kenreau 09:47:03 09/09/08 (6)
I'm looking for something respectable and gave up on TV reviewers. Is there another movie review program on TV with merit? I usually just check out rottentomatoes.com for the best consensus of reviews.

Ciao,
Kenreau
- Try metacritic.com... - Harmonia 12:40:32 09/09/08 (4)
  ...which weights the reviews.
  
  Rotten Tomatoes is not as reliaboe IMO, although it has legit reviewers, it has a whole lot more wannabes with websites and little actual insight. Even some of the pros on RT are more consumer guide types who really aren't very good at anything in depth.
  
  There is virtually nothing on TV that I would ever trust for movie reviews now. It's "read" or be at extreme risk.
  
  Personally, I have a few reviewers/film writers whom I follow fairly closely and whose opinions I respect.
  - RE: Try metacritic.com... oh yeah - Kenreau 21:31:52 09/09/08 (0)
    Excellent recommendation. I forgot about metacritic. I had skimmed it before for music reviews and forgot about the movie and game reviews.
    
    Thanks
  - Harmonia - PhilJ 18:25:51 09/09/08 (2)
    what are the critics that you follow closely?
    
    fwiw I like Time Out New York magazine. In general I agree with the reviewers and they are not afraid to slam a popular film or rave about a quirky effort - just my type of folk!
    
    also: I avoid Leonard Maltin or Peter Travers, the closest thing to shills the industry has IMO
    
    thanks
    
    Phil
    - A varied group. - Harmonia 13:52:22 09/11/08 (1)
      I sometimes look to diferent critics for different types of films.
      I nearly always check out Stephanie Zacharek at salon.com (and Andrew O'Hehir at same spot for indies and foreign). Steph and I are frequently on the same wavelength, and her reviews are lengthy and in depth. Even if I ultimately disagree, I understand her POV and can adjust from there.
      Kenneth Turran at LA Times - there's another (female) critic on this daily (whose name escapes me) who's done some nice work too.
      Ty Burr - Boston Globe
      Michael Wilmington - used to be at the Chicago Trib but is elswhere now.
      David Kehr when I can find him.
      MaryAnn Johansen at FlickFilosopher.com is great for all things geek.
      I like to read Dan Jardine's thoughts on film, current or classic.
      Will also look at David Denby at New Yorker. And sometimes the folks at the NY Times. David Eddelstein occassionally.
      Peter Travers was once actually a good critic, not that you could tell nowdays. When RS actually gave him space and motivation, he had some cogent things to say about contemporary cinema. That was over ten years ago. Travers is smart enough to know better but he's now marginal interst at best.
      Ebert is an excellent writer, but he's way too forgiving of commercial pablum. But he can be quite good on individual films and classics. He is absolutely sincere in his passion for movies.
      If I'm going to see a movie no matter what, I try not to read any reviews. I hate spoilers and prefer to watch new films with a "clean" eye.
      There are more good film writers about, but I don't put much stock in the mass media outlets like EW, USA Today et al. People like Rex Reed and Leonard Maltin is completely off my radar. I NEVER watch "happy face" local or national movie moments on Today or suchlike. Too "consumer guide" for me.
      I loathe the concept of giving a film a letter grade, just hate it completely. I'd often rather see and interesting failure than a mediocre success. So I avoid sites with this kind of structure.
      
      Edits: 09/11/08
      - thanks for such a response - PhilJ 18:09:57 09/13/08 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: A varied group. posted by Harmonia on September 11, 2008 at 13:52:22
        
        and resource for reviews! Salon is a nice site. I agree exactly about Ebert, he is such a good writer that I read him anyway even if he is too easy on the marginal films out there. I will look for the others...
        
        thanks
        
        Phil
- there is Lyons and Bailles on Sat at 5pm - PhilJ 09:57:19 09/09/08 (0)
  but they are kind of lame as well. Allison Bailles (from Live at the Angelica on IFC) is good but Jeffrey Lyons seems to be from another planet. I do not see what he finds in the movies he recommends.
  
  Also try: Movie Review Query Engine (mrqe.com) a little quicker loading time than Rotton Tomatoes...
  
  thanks
  
  Phil
it's not their age so much... - tunenut 11:03:53 09/08/08 (0)
after Ebert got sick, Roeper had some young critics that were quite intelligent and interesting. I am willing to give these young critics some time to settle in- but they need to go into more depth. This show has always been a Reader's Digest version of a full review- but now they are taking it to an extreme. Each of the 5 critics on their panel gets about 2 sentences. It's a mess.

When someone with intelligence and knowledge gets a couple minutes, they can be both entertaining and informative- as Ebert was, as were guest hosts A.O. Scott and Michael Phillips. And Roeper himself was OK.

Of the 2 hosts, Ben Lyons is the son of Jeffry Lyons, who at one point was on one of these 2-critic movie review shows. This takes nepotism too far- he's so lightweight he almost floats away. The other one, from Turner Classic Movies, seems to have something to say if they give him enough time to say it.
RE: The new "At The Movies"....uugghh - Hornlover 09:00:41 09/08/08 (0)
I totally agree. I started watching about 20 years ago wih Siskel and Ebert. I learned to mesh thier tastes with mine, and could be fairly confident on the reviews they gave. It was a bit hard to re-calibrate when Roeper came on board, but I eventually got used to that pairing. The new bunch, however...
Boy, it really... - mkuller 19:39:59 09/07/08 (0)
...sucked the big one, didn't it.
I've been watching the show since it started with Siskel and Ebert as "At the Movies" on PBS.
I don't know where they found those two humourless, pretentious clowns, but they will never be Siskel and Ebert...not even Roeper.
The critic's roundtable is a terrible idea - it's way over the top. Two second reviews by 5 critics...wow! Keep the MTV generation's attention, I guess.
The fact they picked the weekend with the lowest box office receipts in 5 years for their first show is very telling.
I'll give it a few months before it flames out.
Virtually unwatchable.

Edits: 09/07/08

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Atma-Sphere Music Systems, Inc.