My pal Aaron Barnhart gives us a preview of the new PBS show, Roger Ebert Presents At The Movies. This is around the eighty-thousandth attempt to replicate the success of the original Siskel/Ebert programs and I have no idea if it'll succeed, ratings-wise. But every time I see one of these shows, I have the following thought: I wonder if the folks behind them understand that what Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert did was a series that was a lot more about them than it was about films.
I don't think America has ever been that interested in watching a couple of strangers tell us their opinions of the latest flicks. For years though when Siskel and Ebert were on, folks developed an interest to watching those two guys argue. It could have been about sports or recipes or any topic if they'd been equally enthusiastic about it. No other combo of movie critics has ever matched that chemistry, even when one of them was Ebert.
Gene and Roger came to the arena as established competitors and there were times on the show when they seemed genuinely pissed at each other and eager to prove the other wrong. That made it all the more meaningful when they agreed and especially when they hit upon some common ground of passion and it seemed like, just for the moment, they really liked each other. It reminded us of all those nice moments in our own lives when we find ourselves bonding with someone who, not that long before, we regarded as an adversary. It was, in a way, a genuine Reality Show. That particular friendship, stormy as it was, mattered to us.
The hosts of the new program may be fine, articulate folks who truly know movies. I'm not saying they're unqualified. But if I were charged with casting a series like this, I don't think I'd go searching through published reviews looking for witty print reporters. I think I'd look for two guys who've been sitting around some bar for years, yelling at each other about whether Daniel Craig is a better James Bond than Timothy Dalton and if either of them is fit to carry Sean Connery's toupee.