Ebert's candid take on his old TV show...

[J.M. Vargas]

... from his blog: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/11/post.html. He pretty much takes a dump on Lyons and Mankiewicz (more on the former than the latter) and this quote is vintage Ebert:

The show's reviews were not kind. Two websites opened to catalogue Lyon's lapses. I e-mailed Mankiewicz in sympathy, comparing him to the victim of a drive-by shooting.

[Mach6]

I agree with Ebert 100%. I don't know what the hell that corporate nitwit was thinking by replacing Roeper & whomever with "The Bens" was a good idea. Demographics! To me, Roeper & Michael Phillips should've been the permanent hosts. They had good chemistry, probably because both of them are working for rival Chicago newspapers. (Ironically, just like Siskel & Ebert.) Their reviews were entertaining & informative & they could really trash a God-awful film like Siskel & Ebert did. "The Bens" reviews of bad movies were just that: BAD! Just compare their boring & stiff review of Transformers 2 to Siskel & Ebert's review of Highlander 2 The Quickening or Phillips & Roeper's review of The Love Guru. Lyons is an easy target, but Mankiewicz deserves some blame too. Mankiewicz did show some intelligence, but he was bland & lacks Roeper's sense of humor.

I liked what I've seen from A.O. Scott & Michael Phillips as the new hosts. While Scott is no Roeper, he doesn't insult my intelligence or bore me to death. I can look forward to watching At The Movies again.

[Bill Treadway]

Reminds me of a line in a Woody Allen film: "Demographics? You mean how the country suddenly became stupid?"

I really shouldn't be surprised at what Disney did. After all, they've screwed more people than in a porn film..

[Stubblecat]

That Sunday morning in early 1999 when I sat down to watch Siskel & Ebert, only to be greeted by Roger eulogizing Gene, was the day that the concept of credible television movie criticsm died.

[Steve T Power]

I'll always consider Ebert a reviewer - not a critic.

Siskel on the other hand...