I wish the series (and Roger) the best, but any movie review program that tries this format is almost doomed to failure. Siskel and Ebert had a unique chemistry based on mutual love and loathing, and, failing finding two critics who share that relationship, it's just two people in a "balcony" talking about what happened in a movie.
If they're looking for critics, I'd recommend Mick LaSalle of the SF Chronicle. Not because he's a good reviewer (he's actually terrible), but because he's such an opinionated asshole that anyone paired with him would instantly have their hackles raised and want to decimate him with logic and taste. --Dave Sikula On Jan 23, 8:49 pm, "Kevin M." <[email protected]> wrote: > http://www.ebertpresents.com/ > > Someone asked for my opinion of the new series, and I don't think I > could do a quickie review of it. Not because it is particularly > special or groundbreaking, but because of its legacy -- because of the > torch it carries. -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
