On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:19 PM, 'Dave Sikula' via TVorNotTV < [email protected]> wrote:
> I would argue that it the format than the people. If Siskel and Ebert were > still alive, I'd imagine the show would still be going in some format. The > problem was that, once Gene died, Roger was never able to find someone with > whom he had any chemistry. The people who did end up with the job were all > just bland and merge (in my mind) into one gooey and uninteresting mass. > When he did have the chance to pick bold critics (Wesley Morris and Elvis > Mitchell come immediately to mind), Roger passed. > If Siskel and Ebert were still alive and still had a show, it would be a hollow shell of what it once was. I don't know if Ebert kept his stature with a younger generation of moviegoers and I think he and Siskel would skew too old to be sustainable. Hollywood decided years ago to go after the teenage audience in a big way because they will go to more than one screening of a movie they like and they have no memory of when movies cost a quarter or even $5 and don't question whether a movie is worth the cost of admission. And they are not waiting for the recommendation of S&E. The movie business has also changed. By the time S&E would air a person interested in movies should have enough information to decide if the movie is worth seeing so an S&E show would be outdated at airtime. -- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
