Siskel & Ebert’s Biggest Misses: 10 Movies They Got Wrong

by

Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert are two of the most famous movie critics in history, admired by millions due to their written columns in newspapers and, more notably, their long-running TV program, “At the Movies with Siskel & Ebert,” which aired from 1975 to 1999. Besides this show, they both penned books on films and offered both positive and harsh critiques of various movies throughout their careers. They collaborated until Siskel’s passing in 1999.

Although some viewers considered them controversial, they remained authentic by expressing their views honestly. They frequently discovered a shred of credibility in a production, regardless of how poor the film might be. In fact, they reviewed and critiqued numerous awful movies, showcasing their candid opinions. Frequently, one would dislike a movie that the other adored. Their unique “thumbs up” rating system served as a quick guide to determine each’s preferences. They also assigned ratings ranging from 0 to 4 stars. However, there were occasions when both of them misjudged a film.

Here’s a list of 10 films where Siskel and Ebert disagreed, thinking they deserved a thumbs up instead.

Here are 10 movies that Siskel and Ebert panned, but I believe they should have praised.

10
‘Cocktail’ (1988)

In the late 1980s, Tom Cruise was at the pinnacle of his career’s peak. Having just wrapped up films like “The Color of Money” and “Top Gun”, Cruise would go on to act in both “Rain Man” and “Cocktail” in 1988. One of these movies even won Best Picture at the Academy Awards that year, while another was named Worst Picture of the Year at the Razzies. However, with the passage of time, “Cocktail” has turned out to be more delightful cheese than people initially perceived it to be.

Ebert Gave It 2 Stars; Siskel Gave It 2.5 Stars

Siskel and Ebert didn’t express love for the movie based on their ratings, but they didn’t exactly pan it either. Instead, they had quite a bit of criticism for it. The film features Tom Cruise as a bartender forming an intriguing show with Bryan Brown for bar patrons. In the storyline, Cruise becomes romantically involved with Elisabeth Shue in what can be considered a somewhat absurd love tale. Roger Ebert found the tagline “When he pours, he reigns” amusing, but did not deem it the best movie ever made. However, whether or not it’s a less than enjoyable experience at the movies is up for debate.

9
‘Road House’ (1989)

As a film aficionado, I recently found myself captivated by the charm of its lead actor in the 1980s-set film, “Road House”. In this movie, Patrick Swayze plays a bouncer tasked with maintaining order at one of America’s wildest bars. Despite an action-packed plotline involving businessmen trying to exploit the bar’s territory, the storyline can seem a bit far-fetched. Nevertheless, it offers some thrilling fight scenes that have stood the test of time, although it received mixed reviews from critics upon release.

Ebert Gave It 2.5 Stars; Siskel Gave It 2 Stars

The film received generally positive reviews from critics, but didn’t make their list of top films for the year. However, it gained a significant following due to its campy dialogue and over-the-top action scenes, earning it recognition as one of the standout action movies of its time. It became well-known and popular enough to be remade in 2024 and starred Jake Gyllenhaal.

8
‘Honey, I Shrunk the Kids’ (1989)

In 1989, the Disney movie “Honey, I Shrunk the Kids” turned out to be a massive surprise hit at the box office, raking in over $222 million on a budget of just $18 million. This film, starring Rick Moranis as a scientist and father who inadvertently shrinks his own kids and neighbors with his miniaturization devices, was Disney’s biggest live-action money maker at the time of its release. The movie tells the story of these shrunken children trying to find their way back home and get someone to notice them.

Ebert Gave It 2 Stars; Siskel Didn’t Provide a Written Review

In their TV show review, neither Siskel nor Ebert were overly fond of the movie. Although they admired certain scenes and visuals, like the one with the colossal ant, their overall impression was underwhelming. This film, Honey, I Shrunk the Kids, however, provided a massive entertainment value for viewers, who adored Rick Moranis’ endearing portrayal of the nerdy scientist and protagonist. It remains a delightful family movie that continues to be enjoyable today.

7
‘Beetlejuice’ (1988)

I can’t help but sing praises for the unparalleled quirkiness of “Beetlejuice,” a movie that truly stands out from the crowd. Starring three remarkable talents of the ’80s – Michael Keaton, Alec Baldwin, Geena Davis, and introducing Winona Ryder in an iconic role, it was a cinematic delight. However, let me warn you, this isn’t just any film for everyone to enjoy. It revolves around a unique tale of a couple who, after their untimely demise, find themselves as ghosts struggling to evict a new family from their home with the help of the eccentric Beetlejuice (Keaton), all under the masterful direction of Tim Burton. Packed with outlandish set pieces and stellar performances, it’s an unforgettable journey into the whimsical world of the peculiar and fantastical.

Both Siskel and Ebert Gave It 2 Stars

Siskel and Ebert appreciated the visual elements like special effects and set design, but they didn’t quite grasp the movie or its narrative. However, many fans did, as it grossed $84M at the box office and has remained a cherished film for generations to come. In 2024, a sequel titled “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” was released, featuring Michael Keaton, Winona Ryder, and Catherine O’Hara revisiting their characters from the first movie.

6
‘Reservoir Dogs’ (1992)

Back in 1992, audiences had no idea who Quentin Tarantino was as a filmmaker when Reservoir Dogs premiered. They didn’t anticipate the cinematic masterpieces that would follow, such as Pulp Fiction two years later and numerous other iconic films thereafter. In Reservoir Dogs, Michael Madsen, Harvey Keitel, Tim Roth, Steve Buscemi, Chris Penn, and Tarantino himself portrayed a crew of characters before and after a heist, without actually showing the heist itself. Instead, the audience is left to imagine it based on the planning and consequences that unfold.

Both Siskel and Ebert Gave It 2.5 Stars

Siskel and Ebert admired the movie, acknowledging the screenwriter’s skill and the originality of the script. However, they were taken aback by the improbability of severely injured individuals delivering extended dialogues, suggesting the film could have been more progressive. Despite not recouping its budget at the ticket office, Reservoir Dogs gained a new fanbase following the release of Pulp Fiction.

5
‘The Jerk’ (1979)

As a die-hard movie enthusiast, I’d say that one of Steve Martin’s most memorable performances undeniably came in the form of Navin Johnson, his debut leading role in “The Jerk,” released back in 1979 under the guidance of director Carl Reiner. This film took me on a rollercoaster ride filled with laugh-out-loud humor, unintentional blunders, misunderstandings about culture, and an abundance of sheer silliness. It’s got the knack for being crass, rude, and downright hilarious all at once!

Both Siskel and Ebert Gave It 2 Stars

Nevertheless, neither Siskel nor Ebert found it appealing. In fact, Ebert openly expressed that he never considered Martin to be humorous. Both were disenchanted by the film and Ebert fiercely criticized it on their TV show, stating, “Labeling Steve Martin’s character as a jerk is almost a gesture of kindness.” Despite being met with skepticism among critics, it proved to be a huge success among audiences, earning $100M on a budget of just $4M.

4
‘Empire of the Sun’ (1987)

It might sometimes slip one’s mind that Christian Bale started his acting career as a child prodigy, appearing in movies such as Newsies and Henry V. His breakthrough role came in Steven Spielberg’s Empire of the Sun, a movie depicting a young boy’s struggle to survive in a Japanese internment camp during World War II. In the film, Bale portrayed a character living in Shanghai with his family when China was invaded by the Japanese during the war. He was subsequently captured and had to live through the harsh conditions of an internment camp. At merely 13 years old, he secured this significant role.

Ebert Gave It 2.5 Stars; Siskel Gave It 2 Stars

The movie didn’t strike a chord with Siskel, Ebert, or viewers. It earned $66M, surpassing its budget, but Spielberg deemed it unsuccessful. Siskel had issues with the film’s disjointed narrative that attempted to depict war through a child’s perspective while also incorporating an escapade-style escape. Interestingly, this movie was the platform for Bale to win his first National Film Board of Review special citation award for Best Performance by a Juvenile Actor, marking the start of his impressive acting career and leaving audiences in anticipation of more.

3
‘Sister Act’ (1992)

1992 saw an overwhelming enthusiasm among audiences for Whoopi Goldberg’s film “Sister Act”. This rambunctious musical comedy, which revolved around a woman hiding from her gangster boyfriend in a convent, grossed over $231 million at the box office. It not only led to several sequels but also received an “A” rating from CinemaScore’s polled fans. The film, known for its captivating musical performances, has been cherished by viewers for decades due to Whoopi’s chaotic disregard for convent rules, her rebellious spirit, and her transformation of the choir.

Ebert Gave It 2.5 Stars; Siskel Didn’t Provide a Written Review

Instead of giving it their approval, Siskel and Ebert both disapproved of it on their show. Ebert believed it was a squandered chance and criticized the director’s uninspired methods, whereas Siskel felt the script let down the movie. However, they praised Goldberg and several other nuns for delivering impressive performances. In essence, neither found this film to be particularly delightful or satisfying.

2
‘Happy Gilmore’ (1996)

It’s understandable that a film like Happy Gilmore, which has been seen and critiqued by two renowned movie critics who have reviewed countless films, including some of the best ever made, might not win their approval. However, fans didn’t seem to care about their opinions as Happy Gilmore went on to become one of Adam Sandler’s most popular and frequently quoted films. It even started a viral trend where people tried to mimic Happy’s unique golf swing style. The film further solidified Sandler’s reputation for comedic excellence in cinema. Despite its crude humor, the character of Happy Gilmore, who tries to earn money on the PGA Tour to save his grandma’s house, provides a stark contrast to the high-class atmosphere of golf, which adds to its appeal.

Ebert Gave It 1.5 Stars; Siskel Didn’t Provide a Written Review

On their show, neither Ebert nor Siskel held back on expressing their disapproval towards it. Ebert questioned why the character was named ‘Happy’ given his persistent aggression and lack of joy, as he frequently fought with others. In fact, Ebert went so far as to say that “He was only marginally better than the villains and much more homicidal.” Siskel, however, seemed to appreciate it a bit more than Ebert, suggesting he could see potential in Sandler as a capable movie star. Despite the mixed reviews, fans have continued to show their support, leading to the release of the sequel this year.

1
‘Twister’ (1996)

One of the most memorable disaster films, titled “Twister“, gained a strong fanbase following its premiere, ultimately grossing close to half a billion dollars at the box office due to its ideal timing as a summer blockbuster. The film boasted impressive special effects, two prominent actors in leading roles, and an original storyline that was, in essence, a cinematic storm. However, Siskel and Ebert remained unconvinced that it represented anything extraordinary when considered as a great movie.

Ebert Gave It 2.5 Stars; Siskel Didn’t Provide a Written Review

As a movie enthusiast, I wholeheartedly agree with my fellow critics Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert who weren’t impressed by this film on their show. Ebert felt that the movie lacked depth and complexity despite its impressive special effects, and he wasn’t invested in the rest of the plot or the overall quality of the production. Siskel, on the other hand, found the story revolving around the tornadoes to be ludicrous. However, contrary to their opinions, fans were captivated by it, making it a sensation upon its release on DVD in the US during the mid-90s. This film became a popular purchase and rental item, eventually leading to a successful 2024 sequel that also dominated the box office.

Read More

2025-04-20 18:04