He also trashed both John Waters "Hairspray" and even "Serial Mom." I think Rodger Ebert is brilliant, but gets contemptuous and just wont admit it. Also, it shows a LACK of a sense of humor.
Yeah, one of the times Ebert had it wrong, Siskel had it right. There were plenty of misses the other way. Ebert sometimes re-reviewed films after years had gone by and he had a new perspective. I wonder if he did that with this movie.
It is the same thing with the now legendary movie "The Big Lebowski". The reviews of the movie when it came out were, well, mixed at best. It actually didn't do all that well at the box office and many well-known movie critics did not give it a favourable review when it came out. A few years ago someone found all the old reviews and actually went back to the critics who gave them and asked "You want a do-over? Do you still see the movie like that now and do you stand by what you said today? Or have you changed your opinion on it?" They basically all laughed and admitted they missed that one. The gist of what many of them explained was the reason for the negative review was that the "storyline" was hard to follow and it really didn't make a lot of sense the first time watching it. Like any fan of the movie will tell you the movie actually gets better the more times you watch it because you start noticing little details that make it so much better. They didn't get it at the time but now see the greatness that flew over their heads back then.
@@RobwLPOCIronically, while the Big Lebowski gets better and better with further viewings, My Cousin Vinny is the prime example of a one-and-done movie for me. It's a good one, but it's not very layered at all.
@@ignatiusjackson235 agreed. I'll watch it with somebody every couple years or somebody reacting to it but I rarely look for it myself anymore. I got The big Lebowski ready to go on my phone and computer
100%! And everything simply build you up to the climactic ending! And it never gets old! For me: It is the dynamic of wits between Mona Lisa and Vinny. When she hits him with the education about discovery after hunting with Trotter when he thinks he had a significant win, that sealed it for me!😂
And even though I agreed more with Ebert than Siskel when they split you couldn’t help but love special moments like these when Siskel agreed with the majority of America. They were both amazing critics I wish were still around. RIP Siskel and Ebert. You may be gone, but you are never forgotten.
Great writing and execution by not only the stars but the entire supporting cast; the breakfast restaurant cook, Austin Pendleton as the public defender, the witnesses, the stunned juror with his mouth agape, all fine actors that nailed their roles and rounded out one of best comedies.
The funny thing about her performance; it was based on every 2nd generation Italian-American girl I worked with in the trenches of Wall St. in the 80s.
I think we gotta remember that these guys watched movies like they were working at a factory, from early in the morning to the late in the evening. Makes sense that they’d whiff on some and only makes it more impressive how right Roger is most of the time.
Lived in Chicago from 1977-1987 and so saw Siskel & Ebert's show all the time plus read their competing newspaper columns in the Chicago Tribune (Siskel) and Chicago Sun-Times (Ebert). Liked both of them but funny how sometimes one or both could be so dead wrong on a movie and this was one of those times for Ebert.
One of the few times when Mr. Ebert missed the mark! "My Cousin Vinny" is a gem of a comedy and everyone in the film is terrific! The Ralph Macchio/ Mitchell Whitfield story plot is not the real main deal, even though the whole "trial" thing is about them! (Spoiler) - Austin Pendleton is an absolute hoot and his scenes alone are worth watching this movie!
I definitely agree that Ebert is wrong about this movie. I think Ebert admitted over the years that sometimes his personal life kept him from getting some reviews right. If you look at both Ebert and Siskel's careers they had way too much on their plate. They had to see 3-5 movies a week, write their reviews for their respective newspapers(Sun-Times, Tribune), attend special previews/events, go on Letterman, Carson, Leno, etc. Sure, it made them millions but if I were them I'd take all of August off every year.
I find that sometimes they fixate on one aspect of a movie and no matter the rest of the brilliance of said film they just can't get past one or two little things. But I love to hear them anyway regardless if they like or dislike a movie I like or dislike .
@@Kruppt808 - I couldn't agree with you more! I remember back over 40 years ago watching them when they were first on the air (Gene sporting that porno guy mustache) and continued watching their shows ever since! Yes, they occasionally missed the boat but still were always enjoyable viewing!
Really enjoyed Sickle and Elbert, especially Siskal. I am shocked that neither one, really, saw the genius of this movie. As Gene said, it was called MY Cousin VINNY. It wasn’t about Ralph Macchio. The case looked hopeless against the two “utes”. Even as Vinny discredited the witnesses, it looked like a conviction. Then, surprisingly to me, Marisa Tomei’s character saves the day. One of my favorite=te comedies of all time!!!! I’ll give it my two thumbs up..
My Cousin Vinny is one of the great, sleeper movies with a great cast and great writing, how Ebert gave this gem a thumbs down is hard to fathom. Many law schools refer to this movie and many top lawyers have spoken favorably about it. Joe Pesci was terrific in this, but the real star of the movie was Marisa Tomei -- she combined a believable beauty with a spot on NY accent with wonderfully over the top flourish's. When she was on the stand and took apart the prosecution and their witness you almost wanted to shout in approval.
@@delbongo you need me to define it for you, or maybe, I don't know, you could look it up for yourself? I've read somewhere that google search is a pretty good resource.
“My Cousin Vinny” is a timeless classic. It never gets old. It’s a clash between two american cultures: East Coast New York versus the Deep South. A lot of the humor pokes fun at the differences between the two cultures.
@@nicklubrino2606 Ah, I was going off memory. I recall the Southern characters themselves weren't portrayed badly (maybe the stuttering lawyer but I don't think that was swipe at Southerners).
@@neohermitist The southerner gas attendant who was on the witness stand as Joe Pesci cross examins him: “In this picture, how many branches do you see?” So, the gas attendant starts counting out loud with his fingers. I’m sure southerners weren’t too happy on how the gas attendant was portrayed. He was made to look like an idiot by Vinny Gambino.
@@spencer10182 by this point roger ebert was taking money from the studios for good reviews. Paramount knew My Cousin Vinny was good enough and didn't need a fat thumbs up from ebert.
Roger wanted to make it a courtroom drama which it was not. This movie was all about Joe, Marissa and Fred Gwynn. I love d this movie and also fell in love with Marissa.
The way Pesci looks down when she’s stomping her feet is just hilarious.. Absolutely no BS gets by either one of these characters.. Even their own BS.. lol..
Later in the year, 1992, while reviewing Sister Act, they complained that Maggie Smith’s performance as the Mother Superior was sullen and taciturn, that she didn’t realize she was in a comedy. That’s exactly what Fred Gwynne does here as Judge Haller. He plays the role straight. He’s a by-the-book judge. He’s the film’s “straight man.” It’s his reaction shots that play beautifully in the courtroom scenes with Joe Pesci and Marisa Tomei and Austin Pendleton. In some scenes his jaw is hanging just inches off the floor. Every time I saw him with his mouth wide opened, I couldn't help but laugh. Ebert’s observation about Ralph Macchio is true but like Siskel said, the movie isn’t about Billy and Stan; it’s about Vinny, hence the title. Yeah, it’s predictable in the sense that of course Vinny will get an acquittal but getting there is unpredictable and hilarious. This movie is a jewel. 👍🏾 ⭐️⭐️⭐️ 1/2.
As a lawyer for nearly 30 years I can tell you that not only is MCV very funny, but the trial is actually more realistic in terms of the rules of evidence, etc., that almost any “courtroom drama” ever made.
Legal Eagle (another youtube channel), basically said other than approaching the witness and jury constantly, this movie is a gem of legal proceedings.
This is true. I mean, how could you not like watching this guy try to make himself a reputable lawyer in front of an entire town/courtroom who has their minds already made up. Watching the dynamic of Marisa Tomei's character's intelligence matching wits Joe Pesci's character's attitude and mood at every turn is the magic of the movie.
@@A22DNAL Yeah....as Gene Siskel pointed out, the characters in this movie are not dummies, which raises the movie above what we might normally expect for a comedy.
I mean, I guess it's easy in hindsight to say Ebert missed the mark, as "Vinny" has aged extremely well, but for me, just the premise of his argument is flawed: he seems to say that he wants more "suspense" in the outcome for... a comedy? That's insane, as there's no way the audience goes into this movie thinking that the two yutes would be found guilty. It's just not even the remotest possibility. So it's not about the destination, it's about the journey- the characters we meet along the way, as Siskel points out. Strange that Ebert didn't see that. Thanks for posting!
Completely agree on every point, but really hindsight was never needed. When I first saw this movie, I loved it so much I watched it again the next day. I have probably watched it at least a dozen times over the years and still laugh at tbe same jokes. It is just a freaking funny movie and he completely missed on it.
Ebert had one personal problem with the movie, and he let it cloud his judgment. His reasoning made no sense. He wanted Ralph Machio to be more of a star, and that was not the case, so he hated the movie.
@@nyaakewebo It wasn't unique. There was a movie called Cry Freedom which was about a white guy who was working on the cause of Stephen Biko and Ebert gave it a thumbs down because he wanted it to be centered on Biko instead. It was one of those where you say, "if you know so much, why aren't you making your own movies?"
I LOVED IT EXACTLY AS IT WAS. AND ALL THESE YEARS LATER ( 2022) I still rematch it every year or two and still laugh my azz off! Love all the characters!!
I tended to agree more with Roger than Gene on films, but here Gene praises all the sweet spots of a great comedy. Maybe Roger was having an "off" day when he watched it.
Gosh - I miss these two. It's so nice to go back and see this review. I always loved their opinions - and often disagreed. This was one of the times I disagreed with Ebert. Still, I love and miss him.
One of the best written and performed movies ever. Razor sharp script by Dale Launer and excellent performances from Pesci, Tomei and Gwynne in his final film role, rip sir you did a fine job here and in many other shows and movies. And along with Die Hard, Ghost, Mrs. Doubtfire and Home Alone 2 proves once in a while Siskel was occasionally right over Ebert.
Fred Gynwe's performance proved that he deserved be remember for this film instead of The Munsters. As for Roger's criticisms, he isn't really off base. He does point out the film's flaws but they aren't that offensive in my opinion.
I was in second grade in 1992 (or 3rd) depending on the month this came out but wow. I’m almost 40 now, that’s how old this movie is.. a classic from my childhood. When the lawyer claps his hands and says “identical” as he’s questioning someone.. I remembered that my whole life for some reason..
Agree 100% with Siskel here. Kudos for giving props to the film's writer. Everyone remembers Pesci,Tomei, & Gwynne, but that's a great point about the New York & Southern characters are respectability treated more than stereotypes
Thanks for another review. I've now finished adding comments on the S&E site under each section of the Disney Years from 1986 to 1992 to aid you or anyone else in identifying reviews missing from the site. The old Buena Vista site may have had reviews going back to Fall 1986 when the Disney version of S&E started.
Hello! You're right about late 86, for some reason I didn't at least grab the biggies like Heartbreak Ridge, Star Trek IV, Three Amigos etc. I appreciate all the info you give me! Note I just uploaded another the above subject in HD. Thanks again!
@@erichaynes7502 Sure, I'm happy to help. 1986 is not a big problem as the current site is only missing two episodes and all the ones you mentioned are available. I've finished adding comments with the missing episodes on all of the Disney years on the site now. I don't know if you have to be too worried about the videos being taken down. AtTheMoviesFan1 is an account here that added 50 individual reviews 10 years ago and they are still there. Of course there are lots of other accounts with S&E videos out there.
@@jedijones That's encouraging that other reviews have been up for 10+ years. I want to have the best quality.. I have to figure out how I did the first HD one cause it looks pretty good. Do you think it's a good idea to continue uploading 2 versions or just upload HD?
@@erichaynes7502 I would just upload one version. May as well save yourself some time. Once the HD version is up, there's not much reason to keep the other one up. And just having one copy up means if people comment on them they'll all be talking in one place. And if you don't have time to HD convert them all it would be fine to put up the standard version.
I do get Ebert's point about the characters of the defendants being underwritten. In fact I often forget that Ralph "The Karate Kid" Macchio is even in this movie when I rewatch it. But Siskel gets that this is one of the rare courtroom dramas where the story is more about the lawyers than the defendants and so likes it like we do.
The great thing was that witnesses were not scheming false witnesses.They were honest people who were mistaken.Same with the prosecutor.He was a good man using the information he had,not just wanting a cheap conviction.
Ebert is in my opinion, the greatest film critic of all time.. He's allowed to wrong occasionally, which he was here. My Cousin Vinny is a phenomenal film.
Well, that was a surprise. I was ALWAYS at odds with Siskel, but with this movie the script was flipped for some reason. I can't believe Ebert didn't like it. He completely missed the point. The movie wasn't about the suspense of the trial, but the complete fish-out-of-water story, and Pesci and Tomei were hilarious. For me it was even funnier because I've lived in the south for several years, working as a court reporter, so I can tell you those characters were spot on! Really disappointed in Ebert on this one. I wonder how he felt when Tomei one the Academy Award?
I just listen to them and see if they teach me anything about movies, script, directing , cinematography and the like. If they did or didn't like something that doesn't matter to me as much. The are so knowledgeable snd have seen so many movies I love to hear them talk about films.
As a kid I rarely missed this show as it was on soon after church was over. I almost always agreed more with Roger but in this case, I’m squarely with Gene.
Not surprised of Ebert's reaction. He generally didn't understand great comedy that was relatable to the average viewer. Dramas he nailed, though. Miss them both.
This movie is hysterical and it's probably one of the funniest movies that I've seen but you're never really supposed to feel like they're gonna lose the case, you're never supposed to think that they are going to be executed. Therefore the case doesn't really matter. The movie is about the characters. It's not about Stan or William. What did you want Ralph to do start kicking people like he's the Karate kid? You know Vinny is going to win; he's in the f'n title, the question is HOW
Just because we tend to favor one side I understand, however I think in this format of two opinions that are occasionally supposed to be contrary both sides make good arguments for their respective viewpoints.
Ebert was wrong about this movie, but I can kinda see how it could have "got off on the wrong foot" with him. When I saw the movie, I knew going in that Pesci and Tomei were the main characters. But they don't even appear on screen until 12 minutes in; it's all Macchio and Whitfield for the first 12 minutes. So I could see how some viewers would think Macchio's going to be a bigger part of the movie than he ends up being. Especially if you're seeing the movie before any publicity has come out, which was when Ebert saw it.
I am shocked Ebert didn't like it. His taste is usually spot on. He totally dropped the ball on this one. Perhaps his popcorn was stale on the day he saw the movie.
@@erichaynes7502 you’re the best! Other films are: Article 99/American Me/The Lawnmower Man/Shakes the Clown/Daughters of the Dust. But the one I’m most interested in besides Shakes is Lawnmower Man. Have you seen “shakes” Incidentally? No one liked it when it came out but now it’s a cult classic-I loved it even back then!
