Wow, the 80s were so different, I miss that show, but im not surprised Siskel didnt like the Terminator (i remember him not liking alot of movies that are popular)
Siskel seems to have a weird reaction to violence in film sometimes. He's praised clockwork orange a few times on the show. Didn't like the violence in taxi driver although he later said he understood the violence in that movie. And now didn't like terminator. And I like gene more than Roger generally but every once in a while he was way off.
Hes totally ok with the escapist violence in Star Wars. But when the action is turned up to 100%, he becomes the biggest p**sy. Look at Siskels review of Aliens
Watching that scene from Terminator I'm reminded of what Schwarzenegger was going to be in an action movie about famous classical composers. Stallone said he'd play Beethoven; van Daam was Schubert. When asked Arnold said "I'll be Bach."
When my friend and i met Michael Biehn i asked him if he'd like to join us at this cool club for drinks....he said "oh yeah what's it called? " I replied "It's this place called Tech Noir down on Pico. " he looked up, smiled and said " oh yeah, i may have heard of that place"
“The Cambodian”?!? JFC, Roger, at least find out the actors’ names before filming! He was Doctor Haing S. Ngor, who did end up winning the Best Supporting Actor Oscar-the only Asian actor to win that award and only the second non-professional actor to win an Oscar (Harold Russell for The Best Years of Our Lives being the other). Ngor’s personal biography was even more tragic than Dith Pran’s.
Siskel thought the action in the Terminator was sub par? Seriously? He also thought there was no chemistry between Anthony Hopkins and Jodie Foster in Silence of the Lambs BTW - he considered Saturday Night Fever one of the best movies ever made
+Cliff Slatterly did you see his review of TERMINATOR 2, check out that siskel and ebert review on here, they both gave it a TWO BIG THUMBS UP, Siskel said he enjoyed much more than the original
Siskel seemed to get swept up in the times much more than Ebert did. Roger saw a great 80's action film in a sea of crappy ones, whereas Gene was perhaps jaded and didn't recognize The Terminator for the gem it really was.
@@MyEnemy I think Siskel just wasnt a great film critic. He couldnt separate his personal sensibilities from objective analysis. He was a lot more insightful discussing social trends and politics. More of a social commentator.
What is hilarious here is that Ebert admitted in his "Terminator Salvation" review he had never even seen the original movie. Apparently he forgot. He did not do a written review, so perhaps that contributed to it slipping from his memory. "The first "Terminator" movie I regret (I suppose) I did not see." www.rogerebert.com/reviews/terminator-salvation-2009
8:44 "On the planet where this guy comes from."...... he should pay more attention to the movies he watches . This is very poor craftmanship for a critic. Did he even understand the movie has time travel?
Siskel didn't do his homework on this film. I get the idea that he watched some movies completely and others he simply saw parts just to make his statement on them. Perhaps he walked in 30 minutes late because he didn't seem to understand the film. Even as a preteen, when I saw this, I got it.
I think you're right. In fact, I dont know if either of these morons actually saw The Terminator. Ebert admitted as much in the Terminator Genisys review
I saw them both at the theater. The Terminator was a mediocre, lightweight flick, The Killing Fields on the other hand, was a truly powerful film, great acting all around, beautifully filmed and intelligent dialog.
Wrong. The Terminator is a classic action movie. It is so good, they are still making sequels to it today several decades later today and it was number 1at the box office, appreciated by many critics and it is beloved by millions of people all over the world today. Good day sir!
Um... The Terminator launched two amazing careers, Arnold Schwarzenegger and James Cameron. They changed the face of Hollywood again and again. Who remembers The Killing Fields??
Mandela effect acting up again with Arnold saying, “I’ll be back.” I remember that line sounding very foreign and now it’s “normal.” Maybe it was all the impressions over the years that tainted my memory.
The 'terminator' was one of the few sleeper hits of 1984 that spawned many sequels and -made the Austrian muscleman -a big Hollywood star.The action -genre did change with this type -of formulaic premise:The future -of earth is threatened by it's faith -in technology that decides to wipe -out humanity by time-warping bot -h cyborg assassins and saviors.It -remains a sci-fi classic and made -director James Cameron a giant -of big-budget movies.🔚🔚🔚🔚
You can't rate a movie good or bad just with a review, there are elements that keep the movie interesting so while it's not as good as others the movie is still good, a five star review is more fair
it's funny cause the thumbs down and up is pretty much what Rotten Tomatos works by these days, it tranlates above 2.5 stars as a thumbs up (fresh) and below as a thumbs down (rotten)
I think that for this format, thumbs up or down worked better because people watching really just wanted to know if they should see it or not. In depth criticism like they wrote is better for stars, and Ebert at least used that in his written reviews. (Not sure about Siskel since he died before establishing the kind of web presence Ebert did, and I never lived in Chicago so never read either the Tribune or Sun Times.)
@@DeanStrickson But the original Terminator was better, and Aliens was better than the original. Although T2 is a very close second, the first had more bite, story wise.
The killing fields is the superior movie in terms of quality but it's not an easy watch. The terminator is well made and a barrel of fun. Definitely the better of the 2 for a casual weekend watch
It’s scary that the movie 🎥 gods took Siskel too early because he downed the terminator it was prophetic . Also ebert who was also wrong a lot of the times with his analysis was more right then the other so he was spared . Becareful which movies you judge 💀 btw the red balloon 🎈 was a good one
Gene had it on his top ten list that year and both gave it thumbs up. They never reviewed it on the show because at the time of its release, they were off the air from At the Movies and setting up for Siskel and Ebert.
While I personally feel that The Terminator is a thumbs up, T2 was significantly better (again, IMO). When people say that sequels are never better than the original I point to T2 and the Godfather 2...although the latter is about a dead heat.
I wonder if Siskel was awake during the movie. He mentions there was a lot of futuristic stuff on the other planet where these guys were from... I guess Siskel interpreted the future as another planet.
@@martinsorenson1055 Remember that they were seeing A LOT if these types of movies leading up to Terminator, a lot of shitty ones so I think he went in biased and jaded.
It really just depends what you look for more in a movie, story and suspense or action and big set pieces. Terminator had a more solid story, T2 had more action & iconic chase scenes (like the 18 wheeler bike chase scene.) It's kinda funny that Siskel would give T2 the better rating though as it goes against his normal stance that story should trump everything else.
In my opinion the original was the best because it's the only one in the franchise that doesn't have any problems when you really think about the plot. T2 asks you to forget that the time portal thing was only used to send back Arnold and Michael Biehn before being destroyed, and T2 also changes the future in a way to make what happened in the past impossible. You have to ignore that while enjoying T2 (and it's a kickass, great movie) but the first movie was absolutely seamless, and that's all the more remarkable because most time travel Sci Fi presents paradoxes that are never resolved and have to be ignored. Also, T2 drags a bit with the Miles Dyson/Cyberdine Systems subplot, but there's no drag at all in the original. Anyway just my opinion, not trying to get you to change yours.
Movies are an art form and therefor subjective. I love the Terminator, always have. Siskel didn't and Ebert gave it a marginal thumbs up. We all have our opinions. I can't stand Titanic, Avatar, Citizen Kane and Blair Witch Project. Others love them. It's a matter of taste as with any art form. They didn't get it "wrong". It's their opinions.
@@deckofcards87 I respect the technical brilliance and influence of Citizen Kane, but found the story boring and Orson Welles' performance too pompous and over the top.
LOL The Terminator established James Cameron as an A list director. Gene was nuts and Roger was underwhelmed to a degree thar is almost as bad as Genes opinion. I would have lived to see what they would have said if their reviews had been done before the public had declared it to be a hit . Now im goung to look up their reviews of Terminator 2
Terminator is: "not particularly well made". What the actual fuck? If nothing else, Terminator is an expertly crafted thriller. I swear Siskel did not understand moviemaking at all.
Violent, bloody and sadistic?? It sounds like Ebert is basing his review on another review. He admitted later that he never actually watched the original Terminator. How sad is that? The master himself was trying to make a name for himself and the top critics wont even watch his first movie. Listen to Siskel. There was a lot of action on the planet where Reese comes from?? He acts like theres nothing of value in those low budget post-apocalypse sequences. WTF did Siskel watch?
Ebert saw the original Terminator as he points out specific details during this review. Decades later when he reviewed Terminator: Salvation he brought up never having seen the 1984 film, but I honestly think it was a memory lapse. You have to remember he reviewed thousands of movies during his lifetime. Also his health was in decline at that point. Not to mention his age.
Continually surprised at how often they were wrong (not in their opinions because it's their opinion) but with the details of the movie. The Terminator wasn't half-man and they werent from another planet. Gene Siskel always had a bit off an elitist vibe.
I never realized how often Siskel really missed what most Americans considered a good movie. Doesn't mean he has to like it, but no critic should operate in his own exclusive bubble. If he does, he's views aren't relevant.
The Killing Fields was a great historical significant movie, but... The god-awful bell-banging soundtrack (you know the part I mean) and, sorry, the so forced of "Imagine" at the end. Call me a cynic, but that just felt too obvious.
