Siskel and Ebert review 'The Shadow'

I find it funny how Gene brings up Sam Raimi's "Dark Man," considering we may be looking at Sam Raimi's "The Shadow" in the next few years.

I don't think either one of them gave a very good review, and I usually agree with them. Gene Siskel seemed too dismissive of the film, and Roger Ebert seemed too taken with it's visual appeal to notice anything else. Gene was too hard on the film and found nothing redeeming about it's performances or it's plot. While it isn't perfect, I can't see how he didn't enjoy it to at least some level. As for Roger, he is right about the beautiful visual art at work here, but that in and of itself doesn't a good movie make. The film is flawed but still enjoyable, but one cannot avoid some of the flaws that are very much present here. I'm amazed that he was so taken by the effects that he forgot to even talk about the plot. Today, visuals have taken over films and they are not really enjoyable. Attitudes like Roger's and the viewers in general who only go see films for SFX are to blame for this lack of effort. This is why junk like Transformers is a huge hit. Hey, I love visual appeal as much as the next person, but only when it is a tool to enhance a well thought-out, good story. If you don't have that, then all you have is a special effects spectacle. Luckily, The Shadow managed to have a story good enough to support the beautiful spectacle, but I do think it could have been better.