MovieChat Forums > Ebert Presents: At the Movies (2010) Discussion > Michael Phillips and A.O. Scott. Not cur...

Michael Phillips and A.O. Scott. Not current duds.

posted 13 years ago by Fernseher
11 replies | jump to latest

The two talking heads are not ready for TV.
We need Michael Phillips and A.O. Scott back again, or any of the other
dozen reviewers, the worst of which was better than these two combined.

[–] Studman_Productions 13 years ago

these two host are ok. the girl is decent and the guy is a little young but i'll give them a chance to grow on me. its nice to have the show format back and having ebert back in little snippets is great to see. i did really enjoy michael phillips and AO scott though. i thought they were a great team and i wouldn't have any problems seeing them headline the show.

[–] Sandoz 13 years ago

Yeah, I thought Phillips and Scott were an excellent team and I was actually starting to watch the show again on a regular basis...

and then the suits at Disney, in their infinite corporate wisdom, decided to boot the show to the curb and end it.

These two new jabbering, infotainment-style hosts just make me want to punch the TV-screen. I can't believe Ebert approved these two bobbleheads to be the main "critics" on his show--he must be on some really good drugs these days. If I happen to be home on a Friday night (when it airs locally for me) i may tune in, but I'm not setting my recorder to watch this later.

You know....some day this war's gonna end!

[–] seandirector 13 years ago

Ignatiy Vishnevetsky is not an "infotainment-style host." He's one of the most thoughtful, knowledgeable, and intelligent young critics working today. Granted, his screen presence was a little shaky at first, but he's been dramatically improving each week. His arguments are always well-founded and he has film knowledge to back it up, as when he compared the films of Claude Chabrol to The Housemaid last week. That's the kind of intelligent discussion I like to see on the show.

Christy Lemire is doing very well too. She has a more natural TV presence, though I do feel that she knows a lot less about film than Vishnevetsky. Still, she rarely seems lost and I do enjoy their dynamic.

-Sean

[–] Benihanahasnofunflare 13 years ago

No kidding. Vishnevetsky is cool. Phillips and Scott are both corporate hacks, the latter more so.

[–] stevenackerman69 13 years ago

They should try to get Richard Roeper with Michael Phillips again. They were great. Disney should never have changed the show in 2008.

[–] sfitz76 13 years ago

Roeper and Phillips were the best team since Roger left. Hands down.

[–] lasurius 13 years ago

I loved Michael Phillips and A.O. Scott. I don't know anything about Christy Lemire and Ignatiy Vishnevetsky because i live in Bulgaria. But i have a question: This will be something like the show of Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert "At the movies"?! :)

[–] RestlessRust 13 years ago

It's essentially the same show with two new hosts. They also have some segments hosted by other people, including Roger himself. But the bulk of the show is the same as it was originally.

_________
Disclaimer for the clueless: The preceding is my opinion...your mileage may vary.

[–] nightsamba 13 years ago

Totally agree with you. Maybe these two are here to appear to a younger demographic but they are so un-engaing and have no chemistry. Unlike these dullards, Phillips and Scott brought humor, insight and a great give and take to the show, the hallmarks of what made Siskel and Ebert the legends they were.
I can't watch these two.

[–] jtf1986 12 years ago

Siskel and Ebert had no chemisty their first couple of years working together. They were stiff as boards. Ebert in particular. He spoke like a NPR host. Hopefully if the show is able to continue they will get better and become more engaging.

[–] nightsamba 12 years ago

I must agree with you. I gave this show a second look recently and was delightfully surprised by how the 2 hosts had eased into their roles from the first time I had viewed them. Thank you for reminding me that first impressions don't always tell the whole story.