TVSquad

yes i just watched it recently and ben lyons loves almost all movies and recommends almost all the time to "see them". i frequently hear him say "there's just something about the movie and you have to see it. his reviews are void of any substantial criticism. for god sake, he said bedtime stories starring adam sandler is a must-see? nothing with adam sandler is a must-see!!!

Reply

When I saw the title to this article my very first thought was, "So it's not just me."

It really is awful now. I didn't know Ben was the son of .... That explains A LOT. All this time I've been seeing him on E! I kept thinking, "Why does this kid/guy have this job? He's not very good at it." It's true, if you want to get a head in life/work it's not what you know but who you know. Sad, but true.

Reply

It is definitely not the same as having Ebert, who I loved, or even Roeper, who I learned to tolerate after a few years. But I still refer back to these 2 Bens, because like you, I need some feedback from critics at times when I am thinking about seeing a movie.

Reply

Somebody should review those two guys. As weak as Ben Lyons is, the other Ben is so full of himself that watching him is like watching a month's worth of really bad movies.
Can't the network get some of the guest reviewers that were on previous shows. Why do I still watch?

Reply

What they need to understand is that "At the Movies" is not a show that is watched by many young people. It is for people who care about movies, and some who just want to see a good old-fashioned argument about something other than politics (which I get on the cable news channels). They need to get people who have connections to movies greater than their family heritage. The people from the newspapers have a greater understanding, and a way of describing the movies due to the amount of time they have to put in to each idea when they write. I don't think they could get any of the important writers without abandoning the new format for the old format. Phillips and Scott are probably loyal to Ebert and Roeper so I don't know who they could get who was a good fill in before.

Reply

I erased it from my DVR list, I watch Movie Mob...and go to a special website for my reviews....

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/

Reply

DITTO.............

Mostly top 40 who cares flicks with pathetic ratings on Metacritic..........Rot Tom

I don't wanna waste 1 milisecond hearing reviews of an Adam Sandler...or a Jim Carrey xxxx flick.......

Reply

I stopped watching a few weeks ago. I just can't listen to the two Bens anymore.

I read Roger Ebert's reviews every week, but miss seeing him on television. And whatever happened to Richard Roeper's new show he was going to announce a couple of months ago?

Reply

Ebert is everybody's go-to guy as a quintessential critic

(Even in a meta-way: http://www.entertonement.com/clips/47152)

However, I'm willing to open myself up to a new critic. Or even a reminder from an old critic, whether formally trained:
http://www.entertonement.com/clips/50803

Or informal and internet based:
http://www.entertonement.com/clips/32237

Heck, I read the TV Squad pages!

Reply

They tried to make this show "hip and young" with more bells and whistles instead of realizing that it's not about the ages of the hosts or a need to revamp the show -- what I liked, and I think a lot of people liked, was just the simple format of having two critics talk intelligently about a movie (and sometimes get into arguments) and show a few short clips. It doesn't need to be fancy. The new show has gotten better, but it's still embarrassing.

Reply

Clearly, the CIA secretly funded the creation of this show and is using it for its intended purpose: heavy rotation at gitmo.

Reply

After watching an episode, I thought a good name would be "At The Movies with Dumbass and Douchebag." (I like Mankiewicz well enough on TCM, but he seems very hard to please when it comes to modern movies)

I'd still rather watch it than the most insipid movie critic show around, Reel Talk, with Ben Lyon's father. Jeffrey Lyons and the British woman may be better at the skill of critiquing, but that doesn't mean they're not still nonsensical and ridiculous.

Reply

This guy should be a movie critic for teenagers. He was supposed to be hip and cool and it turned out to be lame and insipid.

Reply

So glad tohear that it's not just me! When I turn this show on, I always think, where did they get these two boring guys. I have no interest in their comments - where is Richard Roper?

Reply

The Daily Show had a farcical movie critic for a while - I think his name was Frank DeFario? - and eversince I wondered why a full-fledged half hour movie critique show with a light-but-substantive tone wasn't available. I'm trustworthy of most of the reviews I read on Cinematical at my leisure; however, the absence of another team of critics on TV's just another of those bygones I guess viewers have to take in stride. There really are no substitutes or viable update contenders for the Siskel & Ebert of yesteryear.

The segment I dislike most on At The Movies now involves parceling out the criticism of one movie in particular to a 3-critic panel that usually comes in the middle of the show; the one where the founder(?)/blogger from Rotten Tomatoes and a couple other, albeit learned, talking heads participate. As if the two Ben's styles aren't enough to try to adjust to, suddenly their respective workloads are too heavy?

Hey, for a fraction of their salaries, I volunteer to take a stab at hosting.

Reply

I have been watching the show since it was Sneak Previews in Chicago. So, it's pretty hard to break a 35 year old habit. I still tear up when I think about losing Gene. The rotating host, filling in for Roger, was tough, but Richard was still a decent anchor. I totally agree with beeniebag12 that they must thing they're bringing in a younger audience with Lyons, but that's not who is going to watch the show! Here, it's on at 5:30am on Saturday! I want intelligent discourse. I don't watch some shill who doesn't even use proper grammar or know anything about movie history (I end up stopping the DVR and screaming, at least once a week). They didn't even mention his statement, in that article, about "No one makes better gangster movies than Guy Ritchie!" *blink* WHAT????? I watch, but it hurts. I don't even enjoy feeling superior to them. And poor "Mank" probably looks constipated, because he's got to sit across from the kid. I think he's getting tired of playing nice, too. He seems to be more cranky lately. It IS hurting his credibility. With the loss of my beloved At the Movies and John Leonard from CBS Sunday Morning, I'm lost. It's so depressing.

Reply

I agree with you about the new shows. I wish Richard Roeper would go ahead and start his new show. Also, I heard this week where Shootout will no longer be on AMC. If anyone knows where Shootout is going please post the answer on this site.

Reply

When Richard Roeper walked out, and then Ebert a week after him (maybe it was the other way around), there was some stink made about a new venture for Roeper and reviews. I always assumed that meant a new TV gig. But I've not seen him do anything new TV wise. Did I miss something?

Reply

I can tell you they are probably not raking in some young viewers. Me and my brother are younger and we definitely miss the classic discussions Ebert plus Roeper held (did not get to see much of Siskel and Ebert except on Archives unfortunately). Ebert helped me fall in love with talking about movies.

Reply