Au Revoir, 'At the Movies'

After a quarter-century on the air, one which holistically altered the way we look at and talk about film, At the Movies is closing the balcony. The show dates back much further, of course, about 35 years with Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel hosting Sneak Previews, but after two rounds of hosts in only about two years, Buena Vista Television has said enough's enough. Ebert wrote extensively about the past and, yes, even the future of At the Movies on his blog:

"At the Movies was one of the last survivors of half-hour syndication. It didn't fail so much as have its format shot out from beneath it. Don't blame Disney. Don't blame Tony Scott and Michael Phillips, the final co-hosts, critics I admire who still have five months left on the air. Don't blame Ben Mankiewicz. Don't blame my pal Richard Roeper, who didn't fancy following the show in a "new direction." Don't blame the cancer that forced me off the show. Don't even blame Ben Lyons. He was the victim of a mistaken hiring decision. "Blame the fact that five-day-a-week syndicated shows like Wheel of Fortune went to six days. Blame the fact that cable TV and the internet have fragmented the audience so much that stations are losing market share no matter what they do. Blame the economy, because many stations would rather sell a crappy half-hour infomercial than program a show they respect. Blame the fact that everything seems to be going to hell in a hand basket."

Still, a quality dig at poor Ben Lyons, so that's nice. But Ebert is correct: The model on TV is different, and just as it was 25 years ago when that model was the staple, it's never forward thinking that changes it but groupthink, a reaction to a decision the audience beat the executives to by several years. I hate to say it, but I think Ebert might even be missing the forest right now. Syndicated TV just isn't as marketable, not for new shows, certainly. And if you're a movie show without Roger Ebert on-screen - which is an impossibility full-time - this seems like an uphill battle. A new direction is in the cards, as Ebert admits, but he's still holding out hope for TV, when so much of that attention has been transplanted to online hubs. "We held video tests with several potential hosts two weeks ago in Los Angeles, and know who we will use," Ebert acknowledged. "We also know we will have a strong web presence. We will go full-tilt New Media: Television, net streaming, cell phone apps, Facebook, Twitter, iPad, the whole enchilada." "The disintegration of the old model creates an opening for us. I'm more excited than I would be if we were trying to do the same old same old," Roger added, all of which sounds great, if they somehow minimize or cost-control the TV end of it effectively. Even though I hadn't watched At the Movies in about seven or eight years, I still remember it fondly from the 80s and 90s, when it was at its peak and when it was unlike anything else on the tube. It lost something when Siskel passed away, lost more with a parade of guest hosts until Richard Roeper joined, and I'm not sure he helped. But when Ebert left the balcony for good, this writing was on the wall.

Comments

[J.Bradley]

I always regarded Siskel and Ebert as my film professors. When they were first on tv in my Jr. High and High School days, they taught me a lot about movies, even many that I didn't see, wouldn't see 'til years later or still haven't seen. They didn't so much tell you how to think about movies but what the thoughts WERE about them, at least among two people. There were a lot of "controversial" films in the 70's and as a kid growing up then, you got the impression that adults just wanted you to disengage from the world of movies and media - and the world in general. Watching those two showed you that you could engage without being overwhelmed and movies, media - the world wasn't something to run away from, but discuss, debate, critique and be a part of.