Siskel and Ebert: Back to the Future Part III, Cadillac Man, Longtime Companion

[@bobthebear1246]

I LOVE _Longtime Companion._ It is extremely powerful, paces itself well and is actually very humorous insurgencies. And yes, Bruce Davison did get nominated for Best Supporting Actor for it, and very deservingly so. ❤

[@redvine1105]

That modulation at 0:43 gets me every time - smoooooth

[@jjgreen5206]

Siskel and Ebert were honest and brutally so. We need that back today

[@newwavepop]

i watched longtime companion about half a year ago, its pretty powerful, its tragic and painful. but in all the right ways.

[@reneedennis2011]

It's a good movie.

[@danmseattle975]

Bruce Davison was nominated for an Oscar for Long time Companion. He should have won.

[@kw7378a1]

It’s an excellent movie. I do wish S&E wouldn’t refer to partners and lovers as “friends.”

[@5andup]

Comparisons to 1993's Hollywood-manufactured Philadelphia is inevitable when analysing the thematic treatment. For me, this underrated Norman Rene film is way better 👍👍👍

[@kd17Burger]

@@kw7378a1 he said lover

[@haroonabassi1821]

"This is a world where sex and love have less of a connection than sex and violence" Roger Ebert you magnificent beautiful man. I'm writing this quote down so I don't forget it.

[@leonidasmarlon676]

i dont mean to be so offtopic but does someone know of a way to get back into an Instagram account?? I was dumb forgot my password. I would appreciate any tricks you can offer me

[@haroonabassi1821]

@@leonidasmarlon676 ur not gonna like this but the only advice i can give you in that regard is to never log back into it and perform esteemable actions for your own souls sake instead of the gratitude of others. Off topic too but u asked me so this is my answer brother lol.

[@citygirl5705]

Siskel doesn't usually win arguments with Ebert. But I'd say he came out ahead on "Back to the Future 3."

[@zapan101313]

Seriously, I would have thought their opinions would be the other way around.

[@kd17Burger]

For the most part, I would say they were about even and I've been watching live since they were on Sneak Previews

[@citygirl5705]

@@kd17Burger Me too. I remember them giving Rocky 3 two thumbs down and thinking "these guys are idiots." I often disagree with them but still love watching them.

[@Hellraiser0601]

Siskel always thought of himself as a smart man, equal or smarter than Ebert. Not even close. His idea of a strong rebuttal was talking over and yelling at Ebert.

[@citygirl5705]

@@Hellraiser0601 Oh, he'd have rebuttals, but they usually made no fucking sense.

[@omargonzalez2641]

Not all these episodes are equally good but I enjoy intelligent people arguing how rare.

[@TheLiveMusicGroup]

Not all of these episodes are equally good, but I enjoy intelligent people arguing. How rare!

[@Jbaxter85]

0:00 Intro 0:56 Bird on a Wire 👎🌟 4:49 Last exit to Brooklyn 👍🌟🌟🌟🌟 9:03 BTTF 3 👍🌟🌟🌟 12:44 Cadillac Man 👎🌟🌟 16:45 Longtime Companion 👍🌟🌟🌟🌟 20:22 The reviews

[@chinitowon]

Goldie Hawn looks down at Mel Gibson's equipment, Gene Siskel: "nothing special there." LOL

[@JacobFrey]

Imagine giving a thumbs down to Back to the Future III.

[@musicman76enator]

6:45 - 6:48 You're welcome ;-)

[@dwaynemalone4026]

She has some BIIIIIIIIG hooters!😀

[@sha11235]

Paulie is Ricki Lake's dad there. And this was when Ricki weighed a metric ton.

[@LeoOrientis]

Very strange how they split on Back to the Future Parts 2 and 3. (Especially given that in many ways, they're the same long film.) I note that both of them will often attack a film's realism when they don't like it, and then turn around and praise the zaniness and originality of a film that makes no attempt to be realistic. Therefore, the idea of _realism_ is a red herring. The real question is whether or not you're susceptible to a film's conceit. If I recall correctly, Ebert relished the science-fictiony temporal mechanics of Part 2, whereas Siskel savoured the homespun nostalgiafest that is Part 3. I suppose one could reasonably deduce that the Chicago-born Siskel had fond boyhood memories of Hop-Along Cassidy matinées, whereas the hayseed Ebert probably used the movies as an escape from the mundanity of his small-town Illinois upbringing.

[@atroyz]

Ironically Ebert gave the same film a thumbs up in his review in the sun times.

[@Slashboss]

This episode is such a gammit of how they could both be entirely wrong on a movie then rebound and be entirely right, it's honestly amazing. Bird on a Wire they fail utterlly on, and they get Last Exit to Brooklyn and Longtime Companion perfectly right. BOAW is a underrated and fun romantic comedy/action flick of a bygone era and the other 2 are two excellent human saga dramas. What a week to pick something to watch lol. Ebert's criticism of Hawn's so dumb.. just because someone is a "tough," attorney doesn't mean they won't be scared in a life or death situation, not was her and Mel's chemistry awful. That's what makes the movie so fun, they get along well as a legit pairing. Time's aged the movie better than their reviews there. Then 4-5 minutes later Ebert has that poignant quote in the Brooklyn review about tone's not making a movie good, dude could say something utterly idiotic then rebound to being poignant in a heartbeat. Makes me lmao thinking about it. Siskel wasn't that smart but he had his moments too.

[@kevinpernod9336]

Siskel is so right, BTTF 3 works because it's the final part of the trilogy. Would the film be as good as a single movie on its own, of course not.

[@jakedizzle]

Just watched Cadillac Man. Such a good movie. RIP Mr. Williams. These guys don't know what's even good.

[@Abr022575]

I thought it was mediocre.

[@anothermonday5664]

The too much talk element was right on the money. But it had some good one liners.

[@drumtum]

Cadillac man is a good movie. RW did star in quite a few really bad movies after this one though.

[@kd17Burger]

Including this one It was terrible

[@DoncoEntAgain]

I don't like the argument Ebert made during the Back to the Future 3 review. Over and over he said, "If this movie were a regular western, you wouldn't like it." First off, he's trying to tell Siskel how he would think, which you can't do. Secondly, he's saying "If this movie were a different movie" but it's not a different movie. Siskel liked it for what it was. It's a comedy western with a nice love story in the middle, surrounded by time travel elements that no normal western would ever have. And the funny thing is, I've seen Siskel make these same kind of flawed arguments in Ebert's direction other times.

[@MiceOnParole]

Last Exit to Brooklyn is a classic.

[@lerm2866]

I’m not one to cry during a movie, too many films manipulate the audience. I broke down during the final 15 minutes of Last Exit.

[@pablosilva6988]

❤

[@oobrocks]

Roger screwed up on BTTF 3

[@pi6835]

Bird On A Wire was dreadful, but it did feature the treasures of a campy David Carradine and Hawn’s posterior.

[@kali3665]

I don't think I was ever impressed with Back to the Future III. I thought they were reduced to doing a Western parody, and how often have we seen THAT?! But I enjoyed Back to the Future II more than I liked the first one. Which was still pretty good.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

Regardless of the inept parody of movie westerns, I think chemistry between the characters compensate for the film's short comings.

[@kali3665]

@@ricardocantoral7672 True. Also the minor shift in personalities when Doc Brown starts quoting Marty's own catchphrases, which was amusing. But the appearance of ZZTop immediately destroyed the illusion for me. And the Clint Eastwood joke was kinda pathetic - he did NOTHING worthy of having a ravine named after him. 😄

[@ricardocantoral7672]

@@kali3665 Yeah, there is too much of the contemporary world influencing the film. That didn't bother me as a kid but now I see it as annoying. Still, I think it's refreshing to see a major film franchise bringing a curtain down instead of simply fizzling out.

[@kali3665]

@@ricardocantoral7672 I said years ago the biggest problem was that there should have been an extension of the time paradoxes created by Marty's initial visit to 1955. All are interrelated, but BTTF3 virtually forgets about that in favor of doing the western parody. Something else the franchise forgot. If you notice, each film *except the last* begins in 1985 -- but each a very DIFFERENT 1985, showing how much influence over the timestream Marty really had. I have this vision of the third film beginning when Marty confronts Evil Biff to find out when he got the sports almanac (during BTTF2 in the Evil 1985), and he runs to the roof to meet with Doc. But, before Doc can knock out Biff, someone shoots Doc and Marty dead. Evil Biff swirls to see Old Biff with the smoking gun, Old Biff: Get in the car, Butthead! Evil Biff: Who you calling Butthead! Old Biff: I said, get in the car, Tannen! We've got a lot of work to do. And THEN the movie begins proper, with an even more disastrous time paradox. That would have been very interesting if they had gone that route.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

@@kali3665 This definitely comes down to personal preference. I thought a change in tone was needed after the dark, frantic BTTF 2. I think continuing that route would meant further reducing the presence of these characters to point where they are just blank slates. BTTF 3 definitely featured some miscalculations but at least there was a heart, there was human emotion front and center.

[@twikirobot6897]

BTTF III was pretty lame.

[@acrovader]

The 'Back to the Future' sequels are crap.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

The first one is definitely far ahead of the sequels but I like the shifts in tone and the fact that series concluded with the characters moving on in life.

[@jameswilliams-zr8co]

no

[@sbarrow06]

I beg to differ