A review by greg_talbot
Opposable Thumbs: How Siskel & Ebert Changed Movies Forever by Matt Singer

3.0

At an impressionable age, before digital media and streaming services, I had a glimmer into the undiscovered country of cinema. I recall Roger Ebert's erudite voice on the grainy morning television. The Sun Times film critic held court at a roundtable with Martin Scorcese in a year-end retrospective show. They shared their respective lists of the best films of the 90s decade. "Pulp Fiction", "The Thin Red Line" , "Fargo" and "Goodfellas" were listed, and many films I didn't know, including Ebert's decade favorite "Hoop Dreams". As Matt Signer states, hundreds of film critics were born from "Gene and Siskel". Alongside them were hundreds of thousands of viewers, like myself, hungry for deep pathos and human stories.

"Opposable Thumbs" investigates the history of two rival Chicago film critics - Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert,the building a television brand with brought film criticism to a wide audience. Arriving at their newspapers at a time when the new hollywood movement was beginning, and building reputations as trusted film critics, the unlikely duo came to build the flagship movie review television show. Built on their clashing personalities, malleable thumbs and heated debate, they elevated the discussion and analysis around films.

A relatively easy read, "Opposable Thumbs" walks the narrative of the show, and rise of celebrity for the the two critics. There are some great stories - Siskel's infatuation with "Saturday Night Fever", the talk show host circuit, the practical pranks pulled on Ebert, and the push and pull of their combative relationship. The appendix is a great source for some of the the hidden gems they talked about on their show. We explore their working habits, the set design, the stubborn format, and some of their famous acidic banter.

Ebert's passing coninsided with social media and streaming services that shape and current viewing habits. One can't help but wonder how Siskel and Ebert would adapt to these times. Perhaps Ebert would be a rival to Chicago-based podcast Filmspotting (hosted by Josh Larson and Adam Kempenaar). Maybe he would be a guest host with Dana Stevens on her podcast the Cultural Gabfest. Or trade reviews with Mark Kermode in a radio studio. He notoriously detested videogames as an artistic medium - would he feel that way about digital shorts or youtube. We can only wonder.

There is an aching sense that there are many more dimensions that could have been explored. Ebert had already done so much to make Chicago a destination for film lovers. His annual festival became a pilgrimage in Champaign Urbana. His troves of written reviews are timeless and brought readers like myself to some brilliant movies - i'm thinking of his brilliant review of "Walkabout" by Nicolas Roeg.

I also think Ebert's activism and exposing viewers to world cinema are unexplored here. Any fan of "Ebert and Siskel" will enjoy this book, but I think many of us would love to dive into their film judgments. For instance they had strong differing feelings about "Full Metal Jacket", it would be interesting to examine the film's reputation in these times, and maybe put their thumb on the scale.

That said, this is a really enjoyable read. It gave me an appreciation behind my nostalgia - a joy of the monoculture of the 90s, the riveting personalities behind this pivotal program, and the exploration of art. Luckily, we live at a time where the empathy machine of cinema still draws an audience. Every day, there are opportunities to dive into our shared humanity and explore film. Then, as now, we look for cinema to reveal profound truths, share empathy, and connect us through vivid imagination.