The Guy Who Wields the Other Thumb at the ‘Movies’

For those in the audience hoping for a film reviewer’s version of “WWF Smackdown!,”Richard Roeper, as Roger Ebert’s new on-air foil, has a bit of bad news. He won’t be contrary just for the sake of it. But he won’t be out for the count, either.

“I’ve never thought about tailoring my opinions to be different from his,” said Roeper, a Chicago Sun-Times columnist who was a guest host on “Roger Ebert & The Movies” about 10 times this year before recently landing his own chair in the balcony. “The audience can smell a fraud or someone who’s affecting a personality. We just want to have a good, free-flowing dialogue about the movies.”

The long-running syndicated show, formerly “Siskel & Ebert,” had been using a series of guest co-hosts since the much-loved reviewer Gene Siskel died last year. It will be rechristened “Ebert & Roeper and The Movies” in September, though Roeper has already stepped in full-time on the weekly program. He may be sitting in Siskel’s spot, but he does not call himself the late reviewer’s replacement.

“[Gene] can’t be duplicated or matched,” Roeper said. “That legacy stands alone.”

Though Ebert and Roeper have been colleagues at the Sun-Times for a dozen years, where Roeper’s column spans news of the day, pop culture and movies, the two journalists didn’t know each other well before Roeper’s first guest stint on the show last spring. Roeper, who has done radio and TV commentary in Chicago, said he felt comfortable right away with the format and with Ebert.

“I’d grown up watching the show, and I knew Gene,” he said. “It was like walking through the looking glass to be on that set. But when we started, it felt very natural.”

Ebert, whose TV partnership with Siskel was synonymous with movie reviewing, said it was “very traumatic” in the beginning to do the show with new co-hosts; he did the program alone a number of times. But the give-and-take dynamic was vital, he said, so the search began for a co-host who could engage in spontaneous discussions and wasn’t intimidated by him. “It’s important that the person stand up to me, plant their feet in the center of the ring and stay there,” Ebert said.

The co-hosts never discuss the movies before the show, which is taped live, with retakes only for technical reasons or major flubs. Personality and chemistry mattered more than a guest host’s movie critic credentials or film school degree, Ebert said, and he’d match Roeper’s passion for and knowledge of film against anyone’s.

Three relative unknowns emerged from an eclectic group that took a turn co-hosting, including Harry Knowles (aintitcoolnews.com), Tom Shales (the Washington Post) and Janet Maslin (former critic at the New York Times). Ebert said he would have gladly worked with the other two finalists, Joyce Kulhawik and Michaela Perieira, but Roeper was the best candidate.

“He has an extremely strong grasp of popular culture and the moviegoing experience,” Ebert said. “He’s direct, quick and perceptive. He’s a very hard-working newspaperman.”

Not to say they haven’t already disagreed, and have surprised each other in the process. Ebert gave a thumbs up to “Scary Movie,” which Roeper loathed, and to “Chuck & Buck” and “The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle,” both of which Roeper panned. They both gave thumbs down to the indie film “Trixie,” but for wildly divergent reasons. (Contrary to popular myth, Siskel and Ebert only disagreed about 25% of the time, Ebert says.)

Roeper, a native of Chicago, will continue to write his daily column, which is syndicated nationally. He likely will scale back on the movie-themed stories, though, so as not to duplicate material from the TV show. He says he can’t quite define his style of movie reviewing. “I don’t think I have one, and I won’t try to manufacture one.”

Instead, he’ll give his opinion on the show as he would to a friend who asked if the flick was worth $9. He shares Ebert’s passion for art films, documentaries and other small-budget fare. “It’s a big responsibility to know that someone worked for years on a movie, and in four minutes of a TV show, some joker can decimate it,” Roeper said. “But my primary responsibility is to the people who will see the movie, not the people who make them.”

Ebert says he looks forward to studying the effect 300 movies a year will have on his new partner, who already was making it to about 100 films a year. “It’ll be interesting to see how he reacts to this total immersion,” Ebert said.

For Roeper’s part, keeping in mind that many moviegoers have to call a baby-sitter, drive to the theater, and pay dearly for parking, admission and treats, he feels fortunate.

“I’ve told my friends that if they hear me complaining in six months about getting paid to see movies all day,” Roeper said, “they should hit me in the head with a mallet.”

*

“Ebert & Roeper and the Movies” can be seen Sundays at 6:30 p.m. on ABC.