Відео

Siskel really missed the plot here...

I miss this world. I feel sorry for kids that don't know the 90s and the world before the internet. We were different people then.

On crime films, Ebert loved Casino and Scarface while Siskel didn't recommend either....

Siskel was right. The story line is bland with no real resolution. My biggest issue is that deniro is the furthest thing from a Jewish casino operator that you could find. Rothstein should’ve been played by someone else.

GoodFellas is a masterpiece, alongside The Departed. Different slices of criminal life, and incredibly real.

Every movie reviewed by them was over the top and way too much analyzed and nobody really cared about what they thought

I usually agree with Ebert over Siskel, but in this case I think Siskel is spot on. CASINO is interesting as a docudrama, but fails as an actual drama.

Best picture ever

Roger Ebert looks like a lesbian.

Truth is in the middle…it was a good to very good movie, but still a thumbs-up….but definitely not as good as Goodfellas.

How Robert De-Weirdo has fallen

Siskel finally makes a good review Casino is overrated

Maybe a hot take…I like Casino more than Goodfellas.

I kind of agree with Siskel. It's Goodfellas in Vegas. It's like that adage; it's a distinction without a difference.

I believe this is the rare case of one critic way under appreciating a film and the other way over appreciating it.

an ALLTIME best movie

I miss Siskel and Ebert

Gene is right but it’s still not a thumbs down.

Educated imbeciles?

Casino has aged well. I like it more each time I watch it.

I saw the film twice, I just couldn't get into it :/ (I think I couldn't like Ray Liotta)

What an ignoramus that journalist is

I AGREE WITH ROGER EBERT. A GREAT, GREAT MOVIE! I HAVE SEEN IT AT LEAST 10 TIMES. I PERSONALLY THINK THAT IT’S BETTER THAN GOODFELLAS. Definitely fun to watch. But just not on a date.

Loved Goodfellas but not this movie. I agree with Siskel on this one. Thumbs down.

Just goes to show you that the "experts" are out of touch with the audience

Gene please. This is Lester type stuff.

TRES Cool/Heavy!

I agree with Gene. I didn't like this movie much at all. It just seemed like another 2 hours of Goodfellas. All the same actors playing all the same characters. Goodfellas was fantasic. Casino? Nope.

Ebert hit it on the head. Give it a mixed review thumbs up if you have to (still crazy, IMO, but fine) but saying don't see it is just ridiculous.

It's great film because it's based on true events that happened. That's what makes Good Fellowers more chilling than even the God Father was.

Half way through his career Scorsese invented a brand new blueprint for movies. This movie is more imitated than Pulp Fiction, but the imitations are actually good. Nobody agrees with me, but I think Wolf of Wall Street might even be better than this because it's like Goodfellas but it's also a hilarious comedy.

The man had a right to dislike a movie if he pleased. I hated 'Titanic'. 'Casino' was skillfully put together, but it was a lesser work than some of Scorsese's classics.

If these two were alive today to see the crap movies that have been playing the past few years, they would have to literally have a kennel of dogs on their show for their 'Dogs Of The Week' segment. I would give anything for their review of 'Megalopolis'.

You can't always be right, Gene!

Goodfellas is of course an outstanding film, but I disagree with Ebert about it being better than The Godfather. Yes, it gives a more dynamic look at mafia life, but TG is more well rounded, patient, and rich IMO.

Pechi played a real person. Crazy person.

I'm not sure James Woods was acting.

Goodfellas is the only perfect movie ever made. Not a single second of the film is boring

was good film no doubt but siskel was right was same mafia story with few differencies

Thumbs down?! How I wish these two guys were around to see the crap Hollywood is making these days. They'd be begging for a Casino quality film.

I thought it was a good movie….not great

History agrees with Ebert

Just for the way that Scorsese captured the essential vibe of the time and place alone makes it a thumbs up. Vegas is as much a character in this film as the actors. Throw in the tour de force performances by, well, pretty much every single cast member, and the kick ass soundtrack and you have one of the better films of that time period, plain and simple. Meanwhile Siskel gives career hacks like Depalma and Ron Howard a free pass peddling their drek? Gimme a break here!

Siskel's trying to be too much of a critic.

🤱🤱🗣️🗣️☎️☎️cremarte tus pies??????

Siskel trying to be smartest guy in the room

gee talk about spoilers alert, for the time

"Casino. Ca seen it. But I liked it better the first time I saw it ... when it was called Goodfellas." -David Spade

This is one of the opinions where Siskel was much more "correct" than Ebert was. Casino is stale, and it's also hard to get through. The romance storyline, and the scenes encompassing it, are hard to watch, but not in a way that makes them interesting. It's almost like watching trauma porn. I think Casino is one of Scorsese's weakest films, ever.

“Well, as by somebody else how would you grade it?” I think Roger nailed it with that last question. If Gene didn’t know who directed it beforehand, how would he have reviewed it?