Siskel&Ebert Johnny Handsome, Queen of Hearts, Erik the Viking 1989

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 20 жов 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 21

  • @strooomon
    @strooomon 4 роки тому +7

    I loved these 2 growing up. Watching today, it is disappointing how often they talk about the endings. Still, the most relevant film critics of my time

  • @pi6835
    @pi6835 3 роки тому +3

    Johnny Handsome is one of Rourke’s best films, and Barkin is smoking hot!

  • @emcsquare5045
    @emcsquare5045 3 роки тому +1

    Haven't seen it in many years but I remember loving Erik the Viking.

  • @mikedorsey7119
    @mikedorsey7119 5 років тому +5

    Wow I remember my mom taking me to see Erik when I was a kid.

  • @kramnosenhoj
    @kramnosenhoj 6 років тому +10

    These guys nailed Johnny Handsome.

  • @donovanfarr1
    @donovanfarr1 8 років тому +22

    Johnny Handsome is an underrated classic. I'm glad to see these guys gave it a positive review.

    • @rexfellis
      @rexfellis 5 років тому +5

      d farr I know it's been 2 years since you posted this, but I just came to the contents to say the same thing. I think it's one of MIckey Rourke's better films.
      It also kind of mirrors real life, only in reverse. He was a heartthrob to all of the ladies back in the day and now he's just scary looking as all hell.

  • @ragingbull2271
    @ragingbull2271 Рік тому +1

    Johnny Handsome is an awesome flick. Criminally underrated too. Great performances all around especially by Ellen Barkin and Elizabeth McGovern.

  • @jjm2389
    @jjm2389 6 років тому +4

    I saw Queen of Hearts, and its everything they said it was: truly magical.

  • @SmithFilms2009
    @SmithFilms2009 7 років тому +6

    I remember on first watching "Johnny Handsome" that I didnt like it. Watched it again 9 years later & I think its a great underrated flick from the late '80s. Glad that Siskel & Ebert gave it a positive review :)

  • @RandyHawkeye
    @RandyHawkeye 4 роки тому +2

    Their debate about War Party is a perfect example of why I loved these two. They got into it and really argued about it, not using cheap shots, but not holding back strong opinions about the movie and whether it reflects a dynamic of racism that still holds today (or in 1989). They weren't trying to score points or "own" each other. They just really cared about the toppic they were arguing. The movie itself seems not great, but at least it's an interesting and unique idea, and I might be curious enough to watch it some day.

    • @sha11235
      @sha11235 4 роки тому +1

      I like Roger's print review of War Party.

  • @marcomacias3960
    @marcomacias3960 4 роки тому +2

    do you have ones with Mac & Me. I want Siskel & Ebert to say about that movie.

    • @fabiobonetta5454
      @fabiobonetta5454 4 роки тому +2

      Ebert gave It a zero stars review if I'm not mistaken, you can check It on Ebert.com. whether you agree or not his reviews are wonderfully written and ( in case of bad movies) often very funny

  • @dzanier
    @dzanier 6 років тому +2

    i liked it.

  • @borednow5838
    @borednow5838 8 років тому +4

    Their disagreement over War Party makes me want to see it just to make up my own mind. Erik the Virkin doesn't seem my kind of thing.

    • @ronaldh8446
      @ronaldh8446 8 років тому +3

      War Party was MEH. It has its moments but was incredibly heavy-handed.

  • @gradeacontent-o1751
    @gradeacontent-o1751 Рік тому

    6:26

  • @stevenclarke8773
    @stevenclarke8773 3 роки тому +2

    Mickey rourke early in his career was an interesting and smooth type actor.But as he got older,he got nuttier personally, and had the facial surgery so thats when it wjent down the dumper[ although the wrestler was a good performance.]johnny handsome was so so ..........

  • @CelestialWoodway
    @CelestialWoodway 5 років тому +3

    Modern movies suck. Too many CGI shitfests.