These really never get old

The disagreement they articulate to each other over Hero At Large is a perfect example of what made their partnership so much fun.

This sure does bring back nice memories. In 1980 i was 11 years old and i was going to the movies with my then best friend at least once a week, every week, from the 1970s-1980s. We were both a couple of fanatics about the movies. We talked, read, ate, drank, and slept the movies (and yes, we religiously watched siskel and ebert together every week on his living room tv). We tried to see every new movie that came out regardless of plot, genre (he loved horror movies, I preferred comedy), critics reviews, or who starred in it. And Hero At Large just happened to be one of the many new movies we saw that year because it just came out. I rather enjoyed it. There certainly was something magical about the movie theatergoing experience in itself in those years. Going to the movies every week in the 1970s-1980s with my best friend is among my most fondest, happiest memories of my entire life.

One of the many things I appreciate about William Friedkins work in the 70’s and 80’s is the fact that there are no real protagonists or “heroes”. Everyone is flawed….makes for a far more audacious and challenging film (and yes I’m counting Deal of the Century)

And they just keep coming. Thank you!

From reading William Friedkin's autobiography, he said that he meant to reveal Al Pacino as the killer at the end of Cruising. To me, it was always funny that audiences in 1980 were more horrified to think that Al Pacino's character was now gay than that he might have been the murderer!

13:45 Ali McGraw had 15 projects in 30 years, and a lot of those were TV movies. She was popular when she showed up on screen but nobody ever demanded her presence in a movie. Kinda sad, there was nothing wrong with her.

honestly i dont know if "Cruising" was good or not but i always liked it. i dont now what appeals to me about it but i have just always loved those dark gritty old dangerous New York type films that there were a slew of in the late 70s and early 80s. there was something about them that i sort of romanticized about as a kid living in a boring small country town. i guess old dirty dangerous New York itself was one of my favorite actors or characters back in the late 70s early 80s. even when the films werent that great.

I liked Saturn 3. Very silly movie, but entertaining. A schlocky classic.

"Cruising" is a good movie, but a tough one to watch. I tuned in to this one, as I forgot what their reviews were on "Hero At Large". This movie, like so many back then, went straight to HBO after leaving the theaters. As a kid, I was already a John Ritter fan because of "Three's Company", Ann Archer was well-known, along with the rest of the cast. It was a fun, good, feel-good movie with a great message. And this movie came out at a time when space movies were the hot thing...not superheroes. Not that I'm big on remakes, but I think it's a movie that could be remade today, in the cinema world full of superhero movies, and still have that same sentiment. Maybe it wouldn't play as innocent as the original, but they wouldn't have to go too dark with it.

I enjoy Cruising - Al Pacino is terrific in it. Just Tell Me What You want was good too. Haven't seen the other 3 movies.

Cruising is a great movie. These guys have suburban vanilla taste.

I like Hero At Large. I'll watch anything John Ritter was in. Saturn 3 is one of those terrible movies I enjoy.

Having just seen Cruising for the first time this past year, I thought it was fantastic. Visually beautiful and a haunting, dark detective story. While the movie isn’t quite as great as it could’ve been, I’d still rank just under Friedkin’s best movies (Exorcist, Sorcerer, French Connection) and found it satisfying. I didn’t find the violence gruesome at all, some very basic stabbing scenes aren’t anywhere near as brutal as the shoot out scene in Taxi Driver for instance, which is also even more stylized. I find myself wincing at a lot of gore in films, but Cruising didn’t even begin to bother me. As for the depiction of the underground gay world, I don’t see how it’s so bad, it’s taken as seriously as it would if these characters were all straight. Having read a handful of articles and reviews from gay men who’ve seen the movie - they agree; this is a serious film that plunges itself into a dark part of that community and doesn’t talk down to the characters because they’re gay. It’s too bad Gene and Roger could not see the strengths of this movie.

Personally, I HATED the 1980 movie, "Cruising," because of the dark nature of the film's plot, which was based on a rather forgotten novel, and I saw it only once on video and it was really hard to watch indeed. As a straight male, I really understood what the LGBTQ community had protested the movie at the time as well. Nowadays, I am glad that there have been plenty of much better movies about LGBTQ people and how their lives have been portrayed in the world, too.

Watching Al Pacino dancing in films like "Cruising" & "Scarface"" is more memorable than Travolta in Saturday Night Fever & more satisfying than opioids.

I enjoyed Last Married Couple in America a lot more than they did. Natalie was superb, as always.

arthur murray lol

I wish they would have continued with the Dog of The Week segment, or something similar, on their subsequent review shows. God knows there is never a shortage of lousy movies.

Spot rulez

I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks Cruising is a bad film.

Siskel and Ebert are great reviewers, i know that some movies they review people dont agree with, but they are the set trends for movie critics, now i think they shaped that genre, and there wont be another like them, see the letterman interviews by don giller on youtube they are great, and at the end emotional. Im not gonna watch the movies, they mentioned, maybe cruising, but a big maybe, and i feel like i already watched it as well, but i dont remember, is anything good about that film, im watching John Ritter movie, since i finished threes company, and hes amazing in that in physical comedy. and its a great show first saw in on ME tv big fan, and then channel 5.2 in the states, and i was hooked, and had to watch all the show, i like fraternity/ actor john ritter, so i wanted to see his movies, and so i watched his 70s films before, so this movie hero at large captain avenger 1980, i thought it was great, but physically i think john ritter cant fight, i dont buy he can fight people, i mean physcially he cant, physical humor yes, right there with laurel and hardy, leslie nelson, three stooges, but fighting not that great, similar to roger moore fight scenes in the bond films or pierce at times, i guess, even though, he sells packing a punch, i agree with siskel and ebert, i understand both views and where they are coming, from at times i can see people reading a script also at times, i liked the drama and the theme of the movie, but it ends so abruptly i thought there would be more, but i guess maybe it just to make a point or a lesson, i like the chase scene, and him getting shot, and realizing how deadly super heros can be. And its funny since its parodying i think captain america, or marvel super heros, but thats a big thing in the future, similar last american hero, which i have to finish that show, since it stopped abruptly like this movie, i like the themes at times, and the threes company humor in the rooms was great, but i dont like the abruption ending, i wish, maybe it could end in a more satisfying way, but its enjoyable none the less, and could be remade in the influx of comics book movies, that we have now, or do a spy movie in the vain of this, that would be fun, like a guy wanting to be a super secret agent, only to know, its not what you see in the movies. i would give it 4/5 stars i enjoyed it, but could have been better, review will be on my letterboxd CinemaEscape.

SATURN 3... Kirk Douglas treated Farrah so awful making that flick. Bastard.

I'm a big fan of Last Married Couple in America. Wow were these two uptight back in the day! "Oh no, it's an adult movie about adults but they say (gasp) four letter words! And it's dirrrtyyy!" (Siskel faints). Please, it's a comedy that also has fun with the common morality of the day. I always saw it as a sequel to Bob and Carol and Ted And Alice. The scene they showed with the main characters fighting was 10x more lighthearted and entertaining than the one shown from that dismal looking Alan King movie. An angry woman beats the crap out of a man, while destroying a store - and S&E thought that was light and funny. Most of their reviews here definitely didn't age well. Like saying "So gay people are offended by a homophobic, gay panic movie? So what! That's their problem. And who care what Italians think too!" They were so uptight they could create diamonds out of coal, if you know what I mean. Ebert always acts like he didn't write that Valley of the Dolls sequel while he's so pretentious about other movies. But then that was how most men like them behaved back in the day.

I can only think Al Pacino's only attraction to work on cruising was the chance to work with the director of the exorcist and the French connection there was nothing intriguing about his character or the subject matter but by this time friedkin was fast becoming a has been director, plus Al may had saw it as a challenge to do such a part but boy what an ugly movie.

roger or gene should of put the last married couple in america on thier dogs of the week list

Who in their right mind would cheat on Natalie Wood.

Wood is one of the most overrated actors of all time.

Cruising was a bad bad movie. The gay men are cartoon caricatures, their dialogue is embarrassing, and the villain is a wacko cartoon caricature. They never do find out who the villain is, by the way.

Sponsored by PBS, and woke AF.