• International edition
  • Australia edition
  • Europe edition

‘He got along with people, fabulously, even ones who were said to be difficult’ … Gene Wilder in 1979

Remembering Gene Wilder: new documentary sheds light on a comedy titan

A new film uses the late actor’s voice to illustrate a career of neurotic humor on the big screen and a gentleness in real life

Generations of viewers first got to know Gene Wilder as Willy Wonka, and with a new documentary about the beloved actor, director Ron Frank argues that that’s as good a place to start as any.

The twinkling strains of Pure Imagination open the affectionately wrought Remembering Gene Wilder, transporting the audience back into fond memories of the candyman’s immortal introduction: he hobbles out to meet his adoring public with cane in hand, staggers a bit, starts to stumble, then somersaults himself into a sprightly upright stance. Like so many of Wilder’s finest moments, it was a surprise to his scene partners proving his nimble versatility as performer. He could mine humor from tension, aggravation or anxiety, but his desire to keep the public on their toes always gave way to a welcoming friendliness in his art as in his life.

In surveying the broad strokes of Wilder’s biography, however, Frank’s film acknowledges that his brilliance often posed challenges for which America wasn’t always ready. The spiky take on Roald Dahl’s famed chocolatier enchanted Roger Ebert, whose four-star review declared the adaptation the finest kids’ picture since The Wizard of Oz. But parents bristled at this Wonka, a mercurial oddball delighting in bad things happening to bad apples. “When [Willy Wonka] came out in the 70s, they thought that what it did to children – and Gene outlined this in his own book – was cruel,” Frank tells the Guardian from his home in Connecticut. “One kid disappears in a chocolate tube, another one blows up, one shrinks down. Mothers thought it wasn’t good for their children, and it died in the box office. It was only revived with the home video sales.”

In ways that weren’t always comfortable for the public to accept, the antic and serious coexisted in uneasy cooperation in the work of Wilder, starting from childhood. He often repeated a boyhood memory in which a doctor informed him that with his mother’s heart condition, he had to make her laugh instead of making her angry, or she could drop dead. Wilder grew up under the premise that comedy and pain were close cousins, evident in the development of a screen persona constantly teetering on the brink of a breakdown. (“He was good as the ‘Why is this happening to me?’ guy,” Frank says.) Family stoked his passions along with his nerves, as Wilder set a track for the footlights of New York to follow his sister. “The first time he saw his sister act, he was 11 years old, she was onstage doing a solo act,” Frank says. “The lights went down, the audience applauded, she commanded the stage, and Gene was swept away by it all. He was overcome with emotion and saw himself up there, too.”

He entered the entertainment biz just as the hilarity of neurosis was breaking out of Borscht Belt standup stages and into the mainstream, his combination of shtick and personal dysfunction a hit with an America dipping its toe into therapy and pop-psych. After cutting his teeth on and off Broadway, he landed his first film role in Bonnie and Clyde as a hostage who develops Stockholm syndrome in record time before his captors give him the heave-ho; he played a doctor wrapped up in amour fou with a sheep for nebbish extraordinaire Woody Allen in Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Sex* (But Were Afraid to Ask). At the same time, beneath the mania, “he had a very sincere gentle quality”, Frank says.

Wilder got to show off both sides to himself with his name-making role in The Producers, the first collaboration with frequent director and lifelong friend Mel Brooks. Frank structures his film with Wilder as narrator, providing voiceover from beyond the grave via the audiobook of his memoir. “I did not want to see another interview-type film with Gene,” he says. “He died in 2016, so we didn’t even have that option. We let him tell his own story, first-person.” In one such anecdote, the Embassy Pictures head, Joseph Levine, ordered Brooks to fire Wilder, who had been deemed off-putting and insufficiently famous. “You bet”, replied Brooks, only to continue shooting with Wilder until they had so much footage, it would’ve been impossible to start over. “That’s how Mel worked,” Frank laughs. “He would listen to producers, nod in agreement, and then not do anything they said.”

Gene Wilder and Kenneth Mars in The Producers

In addition to sharing a great love of French wines, Wilder and Brooks gave the world some of the most indelible comedies defining a bawdy, subversive era. Young Frankenstein – thrown together by Wilder’s agent, casting his only three clients in the lead roles – allowed both men to indulge their love of old Hollywood by meticulously recreating it, the studio suits persuaded to allow black-and-white cinematography. Blazing Saddles gestured to a different sector of the past while looking forward, its satire on race relations and the western using now-outmoded language to put forth progressive ideas about prejudice. “I get asked a lot if Blazing Saddles could be made today,” Frank says. “I think it depends more on who the audience is. Some tastes and sensitivities are so different now, that even though it pokes fun at racism, there’s a risk that it might not be seen that way.”

Wilder’s buddy-buddy dynamic with co-star Cleavon Little on Blazing Saddles pointed to the next partnership that would shape his career, with that film’s co-writer and initial lead Richard Pryor. (The executives at Warner Bros declared him uninsurable and insisted on a replacement.) Over the course of four films together, they’d forge a close bond as friends even as Pryor struggled with addictions that often threw wrenches into the production process. Wilder harbored a humanitarian streak that also colored how he chose his roles, as in their third picture together, the crime caper See No Evil, Hear No Evil. He worked closely with the New York League for the Hard of Hearing to portray a deaf man with honesty and sensitivity, and found his fourth wife in lip-reading coach Karen Webb. “[His work] was an extension of his character,” Frank says. “He was a gentle soul. He wouldn’t hurt a fly – literally, according to Karen. He got along with people, fabulously, even ones who were said to be difficult.”

Wilder’s final team-up with Pryor on the roundly rejected Another You also marked his final film appearance, his later years filled by less ambitious projects. He did a short-lived sitcom called Something Wilder and a two-episode stint on Will & Grace, but didn’t much like making TV, finding the pace of shooting more hurried than he’d gotten used to in the days of riffing with his buddies. He found pleasure in writing both memoir and fiction novels, painting, playing music and returning to his roots in the theatre. Never much of a Hollywood guy – he never got a star on the Walk of Fame boulevard – he felt more in his element at the old Connecticut farmhouse he shared with his wife until his death. Frank’s documentary suggests that acting proved most valuable to Wilder as a means of connecting to his fellow human beings, whether on set or through the screen.

“When we talked to Alan Alda, he shared a story about worrying before one of the films he directed came out, what the critics might say,” Frank recalls. “He was commiserating with Gene, who told him, ‘What difference will it make? If they pan the film, so what? Big deal! You made it, it’s finished, it’s over. Be proud of it.’ He shared that comfort with him. Gene knew how to live life well.”

Remembering Gene Wilder is out in US cinemas on 15 March with UK and Australia dates to be announced

  • Gene Wilder
  • Documentary films

Most viewed

movie review gene

Remembering Gene Wilder Review: Doc Explores a Legend

  • March 11, 2024

Gene Wilder and co-stars on the set of the film Young Frankenstein, in a photograph shown in the documentary Remembering Gene Wilder

Ron Frank’s documentary Remembering Gene Wilder looks at a comedic legend in American movie history through interviews with him and those he worked with. 

Remembering Gene Wilder is about the charisma and gravitational force of renowned actor Gene Wilder. It’s an exploration of him and his filmography, with background from his life weaved in seamlessly and grounded by his films – with key moments of life anchored to parts of his filmography. This is a rosy look on the actor, and no negative word is said. But the title should give you this sense. This is Gene Wilder in memoriam .

One of the most striking things about this documentary is that so much of it is told in Wilder’s own rich voice . The actor is no longer with us but did a lifetime’s worth of interviews, which the documentarians Ron Frank and Co. piece together in service of their narrative. This is a contemplative look at a contemplative artist. Yes, there are also other interviews, following in good documentary form. Talking head fans won’t be let down. However, the lens of this story is told from Gene’s perspective. 

Remembering Gene Wilder has a certain fondness and warmness washing over all of the films and the subjects covered – things are looked at with a particular joy. It’s the equivalent of Vaseline over the camera lens, with things getting fuzzier with recollection. When things in Gene Wilder’s life shift, the documentary gets sad. The final chapter of Wilder’s life still had smiles, but it was also marked by an unfortunate decline due to Alzheimer’s. The moments in this season of Wilder’s life are heartbreaking and will ring true, especially if you’ve had a family member or loved one in the same situation. Some clips are uncomfortable, and you see the decline of a once vibrant person slipping away. 

Although the man himself is a legend,  Remember Gene Wilder points out that Jerry Silberman (aka Gene Wilder before he took his stage name) is in there, knocking around. The documentary is not a look at the actor’s personal life alone – this is not some expose. It is very much an exploration of his life through his acting life and Gene Wilder, the professional. We meet his mom and dad in the context of what they influenced on film. We meet his wife, Gilda Radner, in the context of their meeting for a movie and how that progressed from there. It’s almost a chicken and egg situation – when you’re in the public eye, and your job is your life, so much of your life is your job. 

Gene Wilder and wife Karen Boyer pose with their dog at the dinner table, in a photograph shown in the documentary Remembering Gene Wilder

What we see of his young life – his mother, the home in Milwaukee – is framed by what it meant for his future career. There’s a moment about his mom that is the essence of Gene – his mother had a heart attack when he was 8. A cardiologist came to his house to check on his mom (not fiction, although these days it might make you do a double take) and took him aside to give him a stern warning – don’t ever argue with your mom, only make her laugh. This was a terrible burden for a child to bear, but the world is brighter because of Gene’s genuine humor. Of the people reflecting on Gene Wilder’s life, perhaps the most impactful is Mel Brooks . At the time of filming, Brooks was 97 and quite old. Brooks cherished Wilder, and that comes through in his interviews.

Brooks isn’t the only special relationship that Gene Wilder had with an icon. Remembering Gene Wilder does a deep dive into Wilder’s friendship with Richard Pryor . The two had a chemistry and emotional connection that made them a great pair on screen. As Pryor’s daughter points out, Pryor knew there was magic between them. Their magic came alive at first on Silver Streak .

There’s another reason to look at the documentary if Gene Wilder wasn’t enough for you. There are some incredibly insightful interviews with titans of cinema history : Alan Alda, Mel Brooks, and Carol Cane (shout out to Star Trek: Strange New Worlds ). They’re talking about Gene and, at the same time, giving mini-history lessons on classic films. The Producers (or Springtime for Hitler ) isn’t the Producers without Wilder for Leo Bloom. Young Frankenstein almost went to Columbia Pictures and would have been in color if Brooks and Wilder hadn’t been steadfast in it for being in black and white as a tribute to the 1934 version. You’ll pick up a ton of knowledge as you learn about history through Wilder’s life.

There is a moment in the documentary where one of the interview subjects praises the “care and specificity” in which Gene Wilder approached his role as Willy Wonka. Just like Wilder deserved the praise for that outing, so too do the filmmakers behind this inside look into the man deserve praise for the care and specificity they put into its assembly. Remembering Gene Wilder is more than a generic retrospective; it is a thoroughly researched and well-made documentary about a man to whom millions worldwide owe smiles . Forget the bio-pic (sorry, Jeremy Allen White). This is a worthwhile look for anyone who enjoys film.

Remembering Gene Wilder will be released in US theaters on March 15, 2024 .

  • TAGS: genre: documentary
  • Must Watch , TV

Ark: The Animated Series Review – Same World, New Game

  • Wesley Hunt
  • March 25, 2024

The Lie: The Murder of Grace Millane Review

  • Claire Fulton
  • Film Festivals , Interviews

I Don’t Know Who You Are Interview: M.H. Murray & Mark Clennon

  • Bethany Lola

A Cat’s Life Review: A Film for Animal Lovers

  • Clotilde Chinnici

April 2024: 10 Best New Shows to Watch

  • Loud And Clear Reviews
  • March 24, 2024

Velvet Goldmine Review: Queer Glam Tableau

  • Connor Lightbody
  • March 23, 2024

LATEST POSTS

movie review gene

movie review gene

Film Review: ‘Remembering Gene Wilder’ is a Lovely Tribute to a Legend of the Screen

' src=

Who doesn’t love Gene Wilder ? Whether it’s a Mel Brooks movie like Blazing Saddles , The Producers , or Young Frankenstein , or Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory , there was a work that made you fall for the actor. Now, we have the documentary Remembering Gene Wilder to pay tribute not just to his career, but his life as well.

Remembering Gene Wilder is incredibly respectful and downright reverent, but it never comes off as fan service. The doc legitimately plays like a filmmaker, as well as his colleagues/friends over the years, wanting to talk about their love for Gene. That intimate feeling from the talking heads, as well as plenty of clips, gives any fan of Wilder’s a fitting tribute to the man. If you somehow have no clue who he is, well, you need to fix that, but this is also a solid entry point.

movie review gene

The documentary celebrates not just the life, but also the legacy, that Gene Wilder left behind. Whether it’s his first collaboration with Mel Brooks in The Producers , his iconic turn as Willy Wonka, or the buddy comedies he made with Richard Pryor , we see how these roles shaped the love that the industry has for the man. There’s also plenty about himself, showcasing a portrait of an incredibly talented individual who also happened to see the world in a very unique manner.

Alongside the talking heads that show up, including Alan Alda , the aforementioned Brooks, and Carol Kane , Wilder himself helps to narrate. Pulling from his audiobook memoir, you hear some of his life and thoughts in his own words. That makes the feeling even more intimate. By the end, when the friends are giving final tributes, you’ll feel like you’ve known him as long as they have.

movie review gene

Director Ron Frank and writer Glenn Kirschbaum keep the warm feelings flowing. There isn’t a lot of style on display here, but the let the late Wilder often tell his own story. The talking heads are solid, with Brooks certainly the most compelling, and the clips chosen are excellent, but it’s in observing Wilder himself that this pays off most consistently. Frank and Kirschbaum aren’t reinventing the wheel, but they’ve found an effective way to share in the love that so many have for this man.

Remembering Gene Wilder is a very pleasing experience. You’re not necessarily going to learn anything new here, but it’s a celebration, as well as somewhat of a vibes piece. Unless you somehow don’t enjoy Gene Wilder’s comedy, you’re going to get something out of this documentary. It’s a fitting tribute to a wonderful talent.

Share this:

' src=

Loading…

Gene Wilder Mel Brooks Remembering Gene Wilder

' src=

Written by Joey Magidson

movie review gene

Yorgos Lanthimos Brings His ‘Kinds of Kindness’ This June!

movie review gene

Interview: Rita Moreno, Connor Kalpopsis, Ramona Young, and Director Maureen Bharoocha Discuss ‘The Prank’

© 2020 Awards Radar | All rights reserved.

Username or Email Address

Remember Me

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Privacy policy.

To use social login you have to agree with the storage and handling of your data by this website.

Add to Collection

Public collection title

Private collection title

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.

Always Be On Our Radar

Subscribe now to be added to our newsletter and to automatically be entered for upcoming drawings!

Don't worry, we don't spam

Letterboxd — Your life in film

Forgotten username or password ?

  • Start a new list…
  • Add all films to a list…
  • Add all films to watchlist

Add to your films…

Press Tab to complete, Enter to create

A moderator has locked this field.

Add to lists

Remembering Gene Wilder

Where to watch

Remembering gene wilder.

2023 Directed by Ron Frank

This loving tribute to Gene Wilder celebrates his life and legacy as the comic genius behind an extraordinary string of film roles, from his first collaboration with Mel Brooks in The Producers, to the enigmatic title role in the original Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, to his inspired on-screen partnership with Richard Pryor in movies like Silver Streak.

Gene Wilder Mel Brooks Harry Connick Jr. Ben Mankiewicz Peter Ostrum Carol Kane Rain Pryor Richard Pryor Zero Mostel Gilda Radner

Director Director

Executive producers exec. producers.

Julie Nimoy David Knight

Writer Writer

Glenn Kirschbaum

Editor Editor

Heath Point Productions

Documentary

Releases by Date

20 jul 2023, theatrical limited, 15 mar 2024, 30 apr 2024, releases by country.

  • Premiere San Francisco Jewish Film Festival 43
  • Theatrical limited NR

90 mins   More at IMDb TMDb Report this page

Popular reviews

Alexander Scott

Review by Alexander Scott ★★★½ 1

On a slow weekday afternoon in 2005, I was working alone in a record store when the phone rang. The voice on the other end had a familiar musical lilt.

“Hello, this is Gene Wilder. I believe you have a CD I ordered.”

I quickly fished through our special order bin, and I’ll be damned if there wasn’t a CD of classical music with “Gene Wilder” scrawled on the affixed post-it note. “Yes sir, I have it in my hands.”

“Ok, great. I’m on my way now. But if I can’t find parking, can you just bring it out to me?”

“We have plenty of spaces open,” I observed, looking out the store’s large picture window. “You should be fine.”

“But if there aren’t any by the time I arrive?”

“We’ll make it work.”

Reader, he found a parking space.

And that’s how I will always remember Gene Wilder.

yowiescope

Review by yowiescope

everything I could aspire to be and more, more, more…

mackiberg

Review by mackiberg

Emotional rollercoaster. Definitely a privilege to see this in a theater full of older jewish folk.

BoobMcNutt

Review by BoobMcNutt ★★★

A very wikipedia page of a doc, but, hey, I love Gene Wilder. He was the best. Gives a good look at his lesser known non-Richard Pryor post-Mel Brooks work that I now wish to explore.

tictactova

Review by tictactova ★★★★

seen at the Hartford Jewish Film Festival -- i was definitely the youngest person in the audience by a couple decades lol. not a perfect documentary by any means but a lovely tribute to one of the most adorable and effective comedians of the 20th century. just the sound of Mr. Wilder's voice brings me comfort :') what an icon

lucaskingweber

Review by lucaskingweber

what a guy…gonna watch young frankenstein later

ellawill

Review by ellawill ★★★★

Man really nothing is what it used to be: movies, comedy, honing a craft, having a talent, Hollywood, courtship, etc.

TIARA GRACE STARKS

Review by TIARA GRACE STARKS ★★★★★

Teared up a few times. No biggie! His wife showed up to speak about the film and it was truly such a pleasure just to be in her presence.

bgrebey

Review by bgrebey ★★★★★

Amazing man amazing career.

David A.M. Wilensky

Review by David A.M. Wilensky ★★ 1

A real Wikipedia article of a documentary. Opening night of San Francisco Jewish Film Festival.

ETA: At the after-party, a generational divide emerged. Younger viewers, like myself, were unimpressed. But people who saw Blazing Saddles in theaters when it came out were moved.

SiftPop

Review by SiftPop ★★★★

"If you love film, this is a wonderful exploration of one of the greatest comedic performers of all time. If you love Wilder himself, this will take you on an unexpectedly emotional journey through his life." - Shane

www.siftpop.com/remembering-gene-wilder-movie-review/

Stephen Michael Brown

Review by Stephen Michael Brown ★★★½

One of the great comic actors of film is immortalized with a warm tribute in Ron Frank’s documentary “Remembering Gene Wilder.” chock-full of clips, interviews, behind the scenes footage and the title subject’s own narration from the audiobook of his 2005 memoir. Mel Brooks is always an enjoyable interview, and he doesn’t disappoint here with his sentimental observations. The best parts of the film involve recollections of work on Brooks films The Producers,” “Blazing Saddles” and “Young Frankenstein” plus “Willy Wonka” and his series of pairings with Richard Pryor. The late stages of Wilder’s life are marred by tragedy, which is covered gracefully. The film is a solid if uninspired largely chronological telling of Wilder’s life without too many surprises. Unlike many of the actor’s most memorable manic performances, the film could have been just a little wilder.

Select your preferred poster

Cookie banner

We use cookies and other tracking technologies to improve your browsing experience on our site, show personalized content and targeted ads, analyze site traffic, and understand where our audiences come from. To learn more or opt-out, read our Cookie Policy . Please also read our Privacy Notice and Terms of Use , which became effective December 20, 2019.

By choosing I Accept , you consent to our use of cookies and other tracking technologies.

Follow The Ringer online:

  • Follow The Ringer on Twitter
  • Follow The Ringer on Instagram
  • Follow The Ringer on Youtube

Site search

  • March Madness
  • What to Watch
  • Bill Simmons Podcast
  • 24 Question Party People
  • 60 Songs That Explain the ’90s
  • Against All Odds
  • Bachelor Party
  • The Bakari Sellers Podcast
  • Beyond the Arc
  • The Big Picture
  • Black Girl Songbook
  • Book of Basketball 2.0
  • Boom/Bust: HQ Trivia
  • Counter Pressed
  • The Dave Chang Show
  • East Coast Bias
  • Every Single Album: Taylor Swift
  • Extra Point Taken
  • Fairway Rollin’
  • Fantasy Football Show
  • The Fozcast
  • The Full Go
  • Gambling Show
  • Gene and Roger
  • Higher Learning
  • The Hottest Take
  • Jam Session
  • Just Like Us
  • Larry Wilmore: Black on the Air
  • Last Song Standing
  • The Local Angle
  • Masked Man Show
  • The Mismatch
  • Mint Edition
  • Morally Corrupt Bravo Show
  • New York, New York
  • Off the Pike
  • One Shining Podcast
  • Philly Special
  • Plain English
  • The Pod Has Spoken
  • The Press Box
  • The Prestige TV Podcast
  • Recipe Club
  • The Rewatchables
  • Ringer Dish
  • The Ringer-Verse
  • The Ripple Effect
  • The Rugby Pod
  • The Ryen Russillo Podcast
  • Sports Cards Nonsense
  • Slow News Day
  • Speidi’s 16th Minute
  • Somebody’s Gotta Win
  • Sports Card Nonsense
  • This Blew Up
  • Trial by Content
  • Wednesday Worldwide
  • What If? The Len Bias Story
  • Wrighty’s House
  • Wrestling Show
  • Latest Episodes
  • All Podcasts

Filed under:

  • The Ringer Podcast Network

Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert: Movie Critics for the People

In this excerpt from The Ringer’s narrative podcast series ‘Gene and Roger,’ Brian Raftery explores how Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert set the standard for movie reviewing in the ’80s

Share this story

  • Share this on Facebook
  • Share this on Twitter
  • Share All sharing options

Share All sharing options for: Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert: Movie Critics for the People

movie review gene

When Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert first started working together, they worried they’d end up embarrassing themselves on TV. Instead, they became cult icons—and then, ultimately, full-on superstars.

“If you did a huge survey of the country, there aren’t that many people, probably, who give a darn about movie criticism as it goes on,” Tom Shales, a Pulitzer-winning TV critic for The Washington Post said. “But they got people to care, and tricked them into watching, sort of, by turning it into a kind of a soap opera: The adventures of Roger and Gene.”

But it took a lot of practice to make the “soap opera” that was Sneak Previews work. Before each taping, the critics spent the week taking in as many films as possible. Once the screenings were done, everyone would gather at the fake movie-balcony for the show’s Thursday taping.

The Sneak Previews format didn’t change much in those first few years. What did change was Siskel and Ebert themselves. After a few stiff early appearances, the critics began to loosen up: Their conversations felt easy and natural—even when they were arguing. And they got a kick out of celebrating the kinds of films that critics weren’t supposed to take seriously.

Keep in mind, this was on PBS—which back then wasn’t known for monster-movie reviews. It was “prestige TV” before that even became a thing. PBS was where you watched Masterpiece Theatre and the Kennedy Center Honors. But even though Siskel and Ebert were on a respected national network, they never came off as too lofty. And much like superstar-chef Julia Child, another public-TV celebrity, Siskel and Ebert had a talent for making something that seemed intimidating feel accessible. As film critic Carrie Rickey points out, that relatability was a big part of Gene and Roger’s early success.

“Here are these Midwest guys,” Rickey said, “and the thing about being in the Midwest is that you could be an intellectual, but you didn’t flaunt it. They had this very refined palate, but they talked about the things they loved like Joe Six-pack. ... They could make sophisticated arguments in that language.”

Quentin Tarantino, who came of age in the ’70s, when local newscasts and TV shows had their own on-air movie critics, knew that the competitors couldn’t connect with viewers the way Gene and Roger did. “Siskel and Ebert put all those guys out of business,” Tarantino said. “Once everybody knew who they were, then they were the movie critics for the people. And everyone was kind of interested, watched the show to see what they said. And then you saw thumbs-up or thumbs-down. You knew, without knowing the content of the review, you know what they thought about it.”

On Sneak Previews , Gene and Roger tackled issues you rarely heard being discussed on television back then. Entire episodes were devoted to how Hollywood treated Black characters, and to how horror movies treated women. Nowadays, these kinds of in-depth movie conversations can be found anywhere, 24 hours a day: on podcasts, subreddits, and Twitter threads. Or even just in a text chain between you and a friend. The modern film discourse is everywhere you read, everywhere you look, everywhere you listen.

But in the Sneak Previews era, for millions of people, Siskel and Ebert were the discourse. Within two years of its debut, the show was being carried on nearly 300 PBS stations around the country. That meant Siskel and Ebert were reaching smaller cities and towns too.

By the spring of 1982, Sneak Previews was drawing millions of viewers each week. Enough to make it the most popular half-hour show in public-TV history. And Gene and Roger had finally landed in powerful markets like Los Angeles and New York—hugely influential cities that had once shut the show out.

With Sneak Previews taking off across the country, Gene and Roger were suddenly in demand. It wasn’t just the late-night shows like Saturday Night Live and Late Night With David Letterman that were after them. At one point, they were even asked to play themselves in the ’80s comedy Strange Brew —an offer they declined.

That newfound fame had an unforeseen side effect as well: It made the competition between the two critics all the more intense.

Brian Raftery is the author of Best. Movie. Year. Ever.: How 1999 Blew Up the Big Screen . His work has appeared in Wired , New York , and GQ .

Next Up In Gene and Roger

  • The Lasting Impact of Siskel and Ebert
  • Tragedy Strikes Siskel and Ebert
  • Siskel and Ebert vs. the Academy
  • The Siskel and Ebert Wannabes
  • Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert vs. the ’80s Blockbuster
  • “Is the Room Big Enough for Both These Guys?” 

Sign up for the The Ringer Newsletter

Thanks for signing up.

Check your inbox for a welcome email.

Oops. Something went wrong. Please enter a valid email and try again.

movie review gene

Would the ‘3 Body Problem’ Deadly Nanofiber Web Actually Work?

The Netflix adaptation features a climactic showdown between a ship and cutting-edge nanotechnology. You couldn’t do that in the real world … right?

movie review gene

Joey’s Unprecedented Finale: Instant Reactions

Also, who is the next Bachelorette?

movie review gene

‘3 Body Problem’ Season 1 Deep Dive

Mal and Jo give their thoughts on all the characters, the cast, and the story in the first season!

movie review gene

‘Manchester by the Sea’ With Bill Simmons, Chris Ryan, and Sean Fennessey

Starring Casey Affleck, Lucas Hedges, and Michelle Williams

Los Angeles Angels v Los Angeles Dodgers

Reporting the Shohei Ohtani Saga, The Washington Post’s Kim Mulkey Story, and ESPN’s Future With Jason Gay

Bryan is joined by Jason this week to talk about the second week of the Ohtani saga, the new ESPN documentary, and more

Oakland v NC State

Mock Madness and the Swivel Hip-Drop Tackle Rule

The guys hand out some awards to NFL draft prospects based on March Madness story lines

Breaking News

Review: Gene Hackman is listening and 1974’s ‘The Conversation’ is more relevant than ever

A man operating reel-to-reel sound equipment in the movie “The Conversation.”

  • Show more sharing options
  • Copy Link URL Copied!

The Times is committed to reviewing theatrical film releases during the COVID-19 pandemic . Because moviegoing carries risks during this time, we remind readers to follow health and safety guidelines as outlined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and local health officials .

Celebrated in its time yet ahead of it, powerfully entertaining as well as prescient, Francis Ford Coppola’s writing and directing triumph “The Conversation” is back in town as disturbing and unnerving as ever, if not more so.

Starring Gene Hackman in one of his signature roles, this 1974 film did not lack for accolades back in the day, winning the Palme d’Or at Cannes and getting nominated for three Oscars, including best picture (the award went to that other Coppola film, “The Godfather, Part II.”) Not only is “Conversation” back for a full week run at Landmark’s Nuart in West Los Angeles, it is being screened in a newly struck 35 mm print, which means the marvelous grain and texture of Bill Butler’s edgy cinematography is on full display.

Also much to be admired is Walter Murch’s legendary sound design and an unsettling score by David Shire that resulted from Coppola giving the composer the script to read long before the film was shot.

But the heart of “The Conversation’s” appeal, then and now, is the way it combines an exceptional character study, a thriller plot and an ability to superbly convey the unease of a society where blanket surveillance is getting to be the norm.

Harry Caul, impeccably played by Hackman with a fine combination of technique and intuitive feeling, looks like the most ordinary of men as he schlumps around San Francisco, his translucent raincoat flapping in the wind, but he is anything but.

Brilliant, obsessive, deeply religious and possibly damaged, Harry is a master of surveillance technology, a legend his competitors call “the best bar none.”

Awkward and enigmatic in person, Harry goes to great pains to avoid human interaction. His apartment is guarded by three locks and an alarm system, he has no home phone anybody knows about, and his most revealingly personal moments come when he takes out his saxophone and plays along with jazz records.

Harry has managed to maintain a sort of relationship with the insecure Amy (a tip-top Teri Garr) but though he insists to her that “I don’t have any secrets,” when she innocently asks him ordinary questions he gets completely unnerved.

On the job, however, Harry is focused and unstoppable, and “The Conversation” opens in San Francisco’s Union Square, where young couple Ann (Cindy Williams) and Mark (Frederic Forrest) are wandering among the mimes and the homeless people (another unexpectedly contemporary touch) having what appears to be the most innocuous of conversations.

But if their conversation is so innocent why, as we gradually become aware, are Harry, his top assistant Stan ( John Cazale , jittery as always) and an entire team of surveillance technicians using the most up-to-date technology to record their every word.

Stan is curious about that, but not Harry, at least not initially. Harry didn’t get to the top of the heap by being curious, and sound quality, he insists, is the only thing that matters to him.

But as we watch and listen to Harry painstakingly forcing the tapes he’s made to give up their secrets, he almost against his will starts to have his doubts, to break his first law and feel a sense of personal interest.

Though the officious Martin Stett (Harrison Ford in his last pre-“Star Wars” big screen role) warns him “don’t get involved with this,” Harry can’t help himself. He starts to fear that he has gotten in over his head. Whether he has, whether he even has any idea of what being in over his head means, is what “The Conversation” gradually reveals.

Character is obviously key to “The Conversation’s” success, with, in addition to those mentioned, Allen Garfield being especially good as Bernie Moran, a fellow surveillance expert and Harry’s bête noir .

Harry may use reel-to-reel tape, but it is finally in its portrayal of a world where everyone is listening all the time that “The Conversation” truly feels both timeless and of the moment. The consequences of that world for the surveillant as well as the surveilled is a lesson for this day and age for sure.

'The Conversation'

Rated: PG Running time: 1 hour 53 minutes Playing: Starts Jan. 28, Landmark Nuart, West Los Angeles

More to Read

Ryan Gosling in DRIVE. Courtesy of FilmDistrict and Bold Films and OddLot Entertainment

These are the 5 best L.A. heist movies

March 14, 2024

February 29, 2004. Best Original Screenplay winner Sofia Coppola.

Oscars rewind -- 2004: Sofia Coppola follows in Dad’s footsteps

Feb. 26, 2024

AMERICA FERRERA as Gloria in Warner Bros. Pictures' "BARBIE," a Warner Bros. Pictures release.

How these meaty speeches drive home the point in this season’s awards films

Feb. 12, 2024

Only good movies

Get the Indie Focus newsletter, Mark Olsen's weekly guide to the world of cinema.

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

movie review gene

Kenneth Turan is the former film critic for the Los Angeles Times.

More From the Los Angeles Times

Replcias of Golden Globe statues appear at the nominations for the 81st Golden Globe Awards at the Beverly Hilton Hotel on Monday, Dec. 11, 2023, in Beverly Hills, Calif. The 81st Golden Globe Awards will be held on Sunday, Jan. 7, 2024. (AP Photo/Chris Pizzello)

Golden Globes, back in Hollywood’s good graces, ink five-year deal with CBS

March 25, 2024

Sacha Baron Cohen in a brown suit and tie with his mouth open. Rebel Wilson in a black dress speaking into a microphone

Entertainment & Arts

Sacha Baron Cohen counters Rebel Wilson after she claims reps ‘bullied’ her over book

Lucky (Celeste O'Connor), Trevor (Finn Wolfhard), Lars Pinfield (James Acaster), Podcast (Logan Kim) and Ray (Dan Aykroyd) in Columbia Pictures' GHOSTBUSTERS: FROZEN EMPIRE.

‘Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire’ collects a cool $45.2 million at weekend box office

March 24, 2024

Kevin Bacon in grey suit and black glasses at "Leave the World Behind" premiere at the Plaza Hotel on Dec. 4, 2023.

Kevin Bacon accepts invite to prom at Utah high school where ‘Footloose’ was filmed

March 22, 2024

  • Gene Siskel Film Center
  • The Journalist
  • The Sports Fan
  • The Collector
  • What Do You Know For Sure
  • Movie Reviews
  • Awards & Highlights
  • Business Inquiries

GENE SISKEL'S MOVIE REVIEWS FOR THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE American Graffiti August 24 1973 THE SCENE was Ravinia Park .last week. A would-be folksinger had completed his last number; a pack of maybe 20 applauding teen-agers stormed the stage in a self-induced frenzy possibly to affirm the wisdom of their ticket purchases; and 20 rows behind them a 27-year-old grumbled to himself, "Stupid kids." But what about his musical taste at that age? Hadn't his crowd made "Purple People Eater" and "Alley Ooop" No.1 on the hit parade? Where was his memory? Explanation: Today's asininity quickly becomes tomorrow's nostalgia. That thought was prompted by a much-celebrated new movie that opens in Chicago today. The presumptuous title is "American Graffiti," and in its best moments it is about being teenage. Those moments are rare for two reasons: the film is bursting at its seams with late '50s memorabilia-cars, records, clothes, jargon, more cars -and the beautifully-acted characters cumulatively are too pat. An example of this perfection-to-a-fault occurs at the very beginning of the movie, which opens with a front view of Mel's Drive-in. It's dusk, and the place is empty now, the long sweep of neon that rims the place reflecting off the white lines that mark the parking stalls. Quickly, tho, the "burger city" begins to fill up as the principal cast rolls in for what must be a nightly ritual of fueling up on greasy fries. First, the wimpy kid, the kid with buck teeth and thick glasses; he barely manages to park his Vespa - it almost runs away from him. Then the doubt-filled intellectual, undecided whether he'll get on the plane tomorrow that will take him out of his familiar surroundings and into the intensely competitive world of an eastern college; he's driving an old Citroen - it has the proper tinge of musty academia. Then the innocent square, who talks a circumspect game, but really is ready to settle down with the one girl he's been dating thruout high school; his wheels belong to a Chevy Impala - already he's bought the Middle America dream. And finally, the greaser enters the picture with his kandy-kolored, custom Ford deuce coupe - his car is himself; he is his car. It's a beautiful opening, one filled with smile-producing moments of recognition. But unfortunately, the introduction doesn't stop at that point. An Edsel rolls into the drive-in in such a way that one cannot help but notice it is an Edsel. The effect is like a big finger reaching out from the screen and tapping one on the shoulder, then pointing back to a "please laugh" sign. It's too pat; the Edsel has nothing to do with the girls inside it. It's too much; it turns the scene from fluid narrative to a herky-jerky slide show of '50s cars. It takes us away from the people; it almost makes the people into cars, almost flattens them into objects. If that criticism sounds picayune, then let the particularity of it signal the strength of much of the film. For "American Graffiti" is well-made, does achieve moments of genuine emotion, and does provide a sock [hop] full of memories. The film's story is really four stories: events in the lives of the wimp, the doubter, the square, and the greaser. The stories have been cleverly condensed into one long night and morning, with the emotional bookends provided by the doubter's questioning of his desire to go to college and the resolution of that questioning. In simpler terms: Will he get on that college-bound plane in the morning? Director George Lucas intercuts among the four lives as they play out their identities and crises in their automobiles thru an evening of cruising a small city's streets. The movie was made on location in two northern California towns, and there is no question that this movie is about the teen-age lives of white California kids. The lack of black faces and the emphasis on custom cars make that quite plain. And it also is a man's movie, more precisely, a boy's movie. The girls are there only because the boys want them there, and they are defined singularly by their desire for a steady boy friend. But this is no fault; this is the late '50s, early '60s Rock 'n' Roll music fills the sound track. There are more than 40 songs, each-with the exception of "At the Hop"-performed, as they say on the current TV commercials, by their original artists. Chances are, at least a couple of your favorites are included. But again, we have the same problem of overkill. Forty plus songs is mucha music. That many songs turns the sound track into one of those golden-oldie TV Blurbs. Overkill - that's the disease that hobbles "American Graffiti" and prevents it from being the great motion picture some writers have called it. To be sure, it is worth seeing. There are times when the actors simply ring so true to memory that they stop the TV commercial, pull the plug on the "please laugh" sign. And it is in those moments that "American Graffiti" is worthy of its title. Gene Siskel Review © 1973 THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE. All Rights Reserved.

  • Scroll to top

23 Great Films Favored By Roger Ebert & Gene Siskel

ebert siskel favorites

Anyone lucky enough to have been a movie fan at some point during the three decades between 1969 and 1998 probably saw Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert review movies on television (even though they did not make their TV debut until 1975). They did so with such passion and precision, in small sound bites but with humor, intelligence, and insight, that they taught all of us how to look at movies.

It was fun to see them tear a bad movie to bits, but it was also fun to see them fight over a movie, disagreeing with one another with a vengeance. They had a particular charisma together that could not be replicated by others, and could not be replicated by Ebert once Siskel died in 1998.

A particularly special time was when they both loved a movie so dearly and deeply that you could feel it flowing from the TV screen. Some of these reviews are available to see again on YouTube, but for the record, here are the 23 films that the team loved the best.

23. Shoah (1985)

Shoah

Ebert: In a class by itself. Siskel: #1 movie of 1985, and #2 movie of the decade.

Claude Lanzmann’s 9-1/2 hour documentary on the Holocaust was made when many participants and survivors in that horrific chapter of history were still alive, but in a time before the internet or phone cameras. So Lanzmann put in an enormous amount of painful, exacting work, tracking down, interviewing, and filming anyone and everyone he could on this subject. The results are, if nothing else, powerful, and essential.

Siskel called it “the greatest use of film I’ve ever seen.” Ebert agreed, and his written review is just as awed. “For more than nine hours I sat and watched a film named Shoah, and when it was over, I sat for a while longer and simply stared into space, trying to understand my emotions.”

At the end of the year, Siskel named it the year’s best, but Ebert did not include it on his list. “Obviously it belongs at the top of the list,” he said, but did not feel right with the year’s ordinary films, so he left it off and placed it in “a special category.” His decision was controversial among list-mongers, and it’s the reason Shoah places so low on this list.

22. House of Games (1987)

House_of_Games

Ebert: #1 movie of 1987 and #10 movie of the decade. Siskel: #3 movie of 1987

Playwright and screenwriter David Mamet made his directorial debut with one of the original “twisty” thrillers, a tale of con men in which the cons unfold inside of other cons. Lindsay Crouse plays a psychiatrist who learns that one of her patients may be in danger over a gambling debt.

In a move probably not endorsed by psychiatry school, she goes to the gambler (Joe Mantegna) and asks him to erase the debt. He agrees, but only if she’ll help him pull off an elaborate con. Along the way, the audience learns all about conning and lying and “tells,” told to the rhythm of Mamet’s singular, dialogue with its punchy, repeating chunks.

Ebert wrote that “this movie is alive,” but years later admitted that he loved it because it seemed so fresh upon its initial release. Today’s movie fans may be able to spot the twists early on, but in its day House of Games was a brainy treat.

21. Hannah and Her Sisters (1986)

Hannah and Her Sisters

Ebert: #3 movie of 1986 Siskel: #1 movie of 1986

Woody Allen was on a roll when he made this great New York comedy-drama about a handful of characters connected to three sisters, cooking up with so many great characters, performances, situations, and dialogue.

Allen plays an ex-husband who searches for meaning in life through religion; in one scene he brings home a cross and a loaf of Wonder Bread. Michael Caine, as the married intellectual who is married to one sister but falls for another, and Dianne Wiest as the kooky, single third sister, both won Oscars.

Allen’s brilliant, novelistic screenplay, which takes place over a year’s time, starting and ending at Thanksgiving, won a third Oscar. Siskel said that “it’s the most life-affirming film that Woody Allen has done since Annie Hall. This is the work of a happy filmmaker, and one of the greatest that this country has produced.” Ebert agreed, adding that it was the best movie Allen ever made.

20. The Color Purple (1985)

The Color Purple

Ebert: #1 movie of 1985 Siskel: #3 movie of 1985

It’s hard to imagine a time when Steven Spielberg was struggling to be taken seriously. But if you’d made some of the top box office attractions, rollercoaster-like rides and movies for younger viewers, then you’d find it hard to be considered a “grownup” filmmaker as well. In recent years, Spielberg has managed that nicely, but The Color Purple was his first attempt.

Adapted from an acclaimed Alice Walker novel, the film takes some tough material and makes it both sweet and heartbreaking. The movie was famous for being one of the most-nominated films at the Oscars without winning a single thing. It’s also famous for Spielberg’s Best Director snub, although he was dropped to allow in Akira Kurosawa for Ran, so it was a fair trade.

In his Sun-Times review, Ebert wrote, “The Color Purple is not the story of her suffering but of her victory, and by the end of her story this film had moved me and lifted me up as few films have. It is a great, warm, hard, unforgiving, triumphant movie, and there is not a scene that does not shine with the love of the people who made it.”

19. The Emigrants (1971) & The New Land (1972)

The Emigrants (1971)

Ebert: #3 movie of 1973 Siskel: #1 movie of 1973, and one of the ten best movies of the 1970s

This two-parter was a giant-sized Swedish epic, running over six hours, released in U.S. theaters in 1973, although it has been largely absent from home video for a generation. It was based on a set of four novels by Vilhelm Moberg, and as the titles suggest, depicts the trials and tribulations of a Swedish family as they journey from Sweden to the United States.

It was directed by Jan Troell, a filmmaker that had been endorsed by none other than Ingmar Bergman. Despite its length and subject matter — and subtitles — it was a success and received universal acclaim and many Oscar nominations. Siskel and Ebert hadn’t begun their TV show yet, and writing for competing papers, they each selected the films together as a major benchmark of the year. In 1979, on a special episode of the show, Siskel mentioned the films as among the best of the decade.

18. Claire’s Knee (1971)

claire-s-knee

Ebert: #3 movie of 1971 Siskel: #1 movie of 1971

The French director Eric Rohmer was a film critic for Cahiers du Cinema in the 1950s, and a colleague of Francois Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard, and the others. While they began making films in the early 1960s and creating the “French New Wave,” Rohmer was something of a late bloomer, not finding his stride until the late 1960s and early 1970s.

With films like Claire’s Knee, he specialized in relaxed, summery films about romance among intelligent people, and their intellectual attempts to try and understand romance and all its strange nuances. In the movie, an older man on the verge of marrying becomes entranced by a young woman and entertains a notion to caress her knee. His writer friend encourages his behavior, looking for fodder for her writing; and, in fact, the film plays out in novelistic “chapters.”

“Claire’s Knee is a movie for people who still read good novels, care about good films, and think occasionally,” wrote Ebert.

17. Terms of Endearment (1983)

Terms Of Endearment (1983)

Ebert: #2 movie of 1983 Siskel: #2 movie of 1983

James L. Brooks exploded right out of a television career to make this feature directorial debut, based on Larry McMurtry’s novel. Like Woody Allen’s Hannah and Her Sisters, it’s a deft mix of comedy and drama, with strong characters and dialogue that slip effortlessly back and forth between funny and painful. The performances are all terrific; Shirley MacLaine and Jack Nicholson won Oscars and Debra Winger and John Lithgow received nominations. Siskel wrote,

“The goal is — I suspect — to reflect life with all of its energy, missed opportunities, warmth, cruelty, joy and bad luck.” It’s a very good movie, if a tad overpraised. Yet, perhaps in part because of Siskel and Ebert, or perhaps because of a subplot involving cancer that switched it from a mere character study to an Important Film, Terms of Endearment went on to win the Oscars for Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Screenplay.

20 Replies to “23 Great Films Favored By Roger Ebert & Gene Siskel”

' src=

I truly miss Sneak Previews and At The Movies. When they championed a movie, a smaller film could get distributed to little towns and actually make money!

' src=

…and of course, you can see most of the reviews here at http://siskelandebert.org/

' src=

I was a colleague of Roger and Gene’s and a film critic in Chicago (1993-1997). My picks for the years 1968-1998 are: 1. One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest 2. Jaws 3. Alien 4. ET: The Extraterrestrial 5. The Shawshank Redemption 6. 2001: A Space Odyessy 7. The English Patient 8. Out Of Africa 9. The Lion King 10. Star Wars I notice none of these are on your list. That’s the problem with “lists” of these kinds. They’re so subjective. How can you say this is the best movie of all time or this is the best song or the most handsome actor of all time when there are sooo many. For its time perhaps but not all time. ~Kilburn Hall American Author

' src=

These lists are obviously subjective.

' src=

Your list is very commercial. It looks like you chose a few top box office hits which tells me you didn’t see many other movies. What mean to say is what are the odds that the best movies in a given year are also the most popular? Virtually zero. And what constitutes a good movie is not “subjective.” What do you think they teach in Film School? Clearly, there is a large body of work that’s been compiled that demonstrates what makes up a great movie.

' src=

My favorite part is how you end your list with a criticism on the merit of lists.

' src=

One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Jaws, Alien, 2001: A Space Odyssey and Star Wars belong in the pantheon of great films, commercial or not. The others you mention are high caliber, and far better than average.

[…] Gene Siskel and Robert Ebert did not agree on much in their film reviews, but tasteofcinema.com recently revealed 23 films that they both agreed were great. As you may recall, I thank Siskel and Ebert for honing my love for movies at an early age so I publish this list with the utmost respect and agreement. You can check out the original article here. […]

' src=

Oh yeah…One False Move. What a sleeper. Thanks for mentioning it…it does belong on this great film list.

[…] And if you have some free time, check out 23 Great Films according to Ebert and Siskel […]

' src=

Just one question: how can Ebert have called Raging Bull the #2 film of its year, but the #1 film of the decade?! How does that work? How can it not be the best of the year but still be best of the decade? Very incoherent…

' src=

You do realize opinions can grow and change right? They’re not set in stone.

' src=

“though he later admitted his mistake”

' src=

According to Ebert’s site he prefered Crimes and Misdmeanors over Hannah and her Sisters

Claire’s Knee was a trifle compared to all the other heavy hitters on this list. Beautiful? Yes. Significant? Hardly.

' src=

[…] Source: https://www.tasteofcinema.com///2014/23-great-films-favored-by-roger-ebert-gene-siskel/ […]

' src=

I concur with pretty much everything you said there about the lists ! You know I was surprised that Godfather , Heat of the Night , or Legends of the Fall weren’t anywhere and these definitely carried some credentials ! Or ‘ Dogday Afternoon ‘ with Al Pacino ! God they knew how to make some great movies back then . Now it’s pretty much dead !!!

Yes opinions can most certainly change over time but regardless what Brian is saying makes sense because it’s contradictory saying the film was only number two once in the same year that ultimately is within that ten year period which claims the number 1 spot or place . Because at this point is it the number one of that decade or not ? To be the best film of the decade you pretty much have to be number one every year in my opinion’.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Tech, Media & Entertainment

15+ Best Movies About Genetics & Biotechnology (List)

movie review gene

Genetics and biotechnology are fascinating fields that have the potential to shape the future of humanity.

They have been the subject of numerous movies that explore the ethical, scientific, and social implications of these advancements.

Here are some of the best movies that explore themes of genetics, biotechnology, and the ethical dilemmas they often present, along with a brief description and the year they were released: Gattaca (1997) – A science fiction film that explores a future society driven by eugenics where potential children are conceived through genetic manipulation to ensure they possess the best hereditary traits of their parents. Jurassic Park (1993) – A science fiction adventure film that showcases the recreation of dinosaurs through the extraction and cloning of DNA from prehistoric mosquitoes preserved in amber. Splice (2009) – A science fiction horror film that follows two young scientists who create a new life form by splicing together multiple organisms’ DNA, leading to unforeseen and tragic consequences. The Island (2005) – A science fiction action thriller that portrays a society where human clones are created for organ harvesting and surrogate motherhood. The Fly (1986) – A science fiction horror film that depicts a scientist who becomes a human-fly hybrid after a housefly enters a molecular transporter he is experimenting with, causing his DNA to fuse with the fly’s. I Am Legend (2007) – A post-apocalyptic action thriller that portrays the aftermath of a virus, originally created to cure cancer, which wipes out most of mankind, leaving the rest as mutant creatures. Blade Runner (1982) – A science fiction film that explores a future where bioengineered beings, known as replicants, are created by a powerful corporation, raising questions about the nature of humanity and the ethics of creating artificial life. Ex Machina (2014) – A science fiction psychological thriller that delves into the world of artificial intelligence, exploring the creation of a highly advanced humanoid robot and the ethical dilemmas surrounding AI and consciousness. The Boys from Brazil (1978) – A thriller film that follows the story of a Nazi war criminal who plans to restore the Third Reich through the cloning of Adolf Hitler. Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) – A science fiction film that portrays the creation of a genetically enhanced chimpanzee, who leads an ape uprising, showcasing the consequences of genetic experimentation. Children of Men (2006) – A dystopian science fiction action-thriller that explores a world where women have become infertile, and the race to protect the only known pregnant woman, touching upon themes of biotechnology and the human race’s survival. Orphan Black (2013-2017) – A science fiction television series that explores the world of human cloning, focusing on a woman who discovers she is one of many clones created by a biotech corporation. Annihilation (2018) – A science fiction horror film that portrays a group of scientists exploring a mysterious zone where the laws of nature and genetics don’t apply, leading to bizarre and terrifying phenomena. Never Let Me Go (2010) – A dystopian science fiction drama that explores the lives of young people who discover they are clones created to be organ donors. Morgan (2016) – A science fiction horror film that follows a corporate risk-management consultant who must decide whether or not to terminate an artificially created humanoid being.

Below we look deeper into some of the best movies about genetics and biotechnology, highlighting their key themes, impact, and relevance in today’s world.

Table of Contents

The Island (2005)

The Island is a science fiction film directed by Michael Bay that explores the concept of human cloning and genetic engineering.

Set in a dystopian future, the movie follows the story of Lincoln Six Echo (played by Ewan McGregor) and Jordan Two Delta (played by Scarlett Johansson), who discover that they are clones created for organ harvesting.

The Island raises thought-provoking questions about the ethics of cloning and the commodification of human life.

It highlights the potential dangers of unchecked scientific advancements and the importance of individuality and freedom.

The movie’s action-packed sequences and compelling performances make it an engaging watch for both science fiction enthusiasts and those interested in the ethical implications of biotechnology.

Gattaca (1997)

Gattaca, directed by Andrew Niccol, is a science fiction film set in a future where genetic engineering has become commonplace.

The story revolves around Vincent Freeman (played by Ethan Hawke), a genetically inferior “in-valid” who dreams of working for Gattaca Aerospace Corporation.

The movie explores themes of genetic discrimination, identity, and the power of human will.

It raises important questions about the potential consequences of a society driven by genetic perfection and the limitations it imposes on individuals who do not meet those standards.

Gattaca serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of genetic determinism and the importance of embracing diversity and individuality.

Ex Machina (2014)

Ex Machina, directed by Alex Garland, is a thought-provoking science fiction film that delves into the realm of artificial intelligence and genetic engineering.

The story follows Caleb Smith (played by Domhnall Gleeson), a young programmer who is invited to administer the Turing test to an intelligent humanoid robot named Ava (played by Alicia Vikander).

The movie explores the boundaries between humans and machines, raising questions about consciousness, morality, and the implications of creating sentient beings.

Ex Machina serves as a cautionary tale about the potential dangers of unchecked technological advancements and the ethical responsibilities that come with creating intelligent life.

Blade Runner (1982)

Blade Runner, directed by Ridley Scott, is a neo-noir science fiction film set in a dystopian future where genetically engineered beings known as replicants are used for dangerous off-world work.

The story follows Rick Deckard (played by Harrison Ford), a blade runner tasked with hunting down rogue replicants.

The movie explores themes of identity, humanity, and the moral implications of creating artificial life.

Blade Runner raises questions about what it means to be human and the ethical responsibilities that come with playing god.

Its visually stunning cinematography and philosophical undertones have made it a cult classic in the science fiction genre.

FAQs – Best Movies About Genetics & Biotechnology

1. are these movies based on real scientific advancements.

No, these movies are works of fiction and often exaggerate or speculate on future scientific advancements.

However, they are inspired by real scientific concepts and raise important ethical questions surrounding genetics and biotechnology.

2. Are there any documentaries on genetics and biotechnology?

Yes, there are several documentaries that explore the real-world applications and implications of genetics and biotechnology.

Some notable examples include “The Gene: An Intimate History” and “Human Nature.”

3. Do these movies accurately portray the science behind genetics and biotechnology?

While these movies may take creative liberties for storytelling purposes, they often incorporate real scientific concepts and principles.

However, it is important to approach them as entertainment rather than scientifically accurate representations.

4. Are there any other movies that explore similar themes?

Yes, there are many other movies that delve into the themes of genetics and biotechnology.

Some additional recommendations include “Jurassic Park,” “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind,” and “Her.”

5. What are some other ethical considerations in genetics and biotechnology?

Aside from cloning and genetic engineering, other ethical considerations in genetics and biotechnology include privacy concerns related to genetic data, the potential for discrimination based on genetic information, and the equitable distribution of genetic advancements.

6. How can these movies contribute to public understanding of genetics and biotechnology?

Movies have the power to engage and captivate audiences, making complex scientific concepts more accessible and relatable.

By exploring the ethical implications and potential consequences of genetics and biotechnology, these movies can spark conversations and raise awareness among the general public.

7. Are there any real-world examples of genetic advancements similar to those depicted in these movies?

While the movies may portray extreme or fictional scenarios, there have been significant advancements in genetics and biotechnology in the real world.

For example, the development of CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing technology has revolutionized genetic research and holds great potential for medical applications.

8. Can these movies influence public opinion on genetics and biotechnology?

Movies have the ability to shape public opinion by presenting compelling narratives and thought-provoking scenarios.

While individual opinions may vary, these movies can certainly contribute to public discussions and debates surrounding genetics and biotechnology.

9. Are there any potential risks associated with genetic advancements?

Genetic advancements, such as cloning and genetic engineering, raise concerns about the potential for misuse or unintended consequences.

These risks include ethical dilemmas, the creation of genetic inequalities, and unforeseen environmental impacts.

10. How can we ensure responsible use of genetics and biotechnology?

Responsible use of genetics and biotechnology requires robust ethical frameworks, transparent regulations, and ongoing dialogue between scientists, policymakers, and the public.

It is crucial to consider the potential risks and benefits of these advancements and prioritize the well-being of individuals and society as a whole.

Summary – Best Movies About Genetics & Biotechnology

The movies mentioned above offer captivating narratives that delve into the complex world of genetics and biotechnology.

They explore the ethical, scientific, and social implications of these advancements, raising thought-provoking questions about the future of humanity.

Through their engaging storytelling and compelling performances, these movies provide valuable insights into the potential dangers and benefits of genetic engineering, cloning, and artificial intelligence.

They serve as cautionary tales, reminding us of the importance of ethical considerations and the preservation of individuality and diversity.

Whether you are a science fiction enthusiast or someone interested in the ethical implications of biotechnology, these movies offer an entertaining and thought-provoking cinematic experience.

  • Movies About Music
  • Movies About Fashion
  • Movies About Spies & Espionage
  • Movies About the Civil Rights Movement
  • Movies About the Wild West
  • Movies About the Ocean
  • Movies About Animals
  • Movies About the Renaissance
  • Movies About Ancient Civilizations
  • Movies About Space Exploration
  • Movies About Culinary Arts
  • Movies About Artists
  • Movies About Scientific Discoveries
  • Movies About Environmental Conservation
  • Movies About the Olympics
  • Movies About the Supernatural
  • Movies About the Legal System & Courtroom Drama
  • Movies About Journalism and Media
  • Movies About Aviation
  • Movies About the Medical Field
  • Movies About Technology & Innovation
  • Movies About Politics
  • Movies About Archaeology
  • Movies About Chess
  • Movies About Poker
  • Movies About American Football
  • Movies About Romance
  • Movies About Coming of Age
  • Movies About the Civil War
  • Movies About Magic & Illusions
  • Movies About Cartography & Exploration
  • Movies About Zoology
  • Movies About Martial Arts
  • Best Movies About Mountaineering
  • Best Movies About Motor Racing
  • Best Movies About Paleontology
  • Best Movies About Spirituality & Religion

Related Posts

movie review gene

How Writers Build & Diversify Their Businesses

theme of travel movies, with characters embarking on an adventurous journey

15+ Best Travel Movies (List)

Log in or sign up for Rotten Tomatoes

Trouble logging in?

By continuing, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from the Fandango Media Brands .

By creating an account, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and to receive email from the Fandango Media Brands .

By creating an account, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes.

Email not verified

Let's keep in touch.

Rotten Tomatoes Newsletter

Sign up for the Rotten Tomatoes newsletter to get weekly updates on:

  • Upcoming Movies and TV shows
  • Trivia & Rotten Tomatoes Podcast
  • Media News + More

By clicking "Sign Me Up," you are agreeing to receive occasional emails and communications from Fandango Media (Fandango, Vudu, and Rotten Tomatoes) and consenting to Fandango's Privacy Policy and Terms and Policies . Please allow 10 business days for your account to reflect your preferences.

OK, got it!

Movies / TV

No results found.

  • What's the Tomatometer®?
  • Login/signup

movie review gene

Movies in theaters

  • Opening this week
  • Top box office
  • Coming soon to theaters
  • Certified fresh movies

Movies at home

  • Netflix streaming
  • Prime Video
  • Most popular streaming movies
  • What to Watch New

Certified fresh picks

  • Love Lies Bleeding Link to Love Lies Bleeding
  • Problemista Link to Problemista
  • Late Night with the Devil Link to Late Night with the Devil

New TV Tonight

  • We Were the Lucky Ones: Season 1
  • Renegade Nell: Season 1
  • Steve! (Martin) A Documentary in 2 Pieces: Season 1
  • American Rust: Season 2
  • A Gentleman in Moscow: Season 1
  • Jerrod Carmichael: Reality Show: Season 1
  • The Baxters: Season 1
  • grown-ish: Season 6

Most Popular TV on RT

  • 3 Body Problem: Season 1
  • X-Men '97: Season 1
  • Shōgun: Season 1
  • The Gentlemen: Season 1
  • Palm Royale: Season 1
  • Quiet on Set:The Dark Side of Kids TV: Season 1
  • Manhunt: Season 1
  • The Regime: Season 1
  • Avatar: The Last Airbender: Season 1
  • The Long Shadow: Season 1
  • Best TV Shows
  • Most Popular TV
  • TV & Streaming News

Certified fresh pick

  • X-Men '97: Season 1 Link to X-Men '97: Season 1
  • All-Time Lists
  • Binge Guide
  • Comics on TV
  • Five Favorite Films
  • Video Interviews
  • Weekend Box Office
  • Weekly Ketchup
  • What to Watch

Best Horror Movies of 2024 Ranked – New Scary Movies to Watch

Best Movies of 2024: Best New Movies to Watch Now

Women’s History

Awards Tour

TV Premiere Dates 2024

Weekend Box Office Results: Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire Opens with $45 Million

  • Trending on RT
  • Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire
  • Late Night with the Devil
  • Play Movie Trivia
  • 3 Body Problem

The Package

1989, Mystery & thriller, 1h 48m

You might also like

Where to watch the package.

Rent The Package on Apple TV, Vudu, Prime Video, or buy it on Apple TV, Vudu, Prime Video.

Rate And Review

Super Reviewer

Rate this movie

Oof, that was Rotten.

Meh, it passed the time.

It’s good – I’d recommend it.

So Fresh: Absolute Must See!

What did you think of the movie? (optional)

You're almost there! Just confirm how you got your ticket.

Step 2 of 2

How did you buy your ticket?

Let's get your review verified..

AMCTheatres.com or AMC App New

Cinemark Coming Soon

We won’t be able to verify your ticket today, but it’s great to know for the future.

Regal Coming Soon

Theater box office or somewhere else

By opting to have your ticket verified for this movie, you are allowing us to check the email address associated with your Rotten Tomatoes account against an email address associated with a Fandango ticket purchase for the same movie.

You're almost there! Just confirm how you got your ticket.

The package   photos.

Army Sgt. Johnny Gallagher (Gene Hackman) is reassigned after he angers Col. Glen Whitacre (John Heard) at a meeting of American and U.S.S.R. military types. Gallagher's new job is to shepherd detainee Thomas Boyette (Tommy Lee Jones) from Europe to the U.S. But when Gallagher loses track of his prisoner, he asks his ex-wife, a servicewoman with access to Boyette's background data, for help. As the chase leads Gallagher to Chicago, the intrigue ramps up in way he couldn't have imagined.

Genre: Mystery & thriller

Original Language: English

Director: Andrew Davis

Producer: Beverly J. Camhe , Tobie Haggerty

Writer: John Bishop

Release Date (Streaming): Sep 16, 2008

Box Office (Gross USA): $9.3M

Runtime: 1h 48m

Production Co: Orion Pictures

Sound Mix: Surround

Cast & Crew

Gene Hackman

Sgt. Johnny Gallagher

Joanna Cassidy

Eileen Gallagher

Tommy Lee Jones

Thomas Boyette

Col. Glen Whitacre

Dennis Franz

Lt. Milan Delich

Ruth Butler

Kevin Crowley

Walter Henke

Reni Santoni

Chicago Police Lieutenant

Karl Richards

Thalmus Rasulala

Secret Service Commander

Andrew Davis

John Bishop

Screenwriter

Beverly J. Camhe

Tobie Haggerty

Arne Schmidt

Executive Producer

Cinematographer

Billy Weber

Film Editing

Don Zimmerman

James Newton Howard

Original Music

Michel Levesque

Production Design

Wynn Thomas

Art Director

Set Decoration

Marilyn Vance

Costume Design

Nan Charbonneau

Louis DiGiaimo

Richard S. Kordos

News & Interviews for The Package

New on Prime Video and Freevee in September 2022

Critic Reviews for The Package

Audience reviews for the package.

There are no featured reviews for The Package because the movie has not released yet ().

Movie & TV guides

Play Daily Tomato Movie Trivia

Discover What to Watch

Rotten Tomatoes Podcasts

Center for Genetics and Society logo

Movie Review: Human Nature

https://www.geneticsandsociety.org/biopolitical-times/movie-review-huma…

Poster for the movie

Human Nature , a documentary about gene editing that had been due to open in many theaters in March, is suddenly available for streaming. The movie had its premiere in March 2019 at the South by Southwest Film Conference and Festival, followed by various showings around the world. Some (including one in San Francisco ) were followed by panel discussions. The reviews are generally positive ( 95% on Rotten Tomatoes ); being able to see it at home for four or five dollars may well attract a larger audience. It’s worth a look but in some ways it’s disappointing, even disturbing.

This documentary is really three movies in one, plus a preface and epilogue. It starts with clips of molecular biologist and UC Santa Cruz chancellor Robert Sinsheimer in 1966, neatly foreshadowing today’s debates about editing genes. There follows a strikingly substantial exposition of the biology behind CRISPR, with excellent animations of the DNA editing process. The movie does not skimp on the history of CRISPR – it includes several scientists whose prior work informed the famous discoverers – and conveys a good sense of the collegial nature of modern science. That’s the best part.

Running through the film are the stories of two young patients. David Sanchez is a delightful and articulate boy with sickle-cell disease, who insists on living as best he can, despite his essential blood transfusions (“you can’t just not play basketball”). Ruthie Weiss is an equally charming girl with albinism who is also into basketball; she wants to play professionally, “but I don’t think that’s going to happen.” These are not sob stories: the patients and their families have struggled but seem to have come to terms with their lives. 

And then there are the experts, pontificating on the possible ethical ramifications of applying the technology to humans before birth. They include:

  • CRISPR co-discoverer Jennifer Doudna, who trots out her well-worn Adolf Hitler nightmare but seems enthralled by the idea of editing nature
  • Antonio Regalado, who has committed notable acts of journalism at MIT Technology Review , most famously in prodding He Jiankui into the limelight
  • George Daley, Dean of Harvard Medical School, who actively supports germline gene editing, once it is fully developed 
  • Matthew Porteus, a Stanford professor who is an expert on sickle cell disease, and was a member of the National Academies Committee on Human Gene Editing .
  • Hank Greely, Director of the Stanford Center for Law and the Biosciences, who is notoriously unmoved by the controversy, largely on the grounds that we’ll muddle through somehow
  • Bioethicist and lawyer Alta Charo, who co-chaired the National Academies Committee on Human Gene Editing and clearly agrees with Greely (citing the failure of the Nobel sperm bank ), channeling her inner Trekkie and eventually, maybe, accepting germline intervention to avoid cancer for her child 
  • George Church, a Harvard-based advocate for heritable human genome editing, being quite charming in his lab and also talking about transplanting organs from genetically modified pigs into humans, and inevitably about reviving mammoths
  • Michigan State University vice president for research Stephen Hsu, who actively encourages eugenics as long as the government is not coercive; unfortunately, not pressed about his pursuit of IQ genes or his trait-selection company , though a clip of a Nazi propaganda film shown during his presentation rather undercuts his optimism

Having the ethical concerns laid out by people who clearly don’t find them compelling undercuts the film’s attempt at exploring these issues. Does it also reflect a general slant in favor of germline editing? After all, three of the four members of Human Nature’s Scientific Advisory Board – Doudna, Daley, and Church – have openly expressed support for heritable genome editing. (The fourth, Rodolphe Barrangou , Editor-in-Chief of The CRISPR Journal, appears in the film as a bacterial scientist, technologist, and businessman.)

Human Nature offers a very narrow slice of ethical perspectives and no serious discussion of social disruption or class implications. There is a brief but clear suggestion that germline enhancements will be purchased on the open market and thus confined to the wealthy — but barely a mention of the social consequences implied by this assumption. There is also a pervasive sense that editing DNA is, or soon will be, flawless: just a quick snip here and, hey presto! a T has become an A. This message, which reinforces the false notion that we have already written down the entire Book of Life and now are merely annotating and editing it, is a major shortcoming of the movie. 

The task of explaining a firm opposition to germline editing is largely left to the redoubtable UC Berkeley geneticist Fyodor Urnov, who does double duty (as does Doudna) as science teacher and commentator. He is the unabashed co-author, with four others, of “ Don’t edit the human germ line ,” published in Nature in 2015. He stands by the argument made in that article that “heritable human genetic modifications pose serious risks, and the therapeutic benefits are tenuous.” Other concerns are expressed, or at least implied, by Vladimir Putin , Aldous Huxley , a clip from the 1997 film classic Gattaca , and a cameo by Rachel Carson , speaking with her usual clear wisdom.

David Sanchez was gently pressed, near the end of the film, for his opinion about the prospect of editing embryos so that the resulting baby would not have sickle cell disease. His response:

Hmm. I guess that’s kinda cool, that they’re thinking they could do that in the future, but I think that would be up to the kid, later. … I don’t wish that I never had it, no. I don’t think I’d be me if I didn’t have sickle cell.

Note that the only hint of a discussion about parental control , disability rights , and ableism comes from a teenager. His views are informed by his experiences, but will his words carry the same weight for viewers as the experts' do? These are topics that elicit extremely strong and divergent opinions and none of the experts addressed them at all. Moreover, in counterbalance, there are highly emotive but sadly uninformed clips from the 2015 International Summit on Human Gene Editing showing lay people demanding cures for conditions that could never be touched by gene editing.

A lot of talent and production skill went into this picture. The explanatory technique of cutting fairly rapidly between experts works very well to maintain interest, much more effectively than an omniscient narrator. The animation and the overall look of the film are excellent, and it incorporates images from a huge variety of sources. Technically it’s a fine piece of work, but the arguments seem a little stale and incomplete.

Peter Bradshaw’s review in The Guardian is nuanced (four stars out of five) and accurate:

The film is at its most intriguing in its earlier half, when it simply takes you through the growing excitement within the scientific community as the reality of Crispr emerges. … The technology is excitingly new, but the debate isn’t. Rightly or wrongly, this film ends on a note dismissing worries as overblown moral panic.

Indeed it does. The film ends with Sinsheimer, speaking about human genetic engineering more than 50 years ago: 

Ours, whether we like it or not, is an age of transition. After two billion years, this is, in a sense, the end of the beginning.

Sinsheimer was actively suggesting that “humans could be the agent of transition to a wholly new path of evolution via designed genetic changes.” In 1985, he convened a meeting in Santa Cruz that is widely credited as the spur for the Human Genome Project . (It also helped promote the institution he headed to the forefront of biological research.) Thanks partly to him, heritable human genome editing has been on the agenda ever since. Steering powerful new tools into cures for existing patients rather than enhancements for future people is one of the most important tasks of our time. Portraying germline interventions as inevitable and downplaying the social and ethical risks, as Human Nature does, works against that urgent challenge.

Related Articles

Engineering the microbiome: crispr leads the way.

Aggregated News

Scientists have genetically modified isolated microbes for decades. Now, using CRISPR, they intend to target entire microbiomes.

Humans are never alone. Even in a room devoid of other people, they are always in the company of billions of microscopic beings...

Sickle Cell Patients Face a Tough Choice: Be Cured or Have Kids

When Celenise Mahmood first learned about two new gene therapies that could cure sickle cell disease, she felt a wave of relief. 

Her 9-year-old son, Navid, has the inherited blood disorder. By age 5, he’d had over 30 life-saving blood...

CRISPR Will Likely Not Solve Bird Flu

Recently,  a group of scientists announced  a breakthrough approach to combat Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (bird flu or avian flu), a  severe illness of birds  that has  killed millions of chickens worldwide  since it emerged in 1996 and continues to...

New way for states to cover pricey gene therapies will start with sickle cell disease

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration late last year approved two breakthrough gene therapies for sickle cell disease patients. Now a new federal program seeks to make these life-changing treatments available to patients with low incomes — and it could...

The Center for Genetics and Society is fiscally sponsored by Tides Center, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. Please visit www.tides.org/state-nonprofit-disclosures for additional information. © 2023 Tides Center, through the Center for Genetics and Society. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy . Terms of Use .

  • Skip to main content
  • Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Consider This from NPR

Consider This from NPR

  • LISTEN & FOLLOW
  • Apple Podcasts
  • Google Podcasts
  • Amazon Music

Your support helps make our show possible and unlocks access to our sponsor-free feed.

Rotten Tomatoes Changed The Role Of Film Critics. But Is That A Good Thing?

movie review gene

Marquee announcing the opening of "Barbie" movie is pictured in Los Angeles California, on July 20, 2023. (Photo by VALERIE MACON / AFP) (Photo by VALERIE MACON/AFP via Getty Images) VALERIE MACON/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

Marquee announcing the opening of "Barbie" movie is pictured in Los Angeles California, on July 20, 2023. (Photo by VALERIE MACON / AFP) (Photo by VALERIE MACON/AFP via Getty Images)

If you're of a certain age, and you love movies, when you think "movie critic", you probably picture Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert and their popular TV shows. Their iconic "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" made it clear what each of them thought about a film. In some ways, the movie review website Rotten Tomatoes is the opposite of Siskel and Ebert. Their viewers depended on the insights of two individuals that they trusted, and felt they knew. Rotten Tomatoes aggregates and averages reviews from lots of critics to assign a movie a number ranking, and declare it "fresh" or "rotten". Since its launch 25 years ago, it's become the the go to site for lots of potential movie goers, offering everything they need to decide whether or not a movie is worth seeing. But for a while now, there have been complaints about the way the site ranks films. And concerns that those rankings unfairly influence whether a movie succeeds or bombs. Host Scott Detrow talks to Lane Brown, who took the site to task in a recent article on Vulture, and film critic Jamie Broadnax, editor-in-chief of the culture site, Black Girl Nerds.

  • Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Critic’s Notebook

Gene Wilder and Frida Kahlo in Their Own Words (for Better and Worse)

These documentaries draw us in by giving the sense that we’re getting the story straight from the artists. But we’re not always getting the full picture.

In a black-and-white image, Frida Kahlo looks temptingly at the camera. In her mouth is part of a string of beads that’s wrapped three times around her neck.

By Alissa Wilkinson

Famous artists are a favorite subject for documentaries right now — probably because people love to watch them. And there are a lot of different ways to tell the story of someone’s life; the more famous they were, the more tools at the filmmaker’s fingertips.

Take, for instance, the new documentary “ Remembering Gene Wilder ,” a uniformly affectionate look at the life and work of the comic actor who died in 2016. (The film opens in theaters in New York on Friday, followed by a national expansion.) Though he did perform onstage, Wilder’s most memorable work was in films like “The Producers,” “Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory,” “Young Frankenstein” and “Blazing Saddles.”

Clips from those films and many others are combined with reflections from many of Wilder’s friends and colleagues, including his frequent collaborator Mel Brooks, Alan Alda, Carol Kane, Richard Pryor’s daughter Rain Pryor and Wilder’s widow, Karen Boyer. Pictures from Wilder’s youth and home video round out a portrait of a man whom everyone describes as gentle, innocent, kind, more or less saintly — and, of course, absolutely hilarious.

There’s a danger to this kind of movie, in that viewers get the sense that they’re getting the whole story even though selection bias is inevitably at work. (“Remembering Gene Wilder” mentions only two of Wilder’s four wives, for instance, and judging from the 2018 documentary “ Love, Gilda ” — about his third wife, the comedian Gilda Radner — there’s a great deal of story left untold.) But the filmmakers made the smart choice to weave narration from the audiobook of Wilder’s memoir into the narrative, drawing the audience closer by giving the sense that we’re hearing the story straight from him.

That’s also the technique at work in Carla Gutiérrez’s new documentary, “Frida” (on Prime Video), about the painter Frida Kahlo (1907-54). Her story has been told before, of course. But Kahlo kept copious, frank diaries about her life, her thoughts and her desires, and her artwork is highly personal. The actress Fernanda Echevarría del Rivero reads from Kahlo’s journals and letters (in Spanish and English, depending on the language in which they were written), with occasional input from others close to Kahlo.

The effect is immediate and personal, as if Kahlo is sitting right there with you, being funny and passionate and scathing and vulnerable. Gutiérrez uses archival footage of Kahlo, as well as paintings that are often animated, as if you’re seeing them come to life the way Kahlo might have in her mind’s eye. The result feels more raw and unfiltered than the one in “Remembering Gene Wilder,” more private and revelatory. But Kahlo always presented herself as a woman painting outside the lines, so it’s only appropriate that a movie about her would, too.

An earlier version of this article misstated the surname of the actress who reads Frida Kahlo’s words in “Frida.” She is Fernanda Echevarría del Rivero, not Fernanda Echevarría.

How we handle corrections

Alissa Wilkinson is a Times movie critic. She’s been writing about movies since 2005. More about Alissa Wilkinson

Screen Rant

Gene hackman's 10 best movies, ranked.

Despite his retirement in 2004, Gene Hackman remains relevant for his rich legacy, which includes some of the best movies in film history.

  • Hackman's career spans from theater actor to film star, with standout performances in key roles like Bonnie and Clyde and Hoosiers.
  • His work in films like The Conversation and Unforgiven showcases his range as an actor, making him a standout in the industry.
  • Hackman's ability to play both complex dramatic roles and fun, memorable characters solidifies his legacy as a versatile and talented actor.

Gene Hackman has gained plenty of fame and recognition, receiving multiple awards for his roles in the best movies of his career. Beginning in the early 1960s as a theater actor, then rising through the ranks of film and television through bit parts and small roles, Hackman's breakthrough performance came in the 1964 film Lilith opposite Warren Beatty. Hackman would later co-star with him again in Bonnie and Clyde , one of Hackman and Warren Beatty's best movies . It was for Bonnie and Clyde that Hackman would receive his first nomination for an Academy Award.

While the height of his fame and most consistent work was in the 1970s, Hackman continued to work until his retirement and consistently worked on quality projects.

Though Hackman is best known for his significant dramatic roles that revolutionized the neo-noir and crime thriller genres, he wasn't afraid to take on roles that were a lot of fun. He's one of the best live-action Lex Luthor actors in Superman , and his turn as the famous villain made the character just as important as his heroic counterpart. While the height of his fame and most consistent work was in the 1970s, Hackman continued to work until his retirement and consistently worked on quality projects. He received the Cecil B. DeMille Award at the Golden Globes in 2003.

Why Gene Hackman Retired From Acting

10 hoosiers (1986), as norman dale.

*Availability in US

Not available

Hoosiers is a solid film about a high school basketball team clawing its way to victory, but what makes it one of the best basketball movies is Hackman's performance. Hackman plays Norman, the reluctant coach who washes out of college ball and takes on the impossible challenge of making a rag-tag group of boys into a team. Though the film doesn't break new ground on the traditional tropes of a sports drama, it's worth watching, if only for Hackman. He imbues his disaffected coach with a depth that few actors could and inspired the performances of other on-screen coaches.

The popularity of movies and TV about small-town high school sports teams has become apparent with the rash of praise and interest in series like Friday Night Lights , and Hoosiers is an early example of why this type of story works. Middle America often goes overlooked in high-profile narratives, but Hoosiers works tirelessly to make its characters relatable, likable, and undeniably real. Hoosiers was always an unlikely story about a group of underdogs, as the film is an underdog itself, but it's still worth remembering.

9 The Birdcage (1996)

As senator kevin keeley, the birdcage.

Although The Birdcage is a satire at heart and isn't afraid to put its characters in hilariously uncomfortable situations, it's a tale about human understanding and unlearning prejudice.

The Birdcage is a remake of the 1978 French film La Cage aux Folles , which is based on the 1973 stage play, and though it had big shoes to fill in adapting the classic French comedy, it was a stunning success. The plot revolves around a young couple introducing their in-laws to each other for the first time, but the parents couldn't be more different. Hackman plays the buttoned-up and conservative Senator Kevin Keeley, father of Barbara (Calista Flockhart). He is the opposite of Armand (Robin Williams) and Albert (Nathan Lane), fathers to Val (Dan Futterman).

Although The Birdcage is a satire at heart and isn't afraid to put its characters in hilariously uncomfortable situations, it's a tale about human understanding and unlearning prejudice. Hackman begins the film unwilling to accept his future son-in-law's fathers, but by the end, he has grown as a person and learned to loosen up. The film has been criticized and heralded by LGBQ+ groups, but it was never meant to be taken as a blanket representation of the entire community. At the time of its 1996 release, it pushed boundaries and showed Hackman's diverse range of interests as a performer.

8 The Royal Tenenbaums (2001)

As royal tenenbaum, the royal tenenbaums.

The Royal Tenenbaums is a 2001 comedy from director Wes Anderson. It focuses on three siblings who, after being very successful as children, grow up to be a disappointment to their father in adulthood. Like most Wes Anderson movies, The Royal Tenenbaums has a star-studded cast, including Owen Wilson, who also co-wrote the movie, Danny Glover, Gene Hackman, Ben Stiller, Luke Wilson, Anjelica Huston, Bill Murray, and Gwyneth Paltrow.

Although Gene Hackman originally rejected The Royal Tenenbaums , it ended up being one the most memorable films to come from the final years of his career. Collaborating with the director, Wes Anderson, turned out to be a fortuitous connection, and Hackman's role, Royal, is a standout among characters in the Anderson oeuvre. Like all great characters, Royal is complex. He's charming and likable but is an absent father who has wreaked havoc on the lives of his adult children. He reunites with them, and that’s why the movie gives the viewer a window into their world.

Like most Anderson films, the film boasts a prolific cast, including Danny Glover, Anjelica Huston, Ben Stiller, Luke Wilson, and Gwyneth Paltrow. Adding Hackman to the movie was an achievement for Anderson, who was still in the early stages of his career, and it's difficult to imagine that the film would be half as good without Hackman. Though Anderson's films have become even more stylized and heady as his career has progressed, Hackman is a grounding force in The Royal Tenenbaums , making it one of the more accessible films Anderson has directed.

All 11 Wes Anderson Movies Ranked Worst-Best

7 night moves (1975), as harry moseby.

Looking back at Hackman's best works, it becomes clear how in his element he is within the crime thriller genre. The 1970s indeed boasted many films of this genre, but Hackman would have found his way into this niche regardless. This is due to how well he embodies the classic archetype of the detective. While the film begins in Los Angeles, the twisting case soon leads Hackman’s Harry to Florida. Though not the typical landscape for this sort of tale, within the swampland of the American South, the Private Detective finds himself embroiled in a mystery beyond his comprehension.

Looking at the intersection between the deterioration of the Golden Age movie star in Hollywood and the impact fame has on a family, Night Moves is not what the audience might expect. In some ways, Night Moves tries to recapture the magic and success of Hackman’s earlier and better film, The French Connection . However, the film does a good job of recognizing the parallels between the two and giving Hackman a new character to develop and work with. As always, Hackman might be the protagonist, but that doesn’t mean he’s playing the good guy.

6 Bonnie And Clyde (1967)

As buck barrow, bonnie and clyde.

In 1967, Bonnie and Clyde took a true story of American crime and passion and combined it with the French New Wave filmmaking that was sweeping the international art world. The real-life couple that Bonnie and Clyde drew inspiration from was already infamous for the bloody line they carved through the United States during their epic crime spree of 1932-1934. However, in many ways, it was the film that made them unforgettable. Beatty’s Clyde and Faye Dunaway’s Bonnie are the undeniable stars of the film, but it’s supporting characters like Hackman’s Buck Barrow who flesh out the story’s world.

As characters, Bonnie and Clyde are too wrapped up in each other and their internal myths about their spree to get a clear look at themselves. Hackman provides the vital role of audience stand-in and questions the purpose of their doomed romance.

Buck joins up with Bonnie and Clyde for a significant portion of the movie, one of the many drifters that punctuate the violent heist sequences that shocked audiences in 1967. Hackman clinched his first Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor for playing Buck, a recognition he deserved. As characters, Bonnie and Clyde are too wrapped up in each other and their internal myths about their spree to get a clear look at themselves. Hackman provides the vital role of audience stand-in and questions the purpose of their doomed romance.

The 10 Best Lovers-On-The-Run Movies, Ranked By IMDb

5 i never sang for my father (1970), as gene garrison.

I Never Sang For My Father is a poignant character study of Hackman's Gene Garrison and the character's father, Tom Garrison, played by the late Melvyn Douglas. Based on the play of the same name, the movie's literary origins are obvious based on how much of the conflict and stakes are moved through conversations between Gene and Tom. The script and dialogue shine in the film, allowing both actors to fulfill their potential as performers. Due to the character-driven nature of the movie, the film wouldn’t be as impactful if different actors took on the parts.

I Never Sang For My Father is not a happy tale, and there is no clear resolution between the father and son, leaving the audience wondering if real relationships ever reach the perfect conclusions often portrayed in films. Gene and Tom are brought together following the death of Gene's mother, but neither man can overcome their differences and heal the wounds they have caused each other. Hackman was nominated for Best Supporting Actor at the Academy Awards, and though he didn't win, this appraisal for a quieter and more understated role speaks to his evolution as an actor.

4 Mississippi Burning (1988)

As fbi agent rupert anderson, mississippi burning.

Hackman co-stars with a young Willem Dafoe in Mississippi Burning . The film takes on how racial violence and discrimination were overlooked and disregarded by the U.S. government for generations. Hackman and Dafoe play FBI agents who travel to Mississippi following the disappearance of a group of Civil Rights workers and leaders in a small community. While the film is based on a real criminal case from 1964, much of the plot, especially the dramatic elements, is heightened for the sake of a compelling narrative.

Mississippi Burning remains one of the most political movies Hackman was part of because of its direct conversation with racism and the terrorist organization, the Ku Klux Klan. Although the subject matter of the movie is brutal, it does attempt to reckon with the violent and shameful aspects of the history of the United States and proposes a path toward a better future. However, Mississippi Burning has faced valid criticism for whitewashing events and elevating Hackman and Dafoe's characters to the position of white saviors within the narrative.

Watch Mississippi Burning on Tubi.

3 The Conversation (1974)

As harry caul, the conversation.

Despite not being an overwhelming success at the box office, The Conversation is well-remembered as an important film in cinema history.

Any film directed by legendary filmmaker Francis Ford Coppola and starring an actor with the chops of Hackman is bound to be a success. The Conversation deals with the effects of living under surveillance but positions Hackman's Harry as the one doing the watching. Paranoia mounts as Harry watches and records the lives of a couple that he becomes increasingly convinced is in danger, as he questions the motives of the man who hired him. Despite not being an overwhelming success at the box office, The Conversation is well-remembered as an important film in cinema history.

Additionally, Hackman carries the story, as there are few moments he’s off-screen, as the narrative is told entirely from his deeply subjective perspective. Of course, The Conversation reveals that trying to understand and piece together a life based on recordings alone will never work. Harry is always one step behind and missing a piece of the puzzle, leading to his eventual undoing. All of this hits home in the final moments of the film when Harry realizes that a recording can easily go both ways.

2 Unforgiven (1992)

As little bill daggett, unforgiven (1992).

Hackman portrays the vile antagonist, Little Bill Daggett, to Clint Eastwood’s nuanced protagonist and anti-hero, Will Munny, in Unforgiven . Hackman gives a performance that has gone down in Western history. The film is one of the best movies directed by Eastwood , and Unforgiven is an exploration of the Western genre and exposes its flaws and virtues through the tale of an aging gunslinger who gets back on the horse for one last ride. Only a villain as evil as Hackman’s blank could provoke him out of retirement, and the battle of wills they embark on is thrilling.

Throughout his career, Hackman’s interest in the deconstruction of classic American genres and playing complex, often vile, roles became increasingly apparent. It’s no easy task to play the villain, but only a man as skilled and empathetic as Hackman could take on these irredeemable characters and make the audience rapt with attention from the moment he steps on screen. Unforgiven wasn’t Hackman’s first foray into playing the villain in a Western, but it is easily his best thanks to his performance and the fantastic quality of the film.

1 The French Connection (1971)

As detective jimmy "popeye" doyle, the french connection.

Hackman’s best role and his best movie, The French Connection , won him an Academy Award for Best Actor, and it’s easy to see why. Even as a young man, Hackman exudes confidence, wisdom, and a deeper purpose hidden beneath the surface. All this makes his portrayal of Detective Jimmy "Popeye" Doyle more intricate and layered, as Popeye isn't the kind of detective audiences root for. He doesn't do things by the book and isn't afraid of letting anyone get hurt, and by the end of The French Connection , his choices become difficult to watch.

Like many films of this era, it asks whether the ends justify the means and is a look into the psyche of characters who are pushed to the edge by a relentless obsession.

He and his partner, Detective Buddy "Cloudy" Russo​​​​​​​ (Roy Scheider), are on the trail of a French drug dealer and are excellent foils of each other. Like many films of this era, it asks whether the ends justify the means and is a look into the psyche of characters who are pushed to the edge by a relentless obsession. Of course, their obsession is not with justice or the safety of others but with proving themselves as men and feeling secure in their choices. Unsurprisingly, The French Connection is considered one of the best films of all time.

  • Cast & crew
  • User reviews

Asphalt City

Sean Penn and Tye Sheridan in Asphalt City (2023)

Ollie Cross is a young paramedic assigned to the NYC night shift with an uncompromising and seasoned partner Gene Rutkovsky. Each 911 call is often dangerous and uncertain, putting their liv... Read all Ollie Cross is a young paramedic assigned to the NYC night shift with an uncompromising and seasoned partner Gene Rutkovsky. Each 911 call is often dangerous and uncertain, putting their lives on the line every day to help others. Ollie Cross is a young paramedic assigned to the NYC night shift with an uncompromising and seasoned partner Gene Rutkovsky. Each 911 call is often dangerous and uncertain, putting their lives on the line every day to help others.

  • Jean-Stéphane Sauvaire
  • Ben Mac Brown
  • Shannon Burke
  • Tye Sheridan
  • Gbenga Akinnagbe
  • 1 User review
  • 21 Critic reviews
  • 41 Metascore
  • 2 nominations

Official Trailer

  • Gene Rutkovsky

Tye Sheridan

  • Ollie Cross

Gbenga Akinnagbe

  • Chief Burroughs

Raquel Nave

  • NYPD Officer #2

Jagan Badvel

  • Indian Father

Shelly Burrell

  • Shelter Medic 2
  • Laundry customer
  • (credit only)

Jagruti Deshmukh

  • Indian Mother

Daniel Foote

  • Lieutenant Russell

Donna Glaesener

  • Shelter Nurse

Decater James

  • NYPD Officer
  • Indian Wedding Guest
  • All cast & crew
  • Production, box office & more at IMDbPro

More like this

Firebrand

Did you know

  • Trivia Mel Gibson was initially cast for Sean Penn character "Rutkowski". During the pre-sales process Gibson was recast with Penn.

Gene Rutkovsky : We decide who lives, who cares if drug dealers die

  • Connections Featured in Amanda the Jedi Show: Never Trust the Standing Ovations | CANNES 2023 Indiana Jones, Killers of the Flower Moon (2023)

User reviews 1

  • May 26, 2023
  • How long will Asphalt City be? Powered by Alexa
  • March 29, 2024 (United States)
  • United States
  • Black Flies
  • New York City, New York, USA
  • Sculptor Media
  • Force Majeure
  • See more company credits at IMDbPro

Technical specs

  • Runtime 2 hours
  • Dolby Digital

Related news

Contribute to this page.

Sean Penn and Tye Sheridan in Asphalt City (2023)

  • See more gaps
  • Learn more about contributing

More to explore

Production art

Recently viewed

Movie Reviews

Tv/streaming, collections, great movies, chaz's journal, contributors, riddle of fire.

movie review gene

Now streaming on:

“Riddle of Fire” is the kind of cinematic bedtime story whose whimsical tone makes it easy to overlook its many keenly crafted intricacies. The feature directorial debut by writer/actor Weston Razooli works through a charming conviction: Three kids—brothers Hazel ( Charlie Stover ) and Jodie ( Skyler Peters ) and their friend Alice ( Phoebe Ferro )—rumble down a country road on their motorbikes to an OTOMO warehouse armed with paintball guns and gummy worms. They fearlessly infiltrate the stockroom, procuring a box simply marked “Angel.” The only resistance they meet is from the manager, whom they mercilessly shoot at before triumphantly thundering back home on their motorbikes. 

Throughout “Riddle of Fire” we’ll find the many seemingly insurmountable obstacles these rambunctious kids can overcome. One barrier they can’t break down, however, is the parental password protecting Hazel and Jodie’s television. See, Angel is a game console. And if the trio want to play it before their summer soon ends, then they need Hazel and Jodie’s sick mother Julie ( Danielle Hoetmer ) to unlock the television. She’ll only do so if they can make a special kind of blueberry pie. What follows is a difficult odyssey requiring the trio to first acquire a secret recipe from one adult, then to make a run to a grocery store that turns up every ingredient except for a speckled egg: The last egg is taken by an unpleasant, as the kids call him, Woodsy Bastard—who they tail to the forest in the hopes of stealing it back. 

Phrases like “Woodsy Bastard” are indicative of Razooli’s willingness to imagine children as full-fledged human beings: These Peter Pan-esque characters are foul-mouthed runts unafraid of confronting morally bankrupt adults yet are equally prone to stirring further trouble through their flights of naiveté. They are neither too precocious nor too innocent. The result is an exhilarating concoction of fairy tale and fantasy, kissed by a gooey daydream wonderment that is made possible primarily through the knowing performances provided by these young actors. 

That sense of imagination is further translated from the warm lens’ Kodak 16mm coat and the rebellious score: They imbue the woodlands setting with a mystical air. The trio find further help from Petty Hollyhock ( Lorelei Olivia Mote ), a kind of flower child who seemingly exists in another time in another place. They need her aid in the face of the Woodsy Bastard aka John Redrye ( Charles Halford ) and his poaching friends Anna-Freya ( Lio Tipton ), Suds (Rachel Browne), Kels ( Andrea Browne ), and the dimwitted Marty (Weston Razooli). In a film accumulated by good-for-nothing adults, this quintet is the worst. 

“Riddle of Fire” can sometimes lose its spit, however, spinning too listlessly to the script’s mazy ruts. But there is an uncommon, finely struck sweetness to this film that keeps it from tumbling down mean, unsavory paths. Consider how one scene—initially spelling an overly mature set-up—finds the quartet of kids visiting a hole-in-the-wall bar where a hen that lays speckled eggs lives. The situation causes one to nearly wince: Why put children in such a seedy space? Then a needle of “Baby Come Back” winks to “ Little Miss Sunshine ,” and the tension evaporates into an adorable vapor.   

You’re either on this film’s wavelength or you’re not: I can see scenes like the aforementioned bar turning some viewers off; I can also see these colorful kids being too hard to handle. But the gentleness of this odyssey, landing on a grace note expressing a kind of pleasantness, in spite of the selfish desires inspiring it, is a complex risk. Razooli accomplishes that feat with an intoxicatingly assuredness that makes this fairy tale feel like a classic in the making. 

Robert Daniels

Robert Daniels

Robert Daniels is an Associate Editor at RogerEbert.com. Based in Chicago, he is a member of the Chicago Film Critics Association (CFCA) and Critics Choice Association (CCA) and regularly contributes to the  New York Times ,  IndieWire , and  Screen Daily . He has covered film festivals ranging from Cannes to Sundance to Toronto. He has also written for the Criterion Collection, the  Los Angeles Times , and  Rolling Stone  about Black American pop culture and issues of representation.

Now playing

movie review gene

The Antisocial Network: Memes to Mayhem

Brian tallerico.

movie review gene

Outlaw Posse

Peter sobczynski.

movie review gene

Asleep in My Palm

Tomris laffly.

movie review gene

Dad & Step-Dad

Carlos aguilar.

movie review gene

Late Night with the Devil

Matt zoller seitz, film credits.

Riddle of Fire movie poster

Riddle of Fire (2024)

113 minutes

Lio Tipton as Anna-Freya Hollyhock

Charles Halford as John Redrye

Weston Razooli as Marty Hollyhock

Charlie Stover as Hazel A'Dale

Danielle Hoetmer as Julie A'Dale

Lorelei Olivia Mote as Petal Hollyhock

  • Weston Razooli

Latest blog posts

movie review gene

Enter Regina Taylor's Black Album Mixtape Contest

movie review gene

The 10 Best Movies Made for Under $50,000

movie review gene

Doug Liman Never Does Things the Easy Way

movie review gene

Trapped in the System: Julio Torres on Problemista

IMAGES

  1. Gene (2016)

    movie review gene

  2. Gene (2016)

    movie review gene

  3. The Evil Gene (Movie Review)

    movie review gene

  4. The Gene Generation Movie Review (Spoilers) Jefficho Films

    movie review gene

  5. Review: ‘The Emoji Movie’ Can’t Escape Its Own Idiocy

    movie review gene

  6. Gene 2016

    movie review gene

COMMENTS

  1. Remembering Gene Wilder movie review (2024)

    The film is held together by Wilder's eerie bright energy, which is palpable even now, years after his passing. His eyes are haunting, and haunted. There are a lot of closeups, still and in-motion, that capture the sadness Wilder endured and subtly communicated to viewers, on top of the hilarity he was known for. Advertisement.

  2. 'Remembering Gene Wilder' review: Saluting a comedy icon

    The lovely and loving documentary "Remembering Gene Wilder" is by no means a complete picture of the legendary comedic actor who died in 2016 at 83. But within the bounds of a fast-paced 90 or ...

  3. Remembering Gene Wilder: new documentary sheds light on a comedy titan

    Family stoked his passions along with his nerves, as Wilder set a track for the footlights of New York to follow his sister. "The first time he saw his sister act, he was 11 years old, she was ...

  4. Genie movie review & film summary (2023)

    Bernard has two brutal blows in the opening act of "Genie.". First, he works so hard that he forgets his daughter's birthday, leading to his wife deciding it's time for a trial separation. Second, he gets fired by Cumming's meanie. He's lost the girl, he's lost the job, he's lost his holiday spirit. Enter Melissa McCarthy as ...

  5. Genie (2023)

    Genie: Directed by Sam Boyd. With Melissa McCarthy, Paapa Essiedu, Denée Benton, Jordyn McIntosh. The film is a fairy-tale comedy about a workaholic man who enlists the help of a magical genie to help win his family back before Christmas.

  6. Remembering Gene Wilder (2023)

    Remembering Gene Wilder: Directed by Ron Frank. With Alan Alda, Mel Brooks, Harry Connick Jr., Burton Gilliam. A special tribute documentary honoring Gene Wilder's life and career.

  7. Remembering Gene Wilder Review: Doc Explores a Legend

    March 11, 2024. Ron Frank's documentary Remembering Gene Wilder looks at a comedic legend in American movie history through interviews with him and those he worked with. Remembering Gene Wilder is about the charisma and gravitational force of renowned actor Gene Wilder. It's an exploration of him and his filmography, with background from ...

  8. Film Review: 'Remembering Gene Wilder' is a Lovely Tribute to a Legend

    Remembering Gene Wilder is incredibly respectful and downright reverent, but it never comes off as fan service. The doc legitimately plays like a filmmaker, as well as his colleagues/friends over the years, wanting to talk about their love for Gene. That intimate feeling from the talking heads, as well as plenty of clips, gives any fan of ...

  9. ‎Remembering Gene Wilder (2023) directed by Ron Frank • Reviews, film

    Review by Michael Bergeron. Interesting documentary that comprehensively covers the bullet points of the brilliant career of Gene Wilder. From Broadway days to his breakthrough in movies. As tender as some of the memories are it still is a bit of a hagiography.

  10. Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert: Movie Critics for the People

    In this excerpt from The Ringer's narrative podcast series 'Gene and Roger,' Brian Raftery explores how Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert set the standard for movie reviewing in the '80s. By ...

  11. 'The Conversation' review: Gene Hackman stars in classic thriller

    Review: Gene Hackman is listening and 1974's 'The Conversation' is more relevant than ever. Gene Hackman in the movie "The Conversation.". The Times is committed to reviewing theatrical ...

  12. Movie Reviews

    GENE SISKEL'S MOVIE REVIEWS FOR THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE American Graffiti August 24 1973 THE SCENE was Ravinia Park .last week. A would-be folksinger had completed his last number; a pack of maybe 20 applauding teen-agers stormed the stage in a self-induced frenzy possibly to affirm the wisdom of their ticket purchases; and 20 rows behind them a 27-year-old grumbled to himself, "Stupid kids."

  13. 23 Great Films Favored By Roger Ebert & Gene Siskel

    Ebert: #3 movie of 1973 Siskel: #1 movie of 1973, and one of the ten best movies of the 1970s. This two-parter was a giant-sized Swedish epic, running over six hours, released in U.S. theaters in 1973, although it has been largely absent from home video for a generation.

  14. 15+ Best Movies About Genetics & Biotechnology (List)

    Children of Men (2006) - A dystopian science fiction action-thriller that explores a world where women have become infertile, and the race to protect the only known pregnant woman, touching upon themes of biotechnology and the human race's survival. Orphan Black (2013-2017) - A science fiction television series that explores the world of ...

  15. The Package

    Movie Info. Army Sgt. Johnny Gallagher (Gene Hackman) is reassigned after he angers Col. Glen Whitacre (John Heard) at a meeting of American and U.S.S.R. military types. Gallagher's new job is to ...

  16. All Of Gene Siskel's Reviews

    94 Metascore. A pair of NYPD detectives in the Narcotics Bureau stumble onto a heroin smuggling ring based in Marseilles, but stopping them and capturing their leaders proves an elusive goal. Director: William Friedkin | Stars: Gene Hackman, Roy Scheider, Fernando Rey, Tony Lo Bianco. Votes: 134,720 | Gross: $15.63M.

  17. Movie Review: Human Nature

    Movie Review: Human Nature. This documentary, directed by Adam Bolt, is really three movies in one: a useful explanation of the gene-editing tool CRISPR; the engrossing personal stories of two young people adjusting to life with a genetic disease; and an unfortunately one-sided discussion of the ethics of heritable human genome editing.

  18. Rotten Tomatoes Changed The Role Of Film Critics. But Is That A ...

    In some ways, the movie review website Rotten Tomatoes is the opposite of Siskel and Ebert. Their viewers depended on the insights of two individuals that they trusted, and felt they knew.

  19. Night Moves movie review & film summary (1975)

    Great seventies film noir. Arthur Penn's "Night Moves" is about an old-fashioned private eye who says and does all the expected things while surrounded by a plot he completely fails to understand. Harry Moseby is played by Gene Hackman as a man who, in 1975 Los Angeles, still seems to be taking his cues from old film noir movies.

  20. Gene Wilder and Frida Kahlo in Their Own Words in 2 New Films

    Take, for instance, the new documentary " Remembering Gene Wilder," a uniformly affectionate look at the life and work of the comic actor who died in 2016. (The film opens in theaters in New ...

  21. Laura movie review & film summary (1944)

    Advertisement. The movie basically consists of well-dressed rich people standing in luxury flats and talking to a cop. The passion is unevenly distributed. Shelby and Laura never seem to have much heat between them. Waldo is possessive of Laura, but never touches her.

  22. Gene Hackman's 10 Best Movies, Ranked

    Gene Hackman has gained plenty of fame and recognition, receiving multiple awards for his roles in the best movies of his career. Beginning in the early 1960s as a theater actor, then rising through the ranks of film and television through bit parts and small roles, Hackman's breakthrough performance came in the 1964 film Lilith opposite Warren Beatty.

  23. Asphalt City (2023)

    Asphalt City: Directed by Jean-Stéphane Sauvaire. With Sean Penn, Tye Sheridan, Gbenga Akinnagbe, Michael Pitt. Ollie Cross is a young paramedic assigned to the NYC night shift with an uncompromising and seasoned partner Gene Rutkovsky. Each 911 call is often dangerous and uncertain, putting their lives on the line every day to help others.

  24. The Package movie review & film summary (1989)

    There's the setup, the development, and then, instead of a payoff, we get a routine chase and shoot-out. "The Package" does end in a race against time, but Davis bases the race so firmly on who the characters are and what their goals are, that it doesn't feel contrived. The whole movie, in fact, is smarter than most contemporary thrillers.

  25. The Conversation movie review (1974)

    Harry Caul (Gene Hackman) gets down and dirty in "The Conversation." His colleagues in the surveillance industry think Harry Caul is such a genius that we realize with a little shock how bad he is at his job. Here is a man who is paid to eavesdrop on a conversation in a public place. He succeeds, but then allows the tapes to be stolen.

  26. Heist movie review & film summary (2001)

    Gene Hackman and Rebecca Pidgeon in "Heist." David Mamet's ''Heist'' is about a caper and a con, involving professional criminals who want to retire but can't. It's not that they actually require more money. It's more that it would be a sin to leave it in civilian hands. Gene Hackman plays a jewel thief who dreams of taking his last haul and ...

  27. Riddle of Fire movie review & film summary (2024)

    "Riddle of Fire" is the kind of cinematic bedtime story whose whimsical tone makes it easy to overlook its many keenly crafted intricacies. The feature directorial debut by writer/actor Weston Razooli works through a charming conviction: Three kids—brothers Hazel (Charlie Stover) and Jodie (Skyler Peters) and their friend Alice (Phoebe Ferro)—rumble down a country road on their ...