Wow, Gene Siskel is really defending this movie :o. I wasn't even expecting him to like it.

I love how Siskel keeps pushing Ebert's opinion to a positive one. He clearly enjoyed this movie more than he claims.

I'm glad Siskel enjoyed it and just saw it for what it is, a fun martial arts movie.

@davidsavage5630

3 жыл бұрын

Siskel & Ebert were much better about giving these types of reviews than people seem to remember. I remember Ebert's review of Rambo 3 .."Thumbs down. I didn't like it because it was more of the same. However, it is not a BAD movie...and anyone who enjoyed the last SHOULD see this one because it would be money well spent. Rambo fans should be very excited." That's a good movie review. Gave his personal feelings about it without descending into hyperbole and also confirming that it's only really subpar froma critical standpoint and that action fans should still see it. And Siskel and Ebert's enthusiasm for Blade and Ebert's GLOWING review of Blade II just made me like them more. Nice to see critics who understood that well made entertainment was worth something. I miss them..

Such a shame that neither of these two master movie critics are around anymore.

This is why S&E we're the best at their craft. They understood that you critique things on a scale. A video game movie call Mortal Kombat is not going to be the next citizen Kane but can be good in its own way and also some forms or art are meant to be fun and over the top. Spill.com are the only people I have seen come close to their sensibilities

@cjwright79

6 жыл бұрын

I agree, we need a new benchmark in cinematic quality. I mean I've tried to watch Citizen Kane and I just find it boring and outdated. I think everyone agrees that Shawshank Redemption is an outstanding movie so maybe we could use that.

@Jbaxter85

4 жыл бұрын

Couldn't agree more & we need more critics because no one understand movies like them.

@davidsavage5630

3 жыл бұрын

This is very true. My only caveat with them was their absolute hatred of slasher films....but they gave Halloween hugely positive reviews....so, I think it was the just the increasing trashiness of the genre that turned them sour when, admittedly, that's most of the fun of slashers to me lol. But Halloween is a great movie...not just a great slasher movie. They understood that well made entertainment has worth and not everything is, or should be judged on the same scale as Casablanca (for example). Of course Mortal Kombat is not going to be as great as Casablanca...and anyone expecting it to be or expecting a similar experience is a fool..

@thecreepycritic4455

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidsavage5630 Funnily enough, Ebert’s perception of slasher or just very violent horror movies developed over time, and I think Siskel’s probably would have too if he hadn’t passed away in the late ‘90s. Ebert still hated movies he deemed misogynistic (Wolf Creek, for instance), but was surprisingly positive about ones like The Devil’s Rejects. I think he appreciated it when films like that had a sense of humour and bizarre creative energy. He also seemed to judge a movie’s attitude over just its content. One of his refrains was that a movie isn’t about what it’s about, it’s about how it’s about it. Hence why he could give a positive review to a movie like Irreversible, which is built around a graphic and nauseating rape scene, because the content was redeemed by the serious intent of and skilful execution by the filmmaker.

I agree with you MLDKF. These two were great individually, but better together.

Kano Asian Good Guy Thunder God Johnny Cage Scorpion A Goon The Lovely Sonya MORTAL KOMBAT!!!!!!!

"Asian good guy goes 1 on 1 with a goon". Sub-zero confirmed for jobber.

Wow - doesn't seem that long ago I was watching these guys give their reviews every week - both are missed.

This review is awesome!

In 1995 this is what high definition looked like.

@musicman76enator

3 жыл бұрын

1995 = Greatest year ever. Period.

@davidsavage5630

3 жыл бұрын

I.E. ..lol there was no high definition. 1989 probably my favorite year..

“As the Asian good guy goes one on one with a goon” There is so much to unpack there.

Lol Ebert doesn’t want to admit he liked the film

It's not bad for a video game movie.

Thumbs up for me "Mortal Kombat" (1995).

@williamhowe1

4 жыл бұрын

But thumbs down for the sequel.

@musicman76enator

3 жыл бұрын

Thumbs up for me too 👍

@davidsavage5630

3 жыл бұрын

@@williamhowe1 One finger up for Mortal Kombat Annihilation..

@williamhowe1

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidsavage5630 The middle one.

@davidsavage5630

3 жыл бұрын

@@williamhowe1 Lol that's the one..

Siskel is right tho Mortal Kombar is actually a fun movie, its never boring at all as cheesy as it gets

Siskel really surprised me because I never expect him to like it, it's funny how he keeps convincing Ebert stay positive. Honestly I remember played the game myself as a kid & I agree with Ebert, the killings weren't as brutally victorious as the game. ⭐⭐👎👎

@musicman76enator

3 жыл бұрын

The killings were not as brutal probably so that it would not be rated R. A softer movie rating meant kids could go see it.

I'm closer to Siskel than Ebert on this one, but that shade Ebert threw right at the very end was legit.

"The Asian good guy" lol

@bryanmack4054

3 ай бұрын

Well I mean…that’s what he is lol

Did he just call Sub-Zero a GOON

@davidsavage5630

3 жыл бұрын

Well....this WAS before Scorpion and Sub-Zero practically became the unofficial faces of the franchise lol. And if one's knowledge of Mortal Kombat extended only as far as the first film then, one could be forgiven for not realizing that Sub-Zero was a great deal more than that. In THIS movie he amounts to little more than the sumo wrestler in Bloodsport. Ok...maybe a little more than that because he's at least verbally named and he gets a hell of an entrance but...you get my point. I'm just happy to hear an educated film critic defending good entertainment..

@ResistanceQuest

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidsavage5630 your reply was well-observed, sir. A doff of my hat to you

I'll give them credit - wasnt a potshot review. Siskel thumbs up makes sense. As does Ebert thumbs down

I would've figured Siskel hated it. Glad he had a good time.

Double Dragon, Street Fighter, Super Mario Bros were flops a year earlier

BITCH PLEASE SUB-ZERO AIN'T NO GOON!

I wonder why neither of them pointed out the similarities between this movie and Enter the Dragon.

@davidsavage5630

3 жыл бұрын

Because they had three minutes to both weigh in on it and Siskel probably preferred to spend that very limited time praising it since he likely was just happy he enjoyed it. If it'd been a thumbs down, he'd probably have knocked it for being an Enter the Dragon knock off (story wise). The similarities weren't lost on either of them because I read their print reviews and they both DID mention it there..

Ebert had the same complaint against Gladiator, that it looked "muddy, fuzzy and indistinct". I wonder if he had vision problems of some sort.

@NefariousDreary

6 жыл бұрын

Chris Wright Well, I actually gotta give him that one on Mortal Kombat, the film does get ridiculously dark to look at sometimes.

@deckofcards87

5 жыл бұрын

I remember seeing Gladiator in theatres when it was released and it was a difficult movie to follow visually. I put it down to that negative they were projecting because the latest bluray is fine to look at.

@davidsavage5630

3 жыл бұрын

Nothing beats The Relic for ridiculous darkness. And the special effects for the monster are GREAT. Like, almost Jurassic Park level. I couldn't believe it. But it is literally the first movie that I've actually wondered whether they had like one light or just didn't bother to turn most of them on. Seriously. Even scenes that SHOULD be well lit just....aren't..

@leiferikson1066

2 жыл бұрын

I was disappointed by how bright Pitch Black was.

Every wanted fatalities lol

@davidsavage5630

3 жыл бұрын

...and now we're getting them! I was 14 when this was in the theater and, honestly, the lack of gore in the movie didn't bother me. Even back then. I was just happy it didn't suck shit like the Double Dragon movie..

Where’s the review for the 2nd movie?

@NefariousDreary

6 жыл бұрын

MetallicaFan1980 Sandman We don't talk about that one lol

@franksmith613

5 жыл бұрын

They did not review the 2nd movie. Probably wasn't screened to critics.

@gerekbraden2983

5 жыл бұрын

@@franksmith613 I wish it wasn't screened for anyone 😂

@usamazahid3882

4 жыл бұрын

@@NefariousDreary I do.

@davidsavage5630

3 жыл бұрын

@@franksmith613 The first one wasn't screened for critics either. They probably reviewed it after it was No. 1 at the BO the previous weekend. It's bad form for a televised movie criticism program to not review the current big film. Their producers probably told them to go see it and have a review for the next week's program after the surprise financial success the week prior..

Just recently watched "Mortal Kombat" for the first time in many years. For me now, more so than back in 1995, in some ways it hasn't aged well and I consider it to be an "awesomely-bad" hilarious and entertaining movie -- very unique, dumb, strange, weird, yet cool... I currently rate this movie 2 1/2 stars out of 5.

@TerryFGM

8 ай бұрын

k

I'm shocked that Siskel liked this. He said it had great special effects? The special effects looked like dogshit, even for the time (this came out two years after Jurassic Park). I'll grant that the movie has some great set-pieces, and great moments, but it's greatness is really sullied by horrible, ham-fisted dialogue and terrible CGI.

@GD-tt6hl

3 жыл бұрын

It came out two years after the best special effects picture ever made with 4 times the budget.

@davidsavage5630

3 жыл бұрын

I disagree about the FX. Some movies have very realistic effects and some have effects that are aesthetically pleasing but not necessarily very real looking. Just good enough to be in service of the film's aesthetic. I agree some of them don't look REAL but a lot of them still look cool to me. If you don't like them though, that's perfectly valid. In 1995 (I have no idea how old you were then lol) I remember them definitely impressing most people. But even then, most of them never looked "real." I think of them as more like music video effects. Now I'm wondering what this movie would've looked like if Industrial Light & Magic HAD done them lol. Probably pretty damn awesome..

@John231984

Жыл бұрын

Not every film had ILM behind it. The cg was on par with most films of that decade.

@Ilikesmalltitties

2 ай бұрын

You're talking out of your ass. I was there back in 1995 and no one ever said the special effects looked like shit. It was back in the day when cgi just wasn't there yet. We had The Lawnmower man, Johnny Mnemonic and Hackers,etc. Back then, people were blown away by the possibiliy of technology looking better every year.

I never understood all the love for this movie. Yes, at the time it was the best video game movie, but it's still terrible and has aged poorly.

@LocalMultiplex

6 жыл бұрын

Ah it's just a fun, inoffensive movie. I've always enjoyed it.

@NefariousDreary

6 жыл бұрын

For me it's the characters, the atmosphere, the action, the score, the production quality and I'm still impressed with the cinematography. They pretty much nailed everything they needed, too. While it's not a great film in the most practical ways I consider it a great film for being a fun, high energy, well-made and faithfully adapted action film to a really fun video game.

@LocalMultiplex

6 жыл бұрын

My biggest complaint is that the movie devolves in the third act to a point where Johnny Cage is the main character and Sonja becomes a damsel in distress.

@NefariousDreary

6 жыл бұрын

KingTekins Johnny Cage doesn't become the main character he just has his moment of subplot. After his fight with Goro the main focus goes back Liu Kang.

@NefariousDreary

6 жыл бұрын

KingTekins But his subplot does drag a little. I think they were trying to establish his implied relationship with Sonja. I don't find it necessary but I didn't really have a problem with it.

Siskel's comment at .21 was smug and ignorant. Video games have become a medium as important as print and moving pictures by today's standards in 2014.

@Mst3kfan1994

9 жыл бұрын

Except this was 1995, and Gene was specifically talking about video game movie adaptations, which were always of mediocre quality then, and still haven't improved by much since.

@JW93581

7 жыл бұрын

Silent Hill 2 gives me more emotion than a lot of art these days does to be fair

@LoN3wOlF5tudi0s

7 жыл бұрын

+Mst3kfan1994 Wreck it Ralph...

@cjwright79

6 жыл бұрын

Silent Hill one is outstanding as well.

@paulgraves1392

6 жыл бұрын

LoN3wOlF5tudi0s Doesn't count because it's not based on a videogame. We've had good movies ABOUT videogames, just not good movies BASED on videogames.