I read him every day in the Sun Times and find him to be pompous over-rated bore. He never criticizes, he only reviews. He is the best in a very shallow pool--he only tries to give you idea about whether or not you would like it, in a very clever way. He never ever tries to discuss whether or not it's any good as cinema, that's why he gives so many good reviews to mostly lousy movies. Gene Siskel was much more thoughtful and a much better critic, he was very under-rated and one of the only good things there was in the Chicago Tribune, which now has no good writers.