Ignatiy Vishnevetsky, film critic for the Chicago Reader, will co-host Roger Ebert’s upcoming movie-review television show, according to the Associated Press. The 24-year old, Russian-born Vishnevetsky, who also writes for the film website, Mubi, steps into the spot originally intended for Elvis Mitchell, who parted ways soon after being announced. He’ll join Christy Lemire, the AP’s film critic, in the balcony when Ebert Presents At the Movies premieres on Jan. 21.
Jan 4
2011
09:46 AM ET
Ignatiy Vishnevetsky joins Roger Ebert's 'At the Movies'
- Comments 36
- Add comment
Latest News
- 'Voice' season 4: And the winner is...
- 'So You Think You Can Dance' top 20 is...
- 'Channing All Over Your Tatum': Kimmel clip
- Selma Blair exits 'Anger Management'
- Miss USA 2013: Our recap in pictures
- Armie Hammer: No 'Fifty Shades' for me
- 'Dumb and Dumber' sequel finds new home
- 'Man of Steel' gets religion?
Find Movies and Showtimes
Choose Your Movie
All movies
Never heard of him. He’s very young. I’ll defintely give the show a chance because I’ve always loved this show in its various incarnations, but I’m not very inspired by choice of the critics.
It’s going to be very painful and disgusting to see Ebert in the state he’s in.
I think that selecting the word ‘disgusting’ was a very poor choice of words to express your feelings. It is sad and difficult to see Mr. Ebert in the condition he is in, but it is not ‘disgusting’. However, I am rather disgusted to see that you chose to use that word.
I’ll watch just to see how to pronounce his name!
“SHE’LL join Christy Lemire…” so I guess it’s “her name!”
I Googled up the name and according to “his” facebook page, “he’s” a male. EW please check.
Yes, he is a man. Fact check your articles EW before posting them.
Lemire is the Barbie Doll of movie critics: she has zero credibility.
What a train wreck in the making!
I can’t believe Ebert’s ego needs further stroking (he certainly doesn’t need the money). Doesn’t he realize that he’s completely besmirching his proud (Siskel Era) legacy?
Totally correct about Lemire — and the addition of some 24-year-old guy is not promising. Guess they’re just aiming for the Rotten Tomatoes crowd. I personally love Ebert’s knowledgeable, literate reviews, but two lightweight counterparts do not add up to one “Siskel.”
terry, whoever said that this show was put together to stroke Mr. Ebert’s ego??? Either you have very little knowledge of what kind of man Mr. Ebert is, or your ability to judge one’s character is extremely poor due to a bad case of cynicism. Mr. Ebert is far from a man of ego. He is very humble, kind, and down to earth. If you had ANY idea what you were talking about you would already know that. Please keep your cynicism to yourself. Most likely you are the one who wants your ego stroked, and you just assume that is the motivation of everyone else.
Mr. Ebert loves great films, and he probably wants to use the show as a way to make sure that great films, which would typically get very little exposure, are brought more of the attention they are due. He knows the power and impact that a truly great film can have on one’s life, along with their knowledge and perception of the human condition, and he wants to share his love and appreciation of great films with others. Is that so difficult for you to imagine, understand, or accept?
I know this sounds rude, but how is Roger Ebert going to host a tv show when he is physically unable to speak anymore?
He has a computer program that can approximate his old voice with all of the recordings they have of him. He won’t host the show, but instead have a 5-minute segment at the end with recommendations. This has a much better shot at success on PBS than his previous show had on syndication. I hope it lasts.
It’s going to be horrible to watch. Hey, why don’t they go film amputees at a Veteran’s hospital, too! What a disaster.
Sorry to ruin the surprise, but she’s a MAN!
That’s HEDLEY Lamar.
HAHAHAHAHA!
Good Lord. Can we just call him “Ig”?
Iggy “Ig” Pop would like a word with you.
I will make every effort to miss this show.
Hilarious!
Just because he’s young doesn’t mean he isn’t credible or knowledgable. It’s not only the old critics who know what they’re talking about. Yes, this could be a disaster, but it could also be good. Since Ebert’s in charge, you just have to trust his judgment. If you don’t, why would you watch this show in the first place?
You may be right, but I also submit two words to you that support my skepticism: Ben Lyons.
Ebert didn’t pick Ben Lyons.
I didn’t think Ebert had anything to do with Ben Lyons being hired.
What’s wrong with Ben Lyons? You guys didn’t think that I am Legand was one of the greatest movies ever made?
That was a response to Rid’s comment about young critics, not Roger Ebert.
So many consonants,so little time to avoid biting one’s tongue when saying them…
I bet they call him “Iggy V”!!!
A 24 year old kid? Not interested. Why is this show even being put on again. Ebert should stay off TV.
Why should he stay off tv?
Good question, why should he? He’s still one of the most respected movie reviewers working. I’ll give it a chance because he’s involved, and because I don’t feel Vishnevetsky’s age should be held against him.
Ebert should host. Let him talk with his computer, I don’t care.
Boo to Ebert he says and believes that Video Games are not “Art”
He’s never even played a video game in his life and says such a bias thing, Video games have become more art then most movies and even longers then what a movie can provide. roger ebert you have Failed please admit Video Games are art to get back any fans you have left.
I watched the revamped show’s premiere…Gawd awful.
There was no chemistry AT ALL between the two “kid” reviewers. They both looked and sounded like posers. Ignatiy Vishnevetsky’s reviews were full of “you knows”…so many that I stopped counting. The “you knows” were grating and revealed a poverty of language if not substance on his part, and not just initial nervousness, I fear.
The other segments were eerie, including the brief glance of Roger Ebert’s wife, the Executive Producer of the show (without voice), and especially the voiceovers for throat-cancer survivor Roger Ebert, who comes off as a shadowy figure lurking somewhere behind the production curtain.
The kids’ reviews were not very substantive either or compelling. Very shallow. And, how is that Ignatiy liked every movie? How is that possible with so many duds?
This show is going to the dust bins very soon, notwithstanding that some critics seem to have liked the show’s debut and its fresh-faced duo of movie reviewers. Too bad, because I have always liked the “At the Movies” shows, from the original through all the overhauls and cancellations, up to now. Now, I doubt I will bother to watch the show.
Michael Meyers
New York, New York