Dick Tracy by Mike Curtis and Charles Ettinger for January 02, 2023

“The committee has its own suspicions. One of the tiny numbers wasn’t covered with paint.”

Gosh, Siskel Ebert is so lame! It’s actually an embarrassing attempt at being funny.

Should Lizz have said; “The” major crime unit?

Just wondering.

Good morning™, everyone!

Siskel Ebert is a funny name for an art critic, but I don’t mind it. Anyway, the verification committee is about to be confronted with evidence that the painting is not a da Vinci. I wonder how that will work out. I suspect that the evidence will not convince them.

Good morning™, repurposed movie critics !

If Mr. Ebert is a respected personality in Tracyville then it’s likely that he is not in league with the crooks. What owlish countenance on Siskel. Is he related to Wally, who is currently living with the Plentys ?

Love the outdoor scene on the far right of P.3. It looks like a window but the red surround band indicates another painting.

Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert, movie critics based in Chicago, that have passed on years ago in case anyone doesn’t know…

There are tests that can be run to determine when a painting was done. I remember that from this Perry Mason episode: https://www.perrymasontvseries.com/wiki/index.php/EpisodePages/Show48

It’s good to see Lizz and Lee take the lead on this case.

Also once things are settled on Lee’s setup with Blaze then it’s time to get Lizz a romantic interest.

I believe Roger Ebert passed away years after Gene Siskel died. The name Curtis came up with to use for his art critic is both funny and unpretentious. And his story’s momentum is picking up badly needed speed. Good job today from Mike!!!

It’s either very convenient or very coincidental that the head of the international committee that would investigate a lost work of da Vinci, especially one that was ostensibly discovered in Europe, would be based in Tracy Ville. It’s narrative whoppers like this that draw Aroma, the Educated Skunk, to the strip.

Is it just me or is that Admin in P1 dressed in the fashion line by G.R. Lee… “I’ve Got No Secrets” ?

Won’t the estates of the real Siskel and Ebert sue for this?

He’ll give “The Physician” Two Thumbs Down

So Ed Asner is a base for Shelly since there have been similar drawn characters in the past?

How about the art experts declare the painting a forgery rather than telling the art experts they suspect the painting is a forgery? (Especially since any real art experts and the forensic technology would require less than an hour to identify it as a fake.)

Yeah, third time I’ve voiced the complaint. Sorry about the obvious whine in the comment.

Are we At The Movies ?

Gene Siskell, Roger Ebert. The name is a homage.

“We’re here to ask for your help.” ??

So, they want Mr. Ebert to tell them it’s a fake, so they can arrest Art Dekko? Kinda backwards. How about:

“We’re here to warn you and the committee that we have a well-founded suspicion that the painting is a fake, so examine it very carefully, and if you and the committee agree that it’s a fake, then we have a suspicion of who’s behind it.”

Didn’t Liz use her deceased husband’s name, I think it was Grove, for a while? Has she changed her name back to Worthington?

Maybe Siskel can team up with E. Bert Rogers.

Good morning, fellow art critics!

It’s nice to see the ladies doing some of the detective work and not just sipping coffee and losing their shoes. Will Mr. Ebert (nice nod to the dearly departed movie critics) be part of the scam and “authenticate” the new Da Vinci as real or will he verify that it is indeed a well painted fake? That seems to be the question now.

…is that a backpack behind Lee’s braids?

Does he rate the art with a “Thumbs Up, or Thumbs Down”?

1-JET: Will this outfit help me keep the job for which I have no talent?

EBERT: Definitely! You’ll ultimately succeed in melting the rest of my hair off if you keep it up – so to speak.

2-EBERT: HEY! WHO LET YOU TWO IN? LIZZ: Your Assistant. Didn’t she announce us?

EBERT: Oh, well, no but that’s ok. So whadaya here for. LEE: We’re coppers and we’re here to help you do the job for which you’ve trained for 40 years.

EBERT: WHY YOU IMPERTINENT LITTLE…umm. Why don’t you strip… I mean get a little more comfortable and tell me about it. HEY JET! TURN UP THE HEAT! THESE TWO ARE DRESSED LIKE IT’S COLD IN HERE! heh heh

At different times, I had brief email conversations with both Siskel and Ebert. Both were very willing to interact with their readers/viewers, and both were nothing but cordial to me.

If this guy rates anything with a thumbs-up or thumbs-down, I’m outta here…

Mike paying homage to Gene Siskel, and, Roger Ebert. Hope they’re still having those discussions on the merits of the movies where ever they are. RIP.

I think it’s a great tribute to Gene Siskel & Roger Ebert. I never missed a show.

Wait! The painting was copied right off of real da Vinci drawings. That makes it real!

“Oh, you two are So dated and a clear Nagny and Spacy knock-off. If I could but get my loafer off, I’d give you three toes down.”

Almost no art historian I’ve known—and I’ve known a few—has had so plush an office as Siskel Ebert if in an academic setting; i.e., being a professor. I suppose the lavish setting might come with being employed privately by a major auction house as its very own staff expert, or perhaps by being the lead curator at a major museum. So, let the committee member pontificate from his throne of expert excellence to the two lady detectives, who have pulled this particular relatively light duty.

Meanwhile, Gene Siskel, the film critic for the Chicago Tribune, was for a long time my frustrating favorite; cerebral, thoughtful, witty, and a deft writer, but at the same time obstinate and stubborn in advocating films for which I did not much care. His frenemy Roger Ebert, of the rival Sun-Times (expressly intended by its Field family owners, from its inception in 1948, to provide a liberal/progressive counterpoint to the then-conservative Tribune; in more recent years the Tribune itself has become liberal/progressive, a process traceable to the IMO poisonous editorship of James Squires in the ’80s. But I digress.), was a more populist, accessible writer, and this I think was a frustration and challenge to Siskel, as Ebert was more well-known and admired by the general public. But their TV show together was a hit.

For Siskel, see https://tinyurl.com/2ksfdb8n

Will Siskel Elbert be approached by Art in the form of a bribe? No, this guy is a straight arrow. Money won’t change him.

I have this feeling that it was Art who planted the lost Da Vinci story in the newspaper.

Well,at least one member of the judging committee will approach the job with his nostrils wide open.

Two days of Daddy Warbucks and Diet Smith don’t tell me they are going to bid on the fake painting.