list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around James Bond [Film Series] on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/James_Bond_Film_Series/114408/default.aspx Title: James Bond [Film Series]
Plot: Over the course of more than 20 films and five leading men, the James Bond series has defined the quintessential glamorized spy film. Exceedingly suave and debonair, Agent 007 never fails to stop the bad guy, while encountering a barrage of beautiful and seductive women along the way, women with such subtle monikers as Pussy Galore, Mary Goodnight, and Xenia Onatopp. Sean Connery was the first and perhaps most popular Bond, beginning with 1962's Dr. No and continuing through 1967's You Only Live Twice, at which point Connery took a break from the franchise, making way for George Lazenby's one-film stint in 1969's On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Connery returned for 1971's Diamonds Are Forever, his sixth, and what he swore would be his last, time in the role. Two years later, Roger Moore made his debut as Bond with 1973's Live and Let Die. The role would belong to Moore exclusively for four more films. Then, in 1983, in the wake of a court ruling regarding the rights to 1965's Thunderball, two different Bond films were released, Octopussy with Moore and Never Say Never Again, a remake of Thunderball that saw Connery wooed back to the role by a large paycheck. After that, Moore played Bond one more time in 1985's A View to a Kill, tying Connery with a total of seven appearances as 007. Next up, Timothy Dalton took over for two films, 1987's The Living Daylights and 1989's Licence to Kill, both of which were met with tepid reactions by audiences and critics alike. In need of a jump-start, the series took a six-year hiatus before returning in 1995 with GoldenEye, the first of four (and counting) financially successful Bond films starring Pierce Brosnan. In 2006, the dashing spy returned to the screen with another actor under the bowtie -- Daniel Craig, who brought a gruff finesse to the role in the massive international hit Casino Royale. The actor will return to the role in 2008, when the 22nd Bond film is slated to hit theaters. ~ Matthew Tobey, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 4
Number of Lists: 1
Number of blog posts: 3
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:01:08 GMTJames Bond [Film Series]Over the course of more than 20 films and five leading men, the <a href=/films/17694/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>James Bond</a> series has defined the quintessential glamorized spy film. Exceedingly suave and debonair, Agent 007 never fails to stop the bad guy, while encountering a barrage of beautiful and seductive women along the way, women with such subtle monikers as Pussy Galore, Mary Goodnight, and Xenia Onatopp. <a href="/players/P____10646/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Sean Connery</a> was the first and perhaps most popular Bond, beginning with 1962's Dr. No and continuing through 1967's <a href=/films/39310/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>You Only Live Twice</a>, at which point Connery took a break from the franchise, making way for <a href="/players/P____41054/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>George Lazenby</a>'s one-film stint in 1969's <a href=/films/25356/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>On Her Majesty's Secret Service</a>. Connery returned for 1971's <a href=/films/8998/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Diamonds Are Forever</a>, his sixth, and what he swore would be his last, time in the role. Two years later, <a href="/players/P____50375/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Roger Moore</a> made his debut as Bond with 1973's <a href=/films/20608/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Live and Let Die</a>. The role would belong to Moore exclusively for four more films. Then, in 1983, in the wake of a court ruling regarding the rights to 1965's <a href=/films/35034/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Thunderball</a>, two different <a href=/films/4041/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Bond</a> films were released, <a href=/films/25155/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Octopussy</a> with Moore and <a href=/films/24349/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Never Say Never Again</a>, a remake of <a href=/films/35034/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Thunderball</a> that saw Connery wooed back to the role by a large paycheck. After that, Moore played Bond one more time in 1985's <a href=/films/37115/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>A View to a Kill</a>, tying Connery with a total of seven appearances as 007. Next up, <a href="/players/P____16690/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Timothy Dalton</a> took over for two films, 1987's <a href=/films/20651/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>The Living Daylights</a> and 1989's <a href=/films/81102/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Licence to Kill</a>, both of which were met with tepid reactions by audiences and critics alike. In need of a jump-start, the series took a six-year hiatus before returning in 1995 with <a href=/films/92862/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>GoldenEye</a>, the first of four (and counting) financially successful <a href=/films/4041/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Bond</a> films starring <a href="/players/P_____8836/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Pierce Brosnan</a>. In 2006, the dashing spy returned to the screen with another actor under the bowtie -- <a href="/players/P____15549/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Daniel Craig</a>, who brought a gruff finesse to the role in the massive international hit <a href=/films/231917/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Casino Royale</a>. The actor will return to the role in 2008, when the 22nd <a href=/films/4041/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Bond</a> film is slated to hit theaters. ~ Matthew Tobey, All Movie Guide4Slightly Tagged (1-5)133http://www.spout.com/images/no_image.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/James_Bond_Film_Series/114408/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/3/10/40945.aspxPost By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/10/2009 6:01:08 PM
Body: If you buy the kids only one new video release this week, make it Pinocchio. Obviously. But if you have enough spending money to buy two, pick up Howard the Duck as well. Finally on DVD in America (with a Special Edition no less), the infamous flop is anything but a great film. Yet it is hardly one of the worst films of the 1980s, despite its reputation. For the past 23 years, I’ve stood by my childhood love for Howard the Duck, constantly acknowledging that I even owned Ellis Weiner’s novelization of the film. Technically, the best reason to defend the movie’s existence is that it directly led to the creation of Pixar. But this reason doesn’t influence anyone to watch the thing. So, in order to defend the movie’s onscreen worth, I’ve come up with ten points for why you should pick up the new Howard the Duck disc and not feel at all guilty about doing so. 1. It’s No Longer the Worst Lucasfilm Production Take your pick — there’s The Phantom Menace or there’s Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, either of which could certainly take the prize for being the worst movie to come from George Lucas in his 40 years producing films. Well, maybe not worse than More American Graffiti. But both films were far bigger creative and franchise disappointments than Howard the Duck (financial success is another story, of course), and so they have a relative sort of wretchedness that places them in the bottom of Lucas’ Sarlacc pit of a career. Even if you’re one of those defend-to-the-end Star Wars fanboys who will argue the pros of Menace, at least then consider Willow to be worse than Howard the Duck. The blatant Lord of the Rings rip-off has its historical relevance, but looking back on it now, it’s even more dated than Howard. And regardless of how groundbreaking it was, Willow’s visual effects don’t hold up quite as well as Howard’s old-fashioned, and oft-celebrated craftsmanship. But that’s another point… 2.  The Special Effects Are Technically Brilliant Those of us who prefer go-motion and other non-CGI effects work will always pay respect to ILM’s achievements on Howard the Duck, particularly their efforts with the Dark Overlord creature in the movie’s final act. People unfortunately tend to focus on the $2 million duck suit (see point #3), but even then Howard didn’t deserve its Razzie for Worst Visual Effects. To compare it to digital creatures, the monster would fit in just fine in either of the Men in Black movies. And for its own time, it was a magnificent creation. So it existed alongside a silly costumed creature in an overpriced B-movie, it still deserved an Oscar nomination for F/X in 1987, a year the Academy recognized Little Shop of Horrors and Poltergeist II: The Other Side (and incomparable winner Aliens). 3. The Duck Suit is Still Better Than Most CGI Those of us who grew up with Muppets, Chewbacca and other non-computer-generated fantasy creatures had no problem with Howard the Duck’s titular fowl being represented as a dwarf in a duck suit. The issue with the effect, though, is that allegedly Lucas had wanted Howard to be a CG creation, but the technology just wasn’t there yet. So, costumes and robotics, all of which reportedly cost $2 million, were viewed as a relative disappointment. But think of how few great CG characters there have been in the past 20 years, and then seriously attempt to argue that Howard would have been any better if made in the years of CGI supremacy. Now, also remember that 1986 was a year that gave us fine puppetry, costumed dwarfs and robotics like that found in Labyrinth (also a Lucasfilm production), Little Shop of Horrors, Legend, Short Circuit, Flight of the Navigator, Troll (sure, why not?) and, yes, Howard the Duck. So really, the only thing disappointing about the duck suit is that it doesn’t really look like the comic book character upon which it’s based. Of course, it’s not likely that a CG version of Howard would have been any more faithful. 4. Parallels, Puns and Playful Philosophy Some fans of the original Howard the Duck comics could argue that the duck suit is hardly the worst offense of unfaithfulness. Other complaints might be the alteration of Beverly’s career or the occasional sacrifice of the comic’s tone in order to pander to younger audiences. But real sticklers may take issue with Howard’s origin, the inclusion of Duckworld (which did come from the comics but wasn’t Howard creator Steve Gerber’s idea of what the character’s home world was like) and the punny parallels that came with it. Yet for those of us who love corny jokes and puns, the idea of an alternate world where everything’s the same, just with descendants of ducks rather than apes, is a lot of fun. It’s the same appreciation that allowed me to enjoy the ska scene and the similarly parallel worlds of The Flintstones and Dinosaurs and the parodies in MAD Magazine. In the first few minutes, we get treated to the following cheesy but delicious sight and audio gags: a Rolling Egg magazine, a Playduck magazine, movie posters for “Splahsdance,” “Breeders of the Lost Stork” and My Little Chickadee (starring W.C. Fowls and Mae Nest), and commercials for feather fungus treatment and the Crazy Eddie spoof “Crazy Webby.” This, plus the opening credit narration and theory of Duckworld evolution were enjoyable to a kid in the midst of learning about Darwin and pondering the existence of alternate worlds. 5. Jeffrey Jones as Dr. Jenning/Dark Overlord Between Howard the Duck and Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, Jeffrey Jones was one of the biggest and best villains of the summer of ‘86. For kids, anyway. But even adults recognized the quality of Jones’ performance in Howard, as Dr. Jenning, the scientist who becomes possessed by the Dark Overlord. To cult audiences, he may have seemed like just another Dr. Lizardo/Lord Worfin (of The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension), but while John Lithgow was fine and nutty, Jones is much creepier and much, much more evil, even when he finds time to be deadpan hilarious during the greatest scene in the film, in the “cajun sushi” diner. 6. The Diner Scene Although it’s mostly thanks to Jones that this scene is so memorable, it’s not just his performance alone that makes it so terrific. Every time I watch the movie, I look forward to the entire episode, from Jones/Jenning/Dark Overlord’s exposition to the waitress’ interactions with the “family” to Howard’s pie and quack-fu fight with a bunch of rednecks. And I will always recommend the movie for this scene alone. It includes a lot of disturbing elements, such as Beverly’s claim that she’s Howard’s girlfriend and the angry mob’s desire to kill and cook a talking duck man, that might have worked better had Howard been represented as an animated character rather than a guy in a suit (bestiality and homicide is just fine in Who Framed Roger Rabbit? and Looney Tunes cartoons), but it’s also one of the weirdest and funniest scenes from any comic book adaptation ever. 7. Lea Thompson as Beverly Switzler I would go so far as to argue that Lea Thompson’s crimped-haired Beverly is the hottest female comic book character come to (cinematic) life, but that is certainly subjective. Plenty of people probably prefer Kirsten Dunst, Halle Berry, Jennifer Garner, Michelle Pfeiffer, Pamela Anderson or even Margot Kidder. But Thompson is definitely in there as one of the greatest physical incarnations of a comic book femme d’ fantasy, and the scene where she goes to bed with Howard wearing barely a bit of lingerie (as creepy as the scene is infamous for being) is up there with Dunst’s wet tshirt/upside-down kiss in Spider-Man and any of Pfeiffer’s bondage-bound Catwoman scenes in Batman Returns as one of the hottest moments from any comic book adaptation ever. 8. Cherry Bomb and the Howard the Duck soundtrack Beverly may not have been a rocker in the comics, but this was the 1980s, and you had to have a great synthpop soundtrack, so the character was given a change in career as the leader of a Runaways-inspired band called Cherry Bomb. And for having beaten out more musical contenders for the role, including The Go-Go’s Belinda Carlisle and Tori Amos (then of Y Can’t Tori Read), Lea Thompson does quite well singing such catchy tunes as “Howard the Duck” and “Hunger City.” Cherry Bomb’s music also had some help from Thomas Dolby, George Clinton, Joe Walsh and Stevie Wonder. As for the rest of the soundtrack, Oscar-winning composer John Barry (Out of Africa; the James Bond films) contributes a very fine score. 9. It’s For Kids Because everyone always defends the Star Wars prequels as being for kids, as if that’s really an excuse for faulty filmmaking, I’m going to do the same here. But to do that, I guess I have to also defend the idea that it is indeed a movie for kids. Watching the thing, it’s hard to tell, because there is a lot of content and humor that only adults can or should appreciate, and certainly one of the biggest criticisms with the movie is it’s fluctuations between wanting to be a biting, sarcastic comic book adaptation for older audiences and fans of the source and needing to be a silly movie for kids. But for all the duck nudity, sexuality and other material better suited to mature audiences, there’s not really anything harmful to a kid, and there’s millions of us ‘80s children who grew up okay to prove it. So, while you adults may not be able to enjoy Howard the Duck anymore, even as a nostalgic artifact, your kids will probably like it as much as you used to. 10. It’s Not Redundant Unlike some comic book adaptations, Howard the Duck isn’t a straight lift from the pages of the source material, and it’s better off for it. Some fans of the comic may be annoyed with Howard’s appearance or Beverly’s occupation or the absence of any of Howard’s usual foes, but those of us who saw the movie first can appreciate the differences, because these allow for a better introduction to and curiosity about the comic. In a way, it’s to the original Marvel series as The Incredibles is to the graphic novel of Watchmen (though it’s certainly not anywhere near as smart nor well-crafted as The Incredibles). Now, if you still aren’t sure whether or not you should get the DVD, watch some (or all) of the movie on Hulu: Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:01:08 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com3/10/2009 6:01:08 PMIf you buy the kids only one new video release this week, make it Pinocchio. Obviously. But if you have enough spending money to buy two, pick up Howard the Duck as well. Finally on DVD in America (with a Special Edition no less), the infamous flop is anything but a great film. Yet it is hardly one of the worst films of the 1980s, despite its reputation. For the past 23 years, I’ve stood by my childhood love for Howard the Duck, constantly acknowledging that I even owned Ellis Weiner’s novelization of the film. Technically, the best reason to defend the movie’s existence is that it directly led to the creation of Pixar. But this reason doesn’t influence anyone to watch the thing. So, in order to defend the movie’s onscreen worth, I’ve come up with ten points for why you should pick up the new Howard the Duck disc and not feel at all guilty about doing so. 1. It’s No Longer the Worst Lucasfilm Production Take your pick — there’s The Phantom Menace or there’s Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, either of which could certainly take the prize for being the worst movie to come from George Lucas in his 40 years producing films. Well, maybe not worse than More American Graffiti. But both films were far bigger creative and franchise disappointments than Howard the Duck (financial success is another story, of course), and so they have a relative sort of wretchedness that places them in the bottom of Lucas’ Sarlacc pit of a career. Even if you’re one of those defend-to-the-end Star Wars fanboys who will argue the pros of Menace, at least then consider Willow to be worse than Howard the Duck. The blatant Lord of the Rings rip-off has its historical relevance, but looking back on it now, it’s even more dated than Howard. And regardless of how groundbreaking it was, Willow’s visual effects don’t hold up quite as well as Howard’s old-fashioned, and oft-celebrated craftsmanship. But that’s another point… 2.  The Special Effects Are Technically Brilliant Those of us who prefer go-motion and other non-CGI effects work will always pay respect to ILM’s achievements on Howard the Duck, particularly their efforts with the Dark Overlord creature in the movie’s final act. People unfortunately tend to focus on the $2 million duck suit (see point #3), but even then Howard didn’t deserve its Razzie for Worst Visual Effects. To compare it to digital creatures, the monster would fit in just fine in either of the Men in Black movies. And for its own time, it was a magnificent creation. So it existed alongside a silly costumed creature in an overpriced B-movie, it still deserved an Oscar nomination for F/X in 1987, a year the Academy recognized Little Shop of Horrors and Poltergeist II: The Other Side (and incomparable winner Aliens). 3. The Duck Suit is Still Better Than Most CGI Those of us who grew up with Muppets, Chewbacca and other non-computer-generated fantasy creatures had no problem with Howard the Duck’s titular fowl being represented as a dwarf in a duck suit. The issue with the effect, though, is that allegedly Lucas had wanted Howard to be a CG creation, but the technology just wasn’t there yet. So, costumes and robotics, all of which reportedly cost $2 million, were viewed as a relative disappointment. But think of how few great CG characters there have been in the past 20 years, and then seriously attempt to argue that Howard would have been any better if made in the years of CGI supremacy. Now, also remember that 1986 was a year that gave us fine puppetry, costumed dwarfs and robotics like that found in Labyrinth (also a Lucasfilm production), Little Shop of Horrors, Legend, Short Circuit, Flight of the Navigator, Troll (sure, why not?) and, yes, Howard the Duck. So really, the only thing disappointing about the duck suit is that it doesn’t really look like the comic book character upon which it’s based. Of course, it’s not likely that a CG version of Howard would have been any more faithful. 4. Parallels, Puns and Playful Philosophy Some fans of the original Howard the Duck comics could argue that the duck suit is hardly the worst offense of unfaithfulness. Other complaints might be the alteration of Beverly’s career or the occasional sacrifice of the comic’s tone in order to pander to younger audiences. But real sticklers may take issue with Howard’s origin, the inclusion of Duckworld (which did come from the comics but wasn’t Howard creator Steve Gerber’s idea of what the character’s home world was like) and the punny parallels that came with it. Yet for those of us who love corny jokes and puns, the idea of an alternate world where everything’s the same, just with descendants of ducks rather than apes, is a lot of fun. It’s the same appreciation that allowed me to enjoy the ska scene and the similarly parallel worlds of The Flintstones and Dinosaurs and the parodies in MAD Magazine. In the first few minutes, we get treated to the following cheesy but delicious sight and audio gags: a Rolling Egg magazine, a Playduck magazine, movie posters for “Splahsdance,” “Breeders of the Lost Stork” and My Little Chickadee (starring W.C. Fowls and Mae Nest), and commercials for feather fungus treatment and the Crazy Eddie spoof “Crazy Webby.” This, plus the opening credit narration and theory of Duckworld evolution were enjoyable to a kid in the midst of learning about Darwin and pondering the existence of alternate worlds. 5. Jeffrey Jones as Dr. Jenning/Dark Overlord Between Howard the Duck and Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, Jeffrey Jones was one of the biggest and best villains of the summer of ‘86. For kids, anyway. But even adults recognized the quality of Jones’ performance in Howard, as Dr. Jenning, the scientist who becomes possessed by the Dark Overlord. To cult audiences, he may have seemed like just another Dr. Lizardo/Lord Worfin (of The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension), but while John Lithgow was fine and nutty, Jones is much creepier and much, much more evil, even when he finds time to be deadpan hilarious during the greatest scene in the film, in the “cajun sushi” diner. 6. The Diner Scene Although it’s mostly thanks to Jones that this scene is so memorable, it’s not just his performance alone that makes it so terrific. Every time I watch the movie, I look forward to the entire episode, from Jones/Jenning/Dark Overlord’s exposition to the waitress’ interactions with the “family” to Howard’s pie and quack-fu fight with a bunch of rednecks. And I will always recommend the movie for this scene alone. It includes a lot of disturbing elements, such as Beverly’s claim that she’s Howard’s girlfriend and the angry mob’s desire to kill and cook a talking duck man, that might have worked better had Howard been represented as an animated character rather than a guy in a suit (bestiality and homicide is just fine in Who Framed Roger Rabbit? and Looney Tunes cartoons), but it’s also one of the weirdest and funniest scenes from any comic book adaptation ever. 7. Lea Thompson as Beverly Switzler I would go so far as to argue that Lea Thompson’s crimped-haired Beverly is the hottest female comic book character come to (cinematic) life, but that is certainly subjective. Plenty of people probably prefer Kirsten Dunst, Halle Berry, Jennifer Garner, Michelle Pfeiffer, Pamela Anderson or even Margot Kidder. But Thompson is definitely in there as one of the greatest physical incarnations of a comic book femme d’ fantasy, and the scene where she goes to bed with Howard wearing barely a bit of lingerie (as creepy as the scene is infamous for being) is up there with Dunst’s wet tshirt/upside-down kiss in Spider-Man and any of Pfeiffer’s bondage-bound Catwoman scenes in Batman Returns as one of the hottest moments from any comic book adaptation ever. 8. Cherry Bomb and the Howard the Duck soundtrack Beverly may not have been a rocker in the comics, but this was the 1980s, and you had to have a great synthpop soundtrack, so the character was given a change in career as the leader of a Runaways-inspired band called Cherry Bomb. And for having beaten out more musical contenders for the role, including The Go-Go’s Belinda Carlisle and Tori Amos (then of Y Can’t Tori Read), Lea Thompson does quite well singing such catchy tunes as “Howard the Duck” and “Hunger City.” Cherry Bomb’s music also had some help from Thomas Dolby, George Clinton, Joe Walsh and Stevie Wonder. As for the rest of the soundtrack, Oscar-winning composer John Barry (Out of Africa; the James Bond films) contributes a very fine score. 9. It’s For Kids Because everyone always defends the Star Wars prequels as being for kids, as if that’s really an excuse for faulty filmmaking, I’m going to do the same here. But to do that, I guess I have to also defend the idea that it is indeed a movie for kids. Watching the thing, it’s hard to tell, because there is a lot of content and humor that only adults can or should appreciate, and certainly one of the biggest criticisms with the movie is it’s fluctuations between wanting to be a biting, sarcastic comic book adaptation for older audiences and fans of the source and needing to be a silly movie for kids. But for all the duck nudity, sexuality and other material better suited to mature audiences, there’s not really anything harmful to a kid, and there’s millions of us ‘80s children who grew up okay to prove it. So, while you adults may not be able to enjoy Howard the Duck anymore, even as a nostalgic artifact, your kids will probably like it as much as you used to. 10. It’s Not Redundant Unlike some comic book adaptations, Howard the Duck isn’t a straight lift from the pages of the source material, and it’s better off for it. Some fans of the comic may be annoyed with Howard’s appearance or Beverly’s occupation or the absence of any of Howard’s usual foes, but those of us who saw the movie first can appreciate the differences, because these allow for a better introduction to and curiosity about the comic. In a way, it’s to the original Marvel series as The Incredibles is to the graphic novel of Watchmen (though it’s certainly not anywhere near as smart nor well-crafted as The Incredibles). Now, if you still aren’t sure whether or not you should get the DVD, watch some (or all) of the movie on Hulu: Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/6/16/31288.aspxPost By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 6/16/2008 5:01:14 PM
Body: The best time for a Get Smart movie would have been the late ’60s, when the original television series was still on the air. In fact, there was a theatrical Get Smart film in the works during the run of the show, but it was canceled when the theatrical release of Munster, Go Home! bombed at the box office. Many years later, in 1980, a Get Smart feature titled The Nude Bomb was released to theaters, but it also performed poorly. Now we’re getting a remake version starring Steve Carell in the role that was so iconically defined by the late Don Adams. Will it do the show justice? Reportedly the budget was $80 million, a significant amount of which was probably put towards pointless effects. But the best thing Warner Bros. could have done with that money is to give a large amount to series creators Mel Brooks and Buck Henry, who probably even today could churn out a better script than Failure to Launch scribes Tom J. Astle and Matt Ember. Despite its lack of original Get Smart talent, though, it could still be marginally funny. Yet the real problem is that it may be too outdated and obsolete for audiences to care. In the four decades since the show went off the air, there has been plenty of similar-themed movies, from spy spoofs to films with bumbling heroes. The following ten titles are the best evidence of why this new Get Smart movie is completely unnecessary: Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery - It’s interesting that Get Smart is going up against a Mike Myers movie this weekend, because in a way it’s also going up against Myers’ Austin Powers movies, as well. Sure, spy parodies have been around in spades since around the time of the first James Bond movie, but nothing has been as popular as this series, which of course includes the much bigger-grossing sequels, Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me and Austin Powers in Goldmember. Inspector Gadget - The original animated series was based on Get Smart and even featured the voice of Don Adams. Also like Get Smart, it was remade into a feature film with a different cast. However, it did find room to employ both Adams (as the voice of the dog, Brain) and Andy Dick (who had played Maxwell Smart’s son in a 1990s Get Smart series). Regardless, it was still a failure, both in terms of its box office gross and the way it ruined our childhood memory of the beloved cartoon. Perhaps if the Get Smart movie is good enough, then it could make up for Inspector Gadget (and its sequel), but it would have to be really, really good. The Pink Panther - You might say that Get Smart came about as a response to both the Bond films and the original Pink Panther movies, which featured a bumbling police inspector instead of a bumbling spy. The recent remake of The Pink Panther already showed us that some characters should really be forever remembered by their most iconic portrayer. In this case Steve Martin was nothing compared to Peter Sellers, while in the case of Get Smart, Steve Carell is only muddying the memory of Don Adams. Even if he does a good job, he’s just not the real Maxwell Smart. He should just be in another lame generic spy spoof instead. Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgandy - Want to see Steve Carell act clueless? Watch Anchorman again, because he can’t top his performance as Brick Tamland. “I love lamp.” The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad! - The show Police Squad was in a way like Get Smart, only with a clueless detective rather than a clueless spy (I guess it could be seen as more like The Pink Panther then?). Fortunately that series only took a few years to spin-off a feature film, and thanks to the genius of Jim Abrahams and the Zucker Bros., who are almost equal in spoofing ability to Mel Brooks, it is funnier than any single episode or film of Get Smart can be without Brooks’ involvement. Spy Hard - Leslie Nielsen starred as the bumbling detective in the Naked Gun movies and then later played a bumbling spy in this spoof. The result: if Nielsen hadn’t already supplanted the Maxwell Smart character earlier, he did so here, even if really, really poorly. The Man Who Knew Too Little - More clueless spy stuff, this one an underrated movie starring Bill Murray. It actually made less money than The Nude Bomb (even without an inflation adjustment), but I enjoyed it a lot, probably more than I’ll enjoy Get Smart. Johnny English - Yep, I’m still just listing the other recent spy spoofs. But, really, there’s a point. When even Rowan Atkinson has done the bumbling spy bit, it’s time to hang up on the idea. I Spy - Did I already point out that #s 6-10 are more spy comedies? And there’s a lot that I’m not even including! This one is significant because it’s also based on a hit TV series. And it was a huge bomb. Spies Like Us - The thing I like best about the original Get Smart, as well as a number of the films on this list, is that the incompetent hero isn’t really aware of how incompetent he really is. The best movie to utilize this premise, though, has to be Spies Like Us. But that movie came out toward the end of the Cold War, when spy stuff was seeming ridiculously outdated. Comparatively, Get Smart arrives post 9/11, when the fact that American intelligence is incompetent is not so funny anymore. I think that now audiences would much prefer to see more serious spy films, like the Bond reboot Casino Royale (note the significance of this film being kind of a remake of a Bond parody) and the Bourne Identity franchise. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 21:01:14 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com6/16/2008 5:01:14 PMThe best time for a Get Smart movie would have been the late ’60s, when the original television series was still on the air. In fact, there was a theatrical Get Smart film in the works during the run of the show, but it was canceled when the theatrical release of Munster, Go Home! bombed at the box office. Many years later, in 1980, a Get Smart feature titled The Nude Bomb was released to theaters, but it also performed poorly. Now we’re getting a remake version starring Steve Carell in the role that was so iconically defined by the late Don Adams. Will it do the show justice? Reportedly the budget was $80 million, a significant amount of which was probably put towards pointless effects. But the best thing Warner Bros. could have done with that money is to give a large amount to series creators Mel Brooks and Buck Henry, who probably even today could churn out a better script than Failure to Launch scribes Tom J. Astle and Matt Ember. Despite its lack of original Get Smart talent, though, it could still be marginally funny. Yet the real problem is that it may be too outdated and obsolete for audiences to care. In the four decades since the show went off the air, there has been plenty of similar-themed movies, from spy spoofs to films with bumbling heroes. The following ten titles are the best evidence of why this new Get Smart movie is completely unnecessary: Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery - It’s interesting that Get Smart is going up against a Mike Myers movie this weekend, because in a way it’s also going up against Myers’ Austin Powers movies, as well. Sure, spy parodies have been around in spades since around the time of the first James Bond movie, but nothing has been as popular as this series, which of course includes the much bigger-grossing sequels, Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me and Austin Powers in Goldmember. Inspector Gadget - The original animated series was based on Get Smart and even featured the voice of Don Adams. Also like Get Smart, it was remade into a feature film with a different cast. However, it did find room to employ both Adams (as the voice of the dog, Brain) and Andy Dick (who had played Maxwell Smart’s son in a 1990s Get Smart series). Regardless, it was still a failure, both in terms of its box office gross and the way it ruined our childhood memory of the beloved cartoon. Perhaps if the Get Smart movie is good enough, then it could make up for Inspector Gadget (and its sequel), but it would have to be really, really good. The Pink Panther - You might say that Get Smart came about as a response to both the Bond films and the original Pink Panther movies, which featured a bumbling police inspector instead of a bumbling spy. The recent remake of The Pink Panther already showed us that some characters should really be forever remembered by their most iconic portrayer. In this case Steve Martin was nothing compared to Peter Sellers, while in the case of Get Smart, Steve Carell is only muddying the memory of Don Adams. Even if he does a good job, he’s just not the real Maxwell Smart. He should just be in another lame generic spy spoof instead. Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgandy - Want to see Steve Carell act clueless? Watch Anchorman again, because he can’t top his performance as Brick Tamland. “I love lamp.” The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad! - The show Police Squad was in a way like Get Smart, only with a clueless detective rather than a clueless spy (I guess it could be seen as more like The Pink Panther then?). Fortunately that series only took a few years to spin-off a feature film, and thanks to the genius of Jim Abrahams and the Zucker Bros., who are almost equal in spoofing ability to Mel Brooks, it is funnier than any single episode or film of Get Smart can be without Brooks’ involvement. Spy Hard - Leslie Nielsen starred as the bumbling detective in the Naked Gun movies and then later played a bumbling spy in this spoof. The result: if Nielsen hadn’t already supplanted the Maxwell Smart character earlier, he did so here, even if really, really poorly. The Man Who Knew Too Little - More clueless spy stuff, this one an underrated movie starring Bill Murray. It actually made less money than The Nude Bomb (even without an inflation adjustment), but I enjoyed it a lot, probably more than I’ll enjoy Get Smart. Johnny English - Yep, I’m still just listing the other recent spy spoofs. But, really, there’s a point. When even Rowan Atkinson has done the bumbling spy bit, it’s time to hang up on the idea. I Spy - Did I already point out that #s 6-10 are more spy comedies? And there’s a lot that I’m not even including! This one is significant because it’s also based on a hit TV series. And it was a huge bomb. Spies Like Us - The thing I like best about the original Get Smart, as well as a number of the films on this list, is that the incompetent hero isn’t really aware of how incompetent he really is. The best movie to utilize this premise, though, has to be Spies Like Us. But that movie came out toward the end of the Cold War, when spy stuff was seeming ridiculously outdated. Comparatively, Get Smart arrives post 9/11, when the fact that American intelligence is incompetent is not so funny anymore. I think that now audiences would much prefer to see more serious spy films, like the Bond reboot Casino Royale (note the significance of this film being kind of a remake of a Bond parody) and the Bourne Identity franchise. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/BoxSets/MemberTagFilms.aspxBoxSets
Number of films tagged: 25

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 27

]]>Sat, 23 Jun 2007 07:48:13 GMT25327Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/spectre/MemberTagFilms.aspxspectre
Number of films tagged: 2

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 2

]]>Sun, 27 Jan 2008 21:01:12 GMT222Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/AstonMartin/MemberTagFilms.aspxAstonMartin
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Mon, 22 Oct 2007 04:02:01 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/bondjamesbond/MemberTagFilms.aspxbondjamesbond
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Mon, 22 Oct 2007 04:01:35 GMT111Tag