list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Mystery Men 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/Mystery_Men/134336/default.aspx Title: Mystery Men
Year: 1999
Director: Kinka Usher
Plot: Can seven not-so-superheroes save a city of the future? Based on the comic book series created by Bob Burden, Mystery Men is set in the teeming metropolis of Champion City, where noble superhero Captain Amazing (Greg Kinnear) keeps the peace and sees that justice is done. When Captain Amazing mysteriously disappears, his archenemy Casanova Frankenstein (Geoffrey Rush) sees his opportunity to seize power and bend the city to his evil will, with his associate Dr. Annabel Leek (Lena Olin) at his side. However, Casanova will not succeed without a fight, as the The Mystery Men leap into action. The Mystery Men are not your ordinary Men of Steel; in fact, they're barely superheroes at all. Mr. Furious (Ben Stiller) has one gift: throwing tantrums. Blue Raja (Hank Azaria) is a deadly hand with spoons and forks (but not knives). Shoveler (William H. Macy) can dig with superior speed and force. The Bowler (Janeane Garafalo) rolls the ball with superhuman precision. Spleen (Paul Reubens) has a gaseous problem that he's turned into a weapon against evildoers. Invisible Boy (Kel Mitchell) is convinced he can become invisible at will, but he hasn't actually done it yet. And The Sphinx (Wes Studi) does have an unusual power: he can cut metal objects with his mind. Aided by addled gadget master Dr. Heller (Tom Waits), the Mystery Men make their move against Casanova and Annabel, who feel just threatened enough to make things personal by kidnapping Mr. Furious' girlfriend Monica (Claire Forlani). Mystery Men marked the feature directorial debut of Kinka Usher, who previously directed such ads as the Taco Bell talking chihuahua and the Dairy Association's "Got Milk?" ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 20
Number of Lists: 33
Number of blog posts: 3
Number of discussion threads: 1
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:02:46 GMTMystery Men1999Kinka UsherCan seven not-so-superheroes save a city of the future? Based on the comic book series created by Bob Burden, Mystery Men is set in the teeming metropolis of Champion City, where noble superhero Captain Amazing (<a href="/players/P___200274/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Greg Kinnear</a>) keeps the peace and sees that justice is done. When Captain Amazing mysteriously disappears, his archenemy Casanova Frankenstein (<a href="/players/P___151418/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Geoffrey Rush</a>) sees his opportunity to seize power and bend the city to his evil will, with his associate Dr. Annabel Leek (<a href="/players/P____53961/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Lena Olin</a>) at his side. However, Casanova will not succeed without a fight, as the The Mystery Men leap into action. The Mystery Men are not your ordinary Men of Steel; in fact, they're barely superheroes at all. Mr. Furious (<a href="/players/P___112816/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Ben Stiller</a>) has one gift: throwing tantrums. Blue Raja (<a href="/players/P_____3056/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Hank Azaria</a>) is a deadly hand with spoons and forks (but not knives). Shoveler (William H. Macy) can dig with superior speed and force. The Bowler (Janeane Garafalo) rolls the ball with superhuman precision. Spleen (<a href="/players/P___108024/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Paul Reubens</a>) has a gaseous problem that he's turned into a weapon against evildoers. Invisible Boy (Kel Mitchell) is convinced he can become invisible at will, but he hasn't actually done it yet. And The Sphinx (<a href="/players/P____68861/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Wes Studi</a>) does have an unusual power: he can cut metal objects with his mind. Aided by addled gadget master Dr. Heller (<a href="/players/P___115730/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Tom Waits</a>), the Mystery Men make their move against Casanova and Annabel, who feel just threatened enough to make things personal by kidnapping Mr. Furious' girlfriend Monica (<a href="/players/P___195968/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Claire Forlani</a>). Mystery Men marked the feature directorial debut of Kinka Usher, who previously directed such ads as the Taco Bell talking chihuahua and the Dairy Association's "Got Milk?" ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide20Tag Target (>10)33313http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/u34951thctt.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Mystery_Men/134336/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/3/5/40839.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/5/2009 10:00:20 AM
Body: Many smart cinephiles and comic book geeks will avoid watching Watchmen this weekend. Not to avoid the crowds of opening weekend, and not to patiently await word of mouth from friends and reactions from critics. No, these bright few will ignore the out-of-season blockbuster event because there is absolutely no reason to see this movie. They recognize that any Watchmen adaptation (particularly this one that’s been made) is completely unnecessary. Well, for anyone not out to profit from it, anyway. Of course, even Warner Bros. might have been better off not producing the thing, since the studio won’t be making as much money as it had initially envisioned thanks to that profit-participation settlement with Fox. The point of this post is not to call Watchmen watchers stupid. Rather, our list of five reasons the film is unnecessary is to help moviegoers get smart. After reading this, though, if any of you are still determined to waste your time sitting through almost 3 hours of redundant, rehashed, irrelevant, ridiculous and inescapably disappointing superhero cinema, we’ll be left with no choice but to consider you mindless sheep, the kind that deserve to be duped. And if Dr. Manhattan chooses to vaporize us (or fans choose to curse us out in the comments section) for exposing the truth about this enterprise of excess, then so be it. We believe we’ve served justice here. 1. Faithful adaptations of graphic novels are redundant Comic books and movies, though both visual and (for the most part) processive forms of storytelling, are certainly different mediums. Yet there is good reason for people to believe film adaptations of graphic novels are easy, particularly when they’re meant to be faithful reproductions. Recreating a comic panel exactly and then giving it motion isn’t necessarily a simple process, but it is a pointless one. In the past, such redundancy has been fully evident in the sinfully unnecessary movie Sin City, and now Watchmen is furthermore putting the super in superfluous with its attempt to mostly please fans of the classic comic by meticulously replicating Alan Moore’s script and Dave Gibbons and John Higgins’ artwork for the big screen. But in addition to indulging the narrowly satisfied fanatics, a movie as resembling of its source material as Watchmen is may be accepted as substitute and partly render the graphic novel obsolete to newcomers. This is of course a problem with adaptations in general, regardless of the type of medium being adapted. Yet it’s all the more potentially displacing when the film is both based on a visual work and intended to be as precise an imitation as possible. Recently, writing for ThePlaylist, Christopher R. Adams pointed out that, “the best comic book films (”The Dark Knight”, “X-Men 2″ and Iron Man) were not adapted word-for-word and panel-for-panel to the screen. They weren’t even culled from one single story!” So why would anyone think it a good idea to make an exact copy of a graphic novel? Well, defenders of both Sin City and Watchmen will undoubtedly argue that it’s “neat” to see the two-dimensional and relatively static images from the book given the added depth and movement, but then so is it similarly curious to see what happens when you drive a car into a wall. So, devout Watchmen readers, why not simply honor the graphic novel by letting it stand alone and experiencing it in its intended medium? 2. So many movies satirizing and subverting superheroes already exist Watchmen may or may not have been the first subversive twist on superhero comics, but the movie is hardly the first of its kind. From the really lame (Superhero Movie) to the really great (The Incredibles), films making fun of or merely playing on the concept of superheroes have been around for about as long as the Watchmen graphic novel has been in print. And so, like our list of movies that made the recent Get Smart obsolete, it would be quite easy to name examples of movies and TV shows that, whether or not they were directly influenced by the Watchmen comics in the first place, have seemingly superseded the Watchmen story and therefore made its film adaptation a stale, or at least surplus, endeavor. Why should anyone unfamiliar with the graphic novel need to see Watchmen after experiencing Hancock, Mystery Men, The Tick, The Dark Knight, Iron Man, Hellboy, Unbreakable, The Specials, Sky High, My Super Ex-Girlfriend, The Meteor Man, Blankman, et al.? Well, there may be those superhero movie completists who will see any example of the genre, but such people are likely to be the most unimpressed with a story as seemingly dated and done before as Watchmen’s. Really, in a way, The Incredibles was the best possible movie to come out of the graphic novel’s wake, and The Dark Knight was the darkest and most realistic. Comparatively, even a decently made Watchmen adaptation should seem a pale wannabe. That’s why it’s easy to side with IMDb user Richard Brunton’s concern from years ago: “There is so much similarity to The Watchmen that those who haven’t read the graphic novel will be saying ‘That’s the Incredibles movie’ when Watchmen finally comes to fruition.” And already someone made the mashup trailer to encourage such a concern. 3. Watchmen has no contemporary relevance A movie of Watchmen in 2009 has a problem of relevance in two regards. One relates to the previous point about how plenty of subversive superhero movies have already been made prior to this adaptation. Yet even without the preexistence of all those titles the Watchmen movie, as it’s been made, would fail on other levels of innovation and relevance. Paul DeBenedetto of the comics blog Wednesday’s Child, writing us in defense of his decision not to bother with the movie, says, “The greatness of Watchmen (the book) lies not so much in the story as it does the storytelling. Thus a great adaptation of the book would not be a straight retelling of the story, no matter how accurate.” Indeed, when Watchmen was published it was groundbreaking in its medium, totally revolutionizing the art of superhero comics. But not just because of how it played with superhero character conventions, because it also deconstructed the superhero comic’s narrative style. True Watchmen fans, and likewise comics experts, should therefore see no purpose in a Watchmen movie that isn’t analogously cinematically groundbreaking. This Watchmen movie will unfortunately have no notable affect on the film medium, despite being helmed by an alleged “visionary director” (as the film’s marketing has labeled Zach Snyder). The other way in which a current and faithful adaptation of Watchmen is problematically irrelevant is due to its retention of the book’s setting. The book’s themes might not translate completely were the story updated, but the movie could be better off for developing its own themes, whether to modernize certain elements (Vietnam becomes Iraq; Bush is substituted for Nixon) and comment on contemporary abuses of power or to hypothesize how real-life superheroes might deflect the desire for a super-president like Barack Obama. Such a movie would barely be recognizable to fans of the book, but again, adaptation is best when not directly lifted. As the movie was in fact directly lifted, it only functions as a curiosity, like a “What If…” comic or an alternate history novel, both of which are slightly interesting though mainly dispensable works. 4. What was once intended for realism now comes off as ridiculous Considering how the Watchmen comics aimed to take superhero conventions and adapt them to see how they’d function in the real world, it’s a great shame that the Watchmen movie looks and is being criticized for being quite silly (one indirectly reported response compared the adaptation to the live-action Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movies, while The Hollywood Reporter’s Kirk Honeycutt labeled it campy soap opera). But it shouldn’t be surprising that directly lifting from the pages of a dark, serious and relatively realistic comic would result in camp. Because realism on the page is hardly the same as realism on the screen. And because many literary techniques, even those working with visual cues, don’t translate well to audio and visual media. A Watchmen movie shouldn’t look as cartoonish as this one does, but due to the artificial feel of the sets, the stylish cinematographic style and the garishness of the costumes, it seems to have more in common with Joel Schumacher’s Batman movies than with Christopher Nolan’s. 5. There was only ever room for disappointment As with anything as highly anticipated as the Watchmen movie, there isn’t much room for satisfaction. Even if the Star Wars prequels weren’t as bad as they are, for instance, they’d still have been unavoidably disappointing to a majority of fans. Maybe not to the biased diehard fanatics, who will forever defend The Phantom Menace, the Matrix sequels, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, The Godfather Part III or Watchmen, but certainly to those whose expectations were so high they could only focus on whatever flaws the respective films have. Last month, Graeme McMillan wrote at io9 that only the fans will be disappointed due to how much they’ve been building the film up in their minds, and that Warner Bros. should have therefore concentrated the marketing at mainstream audiences. Yet really, for those familiar with the Watchmen comic, the movie might not be as faithful (i.e. as redundant) as hoped or it might be too faithful (i.e. irrelevant and silly looking), but they will enjoy it for the most part. However, those unfamiliar with the comic are likely to be the most disappointed, because they’re the ones going into this in response to the immense hype and recommendation that’s come with the book for more than 20 years. It’s the same reason that some of us who read the graphic novel late had a “that’s it?” response. Those bypassing the book, however, won’t get at least the benefit of reading a quality work that merely seems overrated (due to the unfortunate perspective of high expectations). And their “that’s it?” will be, to them, even more of a “that’s all it will ever be.” Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 05 Mar 2009 15:00:20 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com3/5/2009 10:00:20 AMMany smart cinephiles and comic book geeks will avoid watching Watchmen this weekend. Not to avoid the crowds of opening weekend, and not to patiently await word of mouth from friends and reactions from critics. No, these bright few will ignore the out-of-season blockbuster event because there is absolutely no reason to see this movie. They recognize that any Watchmen adaptation (particularly this one that’s been made) is completely unnecessary. Well, for anyone not out to profit from it, anyway. Of course, even Warner Bros. might have been better off not producing the thing, since the studio won’t be making as much money as it had initially envisioned thanks to that profit-participation settlement with Fox. The point of this post is not to call Watchmen watchers stupid. Rather, our list of five reasons the film is unnecessary is to help moviegoers get smart. After reading this, though, if any of you are still determined to waste your time sitting through almost 3 hours of redundant, rehashed, irrelevant, ridiculous and inescapably disappointing superhero cinema, we’ll be left with no choice but to consider you mindless sheep, the kind that deserve to be duped. And if Dr. Manhattan chooses to vaporize us (or fans choose to curse us out in the comments section) for exposing the truth about this enterprise of excess, then so be it. We believe we’ve served justice here. 1. Faithful adaptations of graphic novels are redundant Comic books and movies, though both visual and (for the most part) processive forms of storytelling, are certainly different mediums. Yet there is good reason for people to believe film adaptations of graphic novels are easy, particularly when they’re meant to be faithful reproductions. Recreating a comic panel exactly and then giving it motion isn’t necessarily a simple process, but it is a pointless one. In the past, such redundancy has been fully evident in the sinfully unnecessary movie Sin City, and now Watchmen is furthermore putting the super in superfluous with its attempt to mostly please fans of the classic comic by meticulously replicating Alan Moore’s script and Dave Gibbons and John Higgins’ artwork for the big screen. But in addition to indulging the narrowly satisfied fanatics, a movie as resembling of its source material as Watchmen is may be accepted as substitute and partly render the graphic novel obsolete to newcomers. This is of course a problem with adaptations in general, regardless of the type of medium being adapted. Yet it’s all the more potentially displacing when the film is both based on a visual work and intended to be as precise an imitation as possible. Recently, writing for ThePlaylist, Christopher R. Adams pointed out that, “the best comic book films (”The Dark Knight”, “X-Men 2″ and Iron Man) were not adapted word-for-word and panel-for-panel to the screen. They weren’t even culled from one single story!” So why would anyone think it a good idea to make an exact copy of a graphic novel? Well, defenders of both Sin City and Watchmen will undoubtedly argue that it’s “neat” to see the two-dimensional and relatively static images from the book given the added depth and movement, but then so is it similarly curious to see what happens when you drive a car into a wall. So, devout Watchmen readers, why not simply honor the graphic novel by letting it stand alone and experiencing it in its intended medium? 2. So many movies satirizing and subverting superheroes already exist Watchmen may or may not have been the first subversive twist on superhero comics, but the movie is hardly the first of its kind. From the really lame (Superhero Movie) to the really great (The Incredibles), films making fun of or merely playing on the concept of superheroes have been around for about as long as the Watchmen graphic novel has been in print. And so, like our list of movies that made the recent Get Smart obsolete, it would be quite easy to name examples of movies and TV shows that, whether or not they were directly influenced by the Watchmen comics in the first place, have seemingly superseded the Watchmen story and therefore made its film adaptation a stale, or at least surplus, endeavor. Why should anyone unfamiliar with the graphic novel need to see Watchmen after experiencing Hancock, Mystery Men, The Tick, The Dark Knight, Iron Man, Hellboy, Unbreakable, The Specials, Sky High, My Super Ex-Girlfriend, The Meteor Man, Blankman, et al.? Well, there may be those superhero movie completists who will see any example of the genre, but such people are likely to be the most unimpressed with a story as seemingly dated and done before as Watchmen’s. Really, in a way, The Incredibles was the best possible movie to come out of the graphic novel’s wake, and The Dark Knight was the darkest and most realistic. Comparatively, even a decently made Watchmen adaptation should seem a pale wannabe. That’s why it’s easy to side with IMDb user Richard Brunton’s concern from years ago: “There is so much similarity to The Watchmen that those who haven’t read the graphic novel will be saying ‘That’s the Incredibles movie’ when Watchmen finally comes to fruition.” And already someone made the mashup trailer to encourage such a concern. 3. Watchmen has no contemporary relevance A movie of Watchmen in 2009 has a problem of relevance in two regards. One relates to the previous point about how plenty of subversive superhero movies have already been made prior to this adaptation. Yet even without the preexistence of all those titles the Watchmen movie, as it’s been made, would fail on other levels of innovation and relevance. Paul DeBenedetto of the comics blog Wednesday’s Child, writing us in defense of his decision not to bother with the movie, says, “The greatness of Watchmen (the book) lies not so much in the story as it does the storytelling. Thus a great adaptation of the book would not be a straight retelling of the story, no matter how accurate.” Indeed, when Watchmen was published it was groundbreaking in its medium, totally revolutionizing the art of superhero comics. But not just because of how it played with superhero character conventions, because it also deconstructed the superhero comic’s narrative style. True Watchmen fans, and likewise comics experts, should therefore see no purpose in a Watchmen movie that isn’t analogously cinematically groundbreaking. This Watchmen movie will unfortunately have no notable affect on the film medium, despite being helmed by an alleged “visionary director” (as the film’s marketing has labeled Zach Snyder). The other way in which a current and faithful adaptation of Watchmen is problematically irrelevant is due to its retention of the book’s setting. The book’s themes might not translate completely were the story updated, but the movie could be better off for developing its own themes, whether to modernize certain elements (Vietnam becomes Iraq; Bush is substituted for Nixon) and comment on contemporary abuses of power or to hypothesize how real-life superheroes might deflect the desire for a super-president like Barack Obama. Such a movie would barely be recognizable to fans of the book, but again, adaptation is best when not directly lifted. As the movie was in fact directly lifted, it only functions as a curiosity, like a “What If…” comic or an alternate history novel, both of which are slightly interesting though mainly dispensable works. 4. What was once intended for realism now comes off as ridiculous Considering how the Watchmen comics aimed to take superhero conventions and adapt them to see how they’d function in the real world, it’s a great shame that the Watchmen movie looks and is being criticized for being quite silly (one indirectly reported response compared the adaptation to the live-action Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movies, while The Hollywood Reporter’s Kirk Honeycutt labeled it campy soap opera). But it shouldn’t be surprising that directly lifting from the pages of a dark, serious and relatively realistic comic would result in camp. Because realism on the page is hardly the same as realism on the screen. And because many literary techniques, even those working with visual cues, don’t translate well to audio and visual media. A Watchmen movie shouldn’t look as cartoonish as this one does, but due to the artificial feel of the sets, the stylish cinematographic style and the garishness of the costumes, it seems to have more in common with Joel Schumacher’s Batman movies than with Christopher Nolan’s. 5. There was only ever room for disappointment As with anything as highly anticipated as the Watchmen movie, there isn’t much room for satisfaction. Even if the Star Wars prequels weren’t as bad as they are, for instance, they’d still have been unavoidably disappointing to a majority of fans. Maybe not to the biased diehard fanatics, who will forever defend The Phantom Menace, the Matrix sequels, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, The Godfather Part III or Watchmen, but certainly to those whose expectations were so high they could only focus on whatever flaws the respective films have. Last month, Graeme McMillan wrote at io9 that only the fans will be disappointed due to how much they’ve been building the film up in their minds, and that Warner Bros. should have therefore concentrated the marketing at mainstream audiences. Yet really, for those familiar with the Watchmen comic, the movie might not be as faithful (i.e. as redundant) as hoped or it might be too faithful (i.e. irrelevant and silly looking), but they will enjoy it for the most part. However, those unfamiliar with the comic are likely to be the most disappointed, because they’re the ones going into this in response to the immense hype and recommendation that’s come with the book for more than 20 years. It’s the same reason that some of us who read the graphic novel late had a “that’s it?” response. Those bypassing the book, however, won’t get at least the benefit of reading a quality work that merely seems overrated (due to the unfortunate perspective of high expectations). And their “that’s it?” will be, to them, even more of a “that’s all it will ever be.” Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Filmgaming/Re_Recasting_THE_PRINCESS_BRIDE_1987/563/27720/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: leeroy711
Post To: Filmgaming
Post Date: 4/23/2008 8:05:18 PM
Body: Well now that it's over, I guess I'll chime in. My idea is to recast this film with characters from other movies. Meaning, new actors, playing the Princess Bride character as a character they have allready played in another movie. This would probably be the worst movie ever so.............. here it goesWestley ..... Zach Braff as Andrew Largeman as the retarded football player in the made for TV movie referenced in Garden StateButtercup / The Princess Bride ..... Christina Ricci as Rae from Black Snake Moan - this will probably change the rating a bit.Inigo Montoya ..... John Turturro as Jesus The Bowler in The Big LebowskiPrince Humperdinck ..... Brian O'Halloran as Dante Hicks in ClerksCount Tyrone Rugen ..... Jeff Anderson as Randall Graves in Clerks Vizzini ..... Ben Stiller as Mr. Furious in Mystery MenFezzik ..... Ron Perlman as HellboyThe Grandson ..... Eric Stoltz as "Rocky" in Mask - I know, that's horrible The Grandfather / Narrator ..... Cardboard cutout of Max Schrek from Nosferatu, (voiced by Casey Kasem)The Impressive Clergyman ..... Chris Kristoferson as Whisper in Blade The Albino ..... Forrest Whitaker as Ghost Dog: Way of the SamuraiMiracle Max ..... Billy Bob Thorton as Karl Childers in Sling BladeValerie (Miracle Max's Wife) ..... Ellen Burstyn as Sarah Goldfarb in Requiem For A DreamThe Queen ..... Terrance Stamp as Ralph/Bernadett Bassenger in The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the DesertThe Ancient Booer ..... Daniel Day Lewis as Daniel Plainview in There Will Be Blood - "my milkshake brings all the boys to the yard and there like........................."
]]>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:05:18 GMTleeroy711Filmgaming4/23/2008 8:05:18 PMWell now that it's over, I guess I'll chime in. My idea is to recast this film with characters from other movies. Meaning, new actors, playing the Princess Bride character as a character they have allready played in another movie. This would probably be the worst movie ever so.............. here it goesWestley ..... Zach Braff as Andrew Largeman as the retarded football player in the made for TV movie referenced in Garden StateButtercup / The Princess Bride ..... Christina Ricci as Rae from Black Snake Moan - this will probably change the rating a bit.Inigo Montoya ..... John Turturro as Jesus The Bowler in The Big LebowskiPrince Humperdinck ..... Brian O'Halloran as Dante Hicks in ClerksCount Tyrone Rugen ..... Jeff Anderson as Randall Graves in Clerks Vizzini ..... Ben Stiller as Mr. Furious in Mystery MenFezzik ..... Ron Perlman as HellboyThe Grandson ..... Eric Stoltz as "Rocky" in Mask - I know, that's horrible The Grandfather / Narrator ..... Cardboard cutout of Max Schrek from Nosferatu, (voiced by Casey Kasem)The Impressive Clergyman ..... Chris Kristoferson as Whisper in Blade The Albino ..... Forrest Whitaker as Ghost Dog: Way of the SamuraiMiracle Max ..... Billy Bob Thorton as Karl Childers in Sling BladeValerie (Miracle Max's Wife) ..... Ellen Burstyn as Sarah Goldfarb in Requiem For A DreamThe Queen ..... Terrance Stamp as Ralph/Bernadett Bassenger in The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the DesertThe Ancient Booer ..... Daniel Day Lewis as Daniel Plainview in There Will Be Blood - "my milkshake brings all the boys to the yard and there like........................." http://www.spout.com/blogs/phantasma-gore-ia/archive/2007/2/15/5491.aspx Post By: Phantasma-gore-ia
Post To: Phantasma-gore-ia Blog
Post Date: 2/15/2007 12:20:18 AM
Body: This film is good, very good. Much better than it's given credit for and monumentally more worth it than anything Will Ferrell, Steve Carell, Martin Lawrence, Kevin Smith (the list is virtually endless) will ever do and is much better designed, thought-out and executed than the perverse and brain-free American Pie series and eclipses just about every vacuous, flimsy excuse for a "comedy" that's come out in the last ten years. Many fondly remembered movies didn't find their public until years after release and I think this has potential to become such a movie. It's not remotely as crass and sorry as, say, Road Trip and has much more to say and to mean than the sophomoric, unoriginal dreck that passes as comedies today.
]]>Thu, 15 Feb 2007 05:20:18 GMTPhantasma-gore-iaPhantasma-gore-ia Blog2/15/2007 12:20:18 AMThis film is good, very good. Much better than it&#39;s given credit for and monumentally more worth it than anything Will Ferrell, Steve Carell, Martin Lawrence, Kevin Smith (the list is virtually endless) will ever do and is much better designed, thought-out and executed than the perverse and brain-free American Pie series and eclipses just about every vacuous, flimsy excuse for a &quot;comedy&quot; that&#39;s come out in the last ten years. Many fondly remembered movies didn&#39;t find their public until years after release and I think this has potential to become such a movie. It&#39;s not remotely as crass and sorry as, say, Road Trip and has much more to say and to mean than the sophomoric, unoriginal dreck that passes as comedies today. http://www.spout.com/blogs/davisfreeberg/archive/2006/5/3/1071.aspx Post By: davisfreeberg
Post To: Davis Freeberg's DVD AllStars
Post Date: 5/3/2006 11:36:00 PM
Body: I hate it when I get films that have absolutely no redeeming qualities. Mystery Men features an all-star gen x ensamble cast in some truly terrible roles. I thought it would at least be funny, but the humor lacks any sort of depth. Now I like the three stooges as much as anyone, but this movie makes even them look sensical. Frankly this one should be buried in the vault of shame along with Bill Cosby's Meteor Man.
]]>Thu, 04 May 2006 03:36:00 GMTdavisfreebergDavis Freeberg's DVD AllStars5/3/2006 11:36:00 PMI hate it when I get films that have absolutely no redeeming qualities. Mystery Men features an all-star gen x ensamble cast in some truly terrible roles. I thought it would at least be funny, but the humor lacks any sort of depth. Now I like the three stooges as much as anyone, but this movie makes even them look sensical. Frankly this one should be buried in the vault of shame along with Bill Cosby's Meteor Man. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/fantasy/MemberTagFilms.aspxfantasy
Number of films tagged: 1044

Number of people who tagged: 128

Number of times used: 480

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:54:25 GMT1044128480Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/superhero/MemberTagFilms.aspxsuperhero
Number of films tagged: 864

Number of people who tagged: 50

Number of times used: 127

]]>Sun, 19 Jul 2009 02:49:48 GMT86450127Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/kidnapping/MemberTagFilms.aspxkidnapping
Number of films tagged: 2851

Number of people who tagged: 49

Number of times used: 172

]]>Sun, 16 Aug 2009 05:39:42 GMT285149172Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/underrated/MemberTagFilms.aspxunderrated
Number of films tagged: 139

Number of people who tagged: 48

Number of times used: 156

]]>Sun, 26 Apr 2009 18:34:46 GMT13948156Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/rescue/MemberTagFilms.aspxrescue
Number of films tagged: 4080

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 142

]]>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:39:36 GMT408031142Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/justice/MemberTagFilms.aspxjustice
Number of films tagged: 779

Number of people who tagged: 20

Number of times used: 27

]]>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:06:56 GMT7792027Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/crimefighting/MemberTagFilms.aspxcrimefighting
Number of films tagged: 175

Number of people who tagged: 12

Number of times used: 16

]]>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 13:01:44 GMT1751216Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/bad-acting/MemberTagFilms.aspxbad-acting
Number of films tagged: 10

Number of people who tagged: 9

Number of times used: 12

]]>Sun, 06 Jan 2008 09:16:05 GMT10912Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/comicbookmovie/MemberTagFilms.aspxcomicbookmovie
Number of films tagged: 27

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 36

]]>Sun, 03 Aug 2008 00:06:44 GMT27536Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Tom-Waits/MemberTagFilms.aspxTom-Waits
Number of films tagged: 6

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 7

]]>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:57:49 GMT647Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/underappreciated/MemberTagFilms.aspxunderappreciated
Number of films tagged: 5

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 6

]]>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:17:19 GMT546Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/inept/MemberTagFilms.aspxinept
Number of films tagged: 16

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 16

]]>Mon, 15 Jun 2009 04:22:44 GMT16316Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/loser-superheroes/MemberTagFilms.aspxloser-superheroes
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 2

]]>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 01:02:38 GMT122Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/bad-comedy/MemberTagFilms.aspxbad-comedy
Number of films tagged: 2

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 2

]]>Thu, 04 May 2006 03:36:29 GMT212Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/box-office-flop/MemberTagFilms.aspxbox-office-flop
Number of films tagged: 3

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 3

]]>Tue, 06 Jun 2006 05:19:31 GMT313Tag