It's stupid. Really, really stupid. Not that I think that's a bad thing. I actually enjoyed the movie but I can't really call it "good." Least of all the story. Fun action, decent humor, good dialog, and a comically hammy villain, but the story was not good in the least (and I think they knew it, too). It's good enough for a popcorn flick in my book.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
This page is strangely enthusiastic about a film almost universally regarded as a giant poop sandwich.
Hide / Show Replies
So people aren't allowed to have liked it? Just because you hate it doesn't mean the page has to bash it.
Just thought they should have went with the Eccentrics or maybe even Emma Valentine would have worked. The fact is that trying to take a iconic part that was played by Micheal Dunn and recreate him the way they did was not very well done. Also will smith, no matter what he does, will have this stink on him for many moons. Kevin Kline was a good choice as Artemus Gordon and how could you go wrong with Salma Hayek? maybe if they reboot it with Count Mazeppi and his merry band of malcontents (possibly played by robin williams or Phillip seymour hoffman) or Emma Valentine (played by Michelle Forbes, Shannon Doherty, or Rose Mcgowen) would probably do the trick. As for James West, you would probably have to pay the "pay or play" contract of Will Smith to free it up, personal choice, Timothy Oliphant or maybe Jeffrey Donovan would work. Need to keep it on the lower side to get three movies out of the main lead. As for Artemus, Kevin Kline would (probably not interested), Bruce Campbell would work, or in another direction, Alexander Siddig.
A "giant poop sandwich" would be more along the lines of, like, The Last Airbender or the Star Wars Holiday Special. Those are So Bad Its Horrible films.
This movie is enjoyably bad, akin to some Ed Wood films or somesuch.
Hmmm...I don't really see the hate in this. Though I admit I never saw the original series. But, the story was actually good. There was characterization, developement, comedy done right, cool steampunk machines, there wasn't even bad acting; and plus the story makes sense. It's not horrible enough to deserve a Razzy (sorry i might not have spelled that right.)
Does 'not being faithful to the original' make it desserving of such?
I mean there are some works that did this, yet it didn't get this much flak. Sorry, but this has been plaguing my mind for quite sometime. So why?
Hide / Show Replies