Change Your Image
keg13206
Reviews
Superman: Doomsday (2007)
It's 2007 Folks!
OK, first off I'll admit that I only saw the last 10 minutes of it as I was shopping at Sam's Club. But those last 10 minutes kept me glued to the screen so I could figure out what was going on.
Now, having said that, let me point out something very important to all of the people who've complained that it wasn't an accurate adaption of the story arc from the comics: It's 2007, folks!
That's right. The Doomsday/Funeral/Reign story arc came out almost 15 years ago. That's ancient history for many current readers and other followers of the franchise. And to insist that an adaptation made in 2007 slavishly follow a storyline written in 1993 makes about as much sense as me complaining now about Superman flying when we all know that according to the earliest stories from the late 30s and early 40s, he could only leap an eighth of a mile.
A lot of people complained about how a number of characters from the "Reign" series were missing. Frankly, my dear, I hated that whole series. It was too confusing and seemed pointless to me. It's only now, with the advent of Wikipedia, that I'm finally able to figure out where all the players in that series came from. Whatever streamlining of the storyline they did in this adaptation sounds like an excellent idea. Especially for an audience that will include people who don't have the entire database of supporting characters and crossovers from the comics memorized.
Keep in mind that you're not the only people in the audience.
The Save-Ums! (2003)
Thunderbirds for Little Kids
Wow! I'm amazed that none of the other reviews have mentioned the fact that this show is basically a kid-sized version of the old Gerry Anderson Supermarionation show "The Thunderbirds" from the mid 1960s. It's not even mentioned in the "Movie Connections" section for either show. Maybe this is because not all that many people saw "The Thunderbirds" when it first came out.
But that doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with this show. It's a great adaptation for kids. My daughter loves it, my wife enjoys it too, and I have fun comparing this show to what I remember from the 60s. If it seems a little simplistic, take the time to remember that this is meant for kids, and not people who've had 20+ years of experience in solving problems.
And maybe later on, when the kids who watched this discover DVDs of "The Thunderbirds, " they'll say, "Hey wait - this is just like the Save-Ums."
Spy Kids 3: Game Over (2003)
It's TRON for kids!
And with that, I suggest that all the naysayers to this movie take a look at the last two words: FOR KIDS. It's not gonna be King Lear, don't expect performances worthy of Sir Alec Guinness, and don't be disappointed if there are a few plot holes. It's a kid's movie, and it works great on that level. All the things that movie aficionados might pick this movie apart for don't matter to the target audience, and shouldn't. It's just a fun time. My 10yo daughter's only complaint was that they didn't use the *good* 3D effects like at Walt Disney World.
As far as the Tron reference goes, I know it will offend some "true believers," but all in all SK3-D is much easier to follow. We rented Tron so my daughter and I could watch it and compare, and there's a whole lot of geek stuff that needs to be explained in order for it to make sense to a mainstream audience. SK3-D is so much more accessible because just about every kid out there understands videogames, lives, cheat codes, and all the other things that were mentioned. You didn't have to be a geek to get it.
And who knows - maybe one day, after having seen and appreciated SK3-D, some of the kids who enjoyed it will stumble across Tron and recognize it just as kids who grew up on The Lion King have begun to recognize Hamlet.
Mr. Deeds (2002)
Better Than The Original
Yes, I know that this sounds heretical to some of you who enjoyed the original. I also know that a lot of Sandler fans were disappointed because this wasn't what they expected from him. But not having seen any other Sandler movies myself, and having specifically seen the original before renting his version, I have to say that it's better.
Perhaps I should qualify that a bit. His version is better for our times. The original version was probably very good for the 30s and 40s, but there are a number of things in it that are extremely grating to a modern audience, not the least of which is the entire sequence when Longfellow Deeds is at a hearing to determine his sanity - a sanity which is in doubt merely because he doesn't share the values of the rest of the rich and powerful in Manhattan. While it might have been believable to audiences then that a person could be declared insane for acting on small town values in the big city, it is not at all believable to modern audiences, and the producers of Sandler's version wisely left that out, choosing to turn the plot in other ways.
I found the remake much easier to follow than the original. Of course, this could also be due to the fact that having already seen the original, I had an idea of what to expect. It would be interesting to have someone who's never seen the original watch Sandler's version first and then the original, and see which was easier to follow.
To those who object to Sandler's character seeming to punch out anyone he didn't like, it should be remember that Gary Cooper's character did the exact same thing, and that *both* versions of the character could've behaved with a little more maturity.
Frankly, I think that this version was a good telling of the Mr Deeds story in a * modern* setting, and shows what someone a little bit like one of us would've done in similar circumstances. The original has its charms, but it's about a different time.
Three thumbs up from our family.
Mr. Deeds (2002)
Better Than The Original
Yes, I know that this sounds heretical to some of you who enjoyed the original. I also know that a lot of Sandler fans were disappointed because this wasn't what they expected from him. But not having seen any other Sandler movies myself, and having specifically seen the original before renting his version, I have to say that it's better.
Perhaps I should qualify that a bit. His version is better for our times. The original version was probably very good for the 30s and 40s, but there are a number of things in it that are extremely grating to a modern audience, not the least of which is the entire sequence when Longfellow Deeds is at a hearing to determine his sanity - a sanity which is in doubt merely because he doesn't share the values of the rest of the rich and powerful in Manhattan. While it might have been believable to audiences then that a person could be declared insane for acting on small town values in the big city, it is not at all believable to modern audiences, and the producers of Sandler's version wisely left that out, choosing to turn the plot in other ways.
I found the remake much easier to follow than the original. Of course, this could also be due to the fact that having already seen the original, I had an idea of what to expect. It would be interesting to have someone who's never seen the original watch Sandler's version first and then the original, and see which was easier to follow.
To those who object to Sandler's character seeming to punch out anyone he didn't like, it should be remember that Gary Cooper's character did the exact same thing, and that *both* versions of the character could've behaved with a little more maturity.
Frankly, I think that this version was a good telling of the Mr Deeds story in a * modern* setting, and shows what someone a little bit like one of us would've done in similar circumstances. The original has its charms, but it's about a different time.
Three thumbs up from our family.