The Movie

Alan · Post by **Alan** » Fri Oct 03, 2008 5:52 pm

As someone who loves the movie, I don't necessarily agree with very much of that post, Darren, but it's refreshing to see a well-thought out critique of the movie that explains itself well and doesn't resort to easy criticism without giving evidence.

Rodney · Post by **Rodney** » Sat Oct 04, 2008 11:40 pm

Alan asks: why close your mind to other 'flavours'of The Avengers, such as the film. I understand the point but I'm tempted to use Paul Newman's line: why go out for a burger when you can have fine steak at home (the show on DVD). Having only watched the film recently, I have to ask the question: how bad was Sean Connery? The 'look' was not bad but the fact that they approached Robbie Coltrane to play Steed says it all really, in terms of casting.

kim · Post by **kim** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 12:19 am

They asked Robbie Coltrane to play Steed? That idea alone makes me wonder if they had intended to make the movie more of a parody of the tv show then.

As I said before, I tried to enjoy the movie as a movie and not as an Avengers' themed one. But I simply couldn't. Does that make it a bad movie? No. It simply makes it a movie that I personaly did not enjoy. In my opinion, it was bad simply because 1. It's not the type of movie I like, regardless of what it's about or who is in it. 2. If it was supposed to be a tribute to the tv show, then in my mind it was poorly done. 3. If it was supposed to be a parody, then it could have been done much better.

I almost got the feeling that no one really cared how the movie turned out. Just get it done and get it on the screen.

If and when there comes an uncut version, am I likely to watch it again? Probably not. As it is, I have a dvd for sale if anyone is interested.

So here's the question...For those of you who enjoyed it, what was it about the movie that you liked? The graphics? The story line? The acting? This is not a jab at the fans of the movie. I really want to know if maybe I should take another look at it sometime in the future.

Andrew Pixley · Post by **Andrew Pixley** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 6:17 am

Hi Kim

kim wrote:As I said before, I tried to enjoy the movie as a movie and not as an Avengers' themed one. But I simply couldn't. Does that make it a bad movie? No. It simply makes it a movie that I personaly did not enjoy.

What a refreshingly mature opinion. If there was more of this kind of thinking, there'd be hope for the world yet ...

So here's the question...For those of you who enjoyed it, what was it about the movie that you liked? The graphics? The story line? The acting? This is not a jab at the fans of the movie. I really want to know if maybe I should take another look at it sometime in the future.

Okay ... I think the fundamental thing is that I liked the reimagining of the format. The essentials from the excesses of the early colour episodes were there: bloke with brolly and bowler, woman kicking the sh*t out of people in catsuit, nutty villain with crazy plot, strange and deserted over-English English background ...

I'm quite a fan of reimagining things, even if they don't work. It's interesting to see other people's different takes on things. "Batman" is an obvious one; do you want your pulpy gangster ridden 1930s and 1940s comics, your campy moralistic 1960s TV series, your hard-edge bits of new wave comic like "The Killing Joke" or the more recent films which range in colour from black to brilliance.

Of course, "The Avengers" itself was reimagined a lot over the years. Compare "Hot Snow" to "Build a Better Mousetrap" to "What The Butler Saw" to "Who's Who???" to "Take-Over", and it's almost like watching different series ... and that's even before we get to "Cat Amongst the Pigeons" or "Emily". Then there were the comic strips, where I could lap up the bizarre offerings in "Diana" although John Canning's stint on "TV Comic" is imaginative but also a bit indigestible for me. I remember admiring the Cold War thriller of "To Catch a Rat" in book form, but not liking it, and finding "The Cybernauts" a better prose entry .... and also enjoying elements of the Anthony Hussey/John Garforth tomes, even although overall they didn't hit the spot. And I immediately got to enjoy the very plummy Steed who accompanied Emma on all those rather post-modern capers on the South African airwaves ... so the chance to see the format adapted yet again with new people wasn't a hurdle for me. It was something I was looking forward to.

So ... what do I like?

The set pieces: hell, they don't add up to a coherent story, but seeing Big Ben errupt, double decker buses buried in snow, Steed and Emms crossing the lake in their plastic bubbles, the mind-bending architecture of Hallucinogen Hall, the Ministry test zone, the flotilla of robot wasps ... they're great moments.

The villain: August de Wynter's great. Sometimes he doesn't quite fit into the plot, but he's terrific value for money in my book.

The music: A very enjoyable score, and the moments when we segue into Laurie Johnson's theme are delightful.

The killer Teddy Bears: No, I don't know what this has to do with anything either, but the sheer sillyness of it is something which amused me.

The graphics: Yes, I liked the opening titles with all the cool imagery.

The setting: The notion of a modern-day England where the 1960s never stopped was lovely. Reminded me a bit of "Brazil".

The dialogue: There's some gems in there ... the double-entendres from Sir August to Emma in the hothouse are good fun.

The cars: Ohhhhh ... wonderful! How cool are they?

Jim Broadbent: Fantastic or what? Oh, if only he'd been around in the original series!

I can't really defend the story at all. Nor the casting of Ms Thurman. Mr Fiennes more or less pulls it off in my book (even if his suit isn't quite the right cut). But, a bit like the original movie of "Casino Royale", all these elements that don't work somehow combine into something quite to my tastes which eclipses the sum of its meagre parts.

All the best

Andrew

moorlock2003 · Post by **moorlock2003** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 6:30 am

Alan wrote:
moorlock2003 wrote:The movie is not worth all the prattling on and on about, as it has widely and correctly been declared terrible by the overwhelming majority of people who had the displeasure of enduring it (and I'm one of them, having sat through it twice). Apologists for this awful movie are simply in denial. Any major studio film not given advance showings for reviewers is a red flag warning that it is a turkey. The only good things about it were a few interesitng visuals (and an $80 million budget should at least give us that) plus the fact that it brought attention to the original series. But honestly, everything else about it reeked.
Now there's an open minded view... Please permit everybody to have their own opinion, and realise that those opinions are every bit as valid as your own.

I love the movie, am a big fan of the television series and the radio series. I'm most certainly not in denial, and frankly I find your comment a tad offensive.

As for Warners barring of the critics from the previews meaning that it was a turkey, I think it points more to their complete lack of understanding of what The Avengers is than any comment upon the quality of the movie (before they hacked it, I mean). They didn't know how to handle it.

If they had one iota of common sense, they'd have kept the movie at its original length, trusted the people they paid to make it and treated it like any other movie. There is no way on earth that it would have ended up with the (mostly undeserved) negative reputation that it has garnered in the wake of their mishandling of the publicity if they hadn't stupidly rung all the alarm bells.

I am as open-minded as anyone, but if you think it is a good movie, you obviously have not seen very many movies. Watch some classics of the past and then tell me The Avengers movie is worthwhile. Don't believe me? How about 107 1 star reviews on Amazon. And compared to the TV show? The movie is an insult to the standards set by the series. Virtually everything about it is deficient. It has been resoundingly called out far and wide as one of the biggest major studio bombs of all time. Kept at its original length? What for, so there's even more to dislike? I hated Fiennes and Thurman as Steed and Mrs. Peel. Badly miscast and out of their league, they were humourless and charmless, the exact opposite of the characters as portrayed by Patrick Macnee and Diana Rigg. Skinny Ralph Fiennes as an action hero? Now that is funny.

moorlock2003 · Post by **moorlock2003** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 6:58 am

Avengerholic wrote:
moorlock2003 wrote:Apologists for this awful movie are simply in denial.
What a stunning burst of arrogance I'm certainly not in denial, I THINK IT'S BRILLIANT and while not highly praised, I don't see it getting totally hammered in any of the posts above.

No, YOU are the arrogant one. The mere fact that you shouted with your all caps and bold type says a lot about you. The movie is brilliant? You must hate the series then. I adore the series but the movie is totally forgettable. Not hammered? Check Amazon for the 107 one-star reviews.

Avengerholic · Post by **Avengerholic** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:08 am

moorlock2003 wrote:
Avengerholic wrote:
moorlock2003 wrote:Apologists for this awful movie are simply in denial.
What a stunning burst of arrogance I'm certainly not in denial, I THINK IT'S BRILLIANT and while not highly praised, I don't see it getting totally hammered in any of the posts above.
No, YOU are the arrogant one. The movie is brilliant? You must hate the series then if that is your opinion. I adore the series but the movie is an outright disaster.

I'm going to ignore this, because by reading it, it's obvious that your not very old. And sometimes it's beneficial to allow kids to let off a little steam.

moorlock2003 · Post by **moorlock2003** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:13 am

Avengerholic wrote:
moorlock2003 wrote:
Avengerholic wrote: What a stunning burst of arrogance I'm certainly not in denial, I THINK IT'S BRILLIANT and while not highly praised, I don't see it getting totally hammered in any of the posts above.
No, YOU are the arrogant one. The movie is brilliant? You must hate the series then if that is your opinion. I adore the series but the movie is an outright disaster.
I'm going to ignore this because by reading it, it's obvious that your not very old. And sometimes it's good for kids to let off a bit of steam.

Oh please, the truth hurts, and some people simply can't take it.

Avengerholic · Post by **Avengerholic** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:15 am

moorlock2003 wrote:Oh please, the truth hurts, and some people simply can't take it.

Yes of course, you're absolutely right, my aplologies.

DiVicenzo · Post by **DiVicenzo** » Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:35 am

Message deleted by DiVicenzo.