the movie.

[Allard]

I see that I have been rather negative in this thread.

Although the Fiennes and especially the Thurman performance pull the film down, it is quite enjoyable.
It is more a homage than a continuation, the elements are there but in the end lacks the charm and feel of the original, which is probably impossible to recreate anyway.

[mousemeat]

well...I've never been a huge fan of the film..despite having Connery as a villain...but when Warners in the U.S. release the film, without a chance for the media to review, that was a signal that the studio knew it was box office poison....add to the mix, from what I've read, the film was severely edited, thus making it even worse......every once in an while, I see a used DVD copy for sale...not sure if it was released in blu ray, here in the States.

but the DVD version, doesn't look all that great....

[Borgus Weems]

There is so much cut from this film that the fact that it is watchable at all is a minor miracle. My understanding is that about 40 minutes was cut out, and the original villain of the plot was not Sean Connery's weather wizard, but instead it was originally... MR. PEEL!

On my most recent rewatch of the BluRay, my main takeaway was that the leads were 100% miscast. Both are capable of greatness, but neither one had the right feel to be the absolutely most charming people on any planet, as Patrick Macnee and Diana Rigg both were. There was doubtless some actors that could have come close, just not those two. Jim Broadbent was a great Mother.

Poking around, I found this video that attempts to put together part of what the film was supposed to be like, using footage from the trailer to spice it up:

[Frankymole]

On my most recent rewatch of the BluRay, my main takeaway was that the leads were 100% miscast. Both are capable of greatness, but neither one had the right feel to be the absolutely most charming people on any planet, as Patrick Macnee and Diana Rigg both were.

I don't know if he'd have been too young at the time, but Julian Wadham who plays Steed for Big Finish audios is absolutely charming with a marvellous twinkle in his eye and can play a gentleman with a rakish wit and a deadly side to his character. So there are some actors who could carry it off. But not the kind Hollywood likes. They'd probably have Benedict Cumberbatch as Steed when it should be more someone like Simon Pegg.

I didn't know there was a BluRay of the movie! I don't feel compelled to trade up from my DVD.

large.jpg (85.13 KiB) Viewed 418 times

[mousemeat]

same here...in fact, didn't think a proper blu ray edition existed...wondering if it was a bootleg ? the initial DVD was fairly bare bones, in terms
of any extras, etc...and most of us know, the film was severely edited..and when the film was ready for release, Warners had no advance press screenings for the film..sorta their admission that the film didn't work, and was going to be a flop.

For years, the director, offered free of charge, to re edit and add the missing footages...and do a blu ray edition...but Warners seems to have
zero interest in this....myself, I would be interested to see the missing footages..

[mcsteed]

I found this on youtube....
Diana Rigg and Patrick Macnee in there last Adventure as Emma Peel and John Steet (AI Deepfake)

[Frankymole]

That's pretty creepy, but an "Avatar" style CGI adventure might just be possible as long as they don't try to make everything look too real.

It needs an impressionist to do Macnee's/Steed's voice. Rachael Stirling could do Emma's...

[mousemeat]

That's pretty creepy, but an "Avatar" style CGI adventure might just be possible as long as they don't try to make everything look too real.

It needs an impressionist to do Macnee's/Steed's voice. Rachael Stirling could do Emma's...

interesting....probably could get pulled off..but then again...as for impressionist ? rich little ? I'm sure there's others that could do it.

then again, there's a AI program, that could 'mimic' Macnee's voice...darn, who saids, you can't live forever ?

[mousemeat]

for me, the film promised much, but delivered little...the casting of the leads, did not clic. no chemistry. period. the film was edited by the studio, and edited badly, from what I've read. whole sections taken out. Warners knew they had a film that was D.O.A. as the released it world wide, without any press screenings...and the film died at the box office..Even Patrick disowned the film..

for years, there's been talk of Warners letting the director restore all -or-some of the missing footages..but the studio seems to have ZERO interest
in doing so..perhaps some company like Kino Lober, Arrow, or Criterion, could do the film justice...

that little snippet of the material with Diana inserted , was both great..and somewhat creepy...as Franky noted, perhaps it could be done sorely as CGI vehicle...then again, made there's zero interest.....nonetheless, the movie was a huge misfire..and the years, haven't been any less kind..

[Frankymole]

Yes, sticking their faces over it doesn't give it any more chemistry than Thurman and Fiennes had.