Timewaster's Guide Archive
Departments => Movies and TV => Topic started by: Mr_Pleasington on May 30, 2005, 11:53:35 PM
-
A movie about a superhero high school?
Probably a trite coming of age story, given the preview, but the effects look fun.
Anyone else caught the preview yet.
Plus Kurt Russel and Bruce Campbell, two of my favorite B-movie actors.
-
Plus is has Lynda Carter.
Yes, it does look fun, but is definitely treading close to the realm of banality.
-
Haven't seen a preview but I have seen posters, didn't catch my intrest at the time becasue Bruce Cambell wasn't showen but now I am.
-
I wasn't too interested at first (the posters do look quite cornball) but the preview changed my mind. I got several chuckles and one full belly laugh (from the "Strength Testing" scene) just from the trailer. Hopefully it will live up to the potential.
-
Just bumping this to show SE I scooped him!
Ha!
-
Well, his thread got locked, so you must have won. ::) :D
-
If I had kids I'd probably go see it sooner, but as it is I think it looks like a great Dollar Theater movie.
-
Well, his thread got locked, so you must have won. ::) :D
Ah, sweet victory...
-
Okay, so I watch the Disney Channel and they've begun doing their hype that they do for all their movies (showing lots of clips and things from "The Movie Surfers," a group of kids that go behind-the-scenes of Disney movies). The only commercials on Disney Channel are for Disney stuff. And I'm starting to get more interested, but still not sure whether I want to see this when it is released or wait a couple of months and save some money. The beauty of Provo is that we have several dollar theaters--if you can keep track of when the movies you want to see hit them, and don't mind the lack of stadium seating or cleanliness.
And this movie--I don't know. It looks like it could be good, or be really bad--kind of like FF4. There seems to be a lot of emphasis on the funny things that can happen when you have untrained superpowers. The writing will probably make or break it--right now it seems to me to be as MsFish described it: A mix between X-Men (the "in school" portions) and The Incredibles.
-
I tend to agree vociferously with however Eric Snider reviews movies, and he gave this one a good review. I don't think I'll see it first run, but I definitely want to see it at some point.
http://www.ericdsnider.com/view.php?mrkey=2472&PHPSESSID=0da9ad55c11843393a794ddd71a04c81
And if you want a really good laugh, read his review of "Stealth"
-
That was a good review. It makes me want to see it more.
And you were right about the stealth review. All that talk about the "magical talking airplane" and the plot holes gave me quite a few laughs. ;D
-
well, saw it last night.
It's a good film
Look, it's not deep, it's not adding a whole lot new to the superhero genre. But it was very entertaining, even with the plot holes (they all know the secret identity of every other hero, and yet they don't worry that some of the kids will grow up to be villains, as they surely will... this doesn't scream "problem" to anyone?).
Anyway, the acting was better than average. Not amazing, but not anything to complain about. The plot is pretty straightforward and predictable, but it doesn't have any pretense at being anything else, and they way the characters are presented are clever. Bruce Campbell losing a girl to Kevin McDonald was an especially hilarious bit. Sets are solid and the ideas are pretty neat.
Now, what I appreciated most (but not my wife, since she didn't watch teen movies like I did... she just liked the movie because it was fun and entertaining and didn't have ANYTHING dirty in it... unless you consider a SPOILER IN THE NEXT PHRASE fourteen year old kissing a girl he thinks is 18 but was made back into a baby when she was around 30 dirty END SPOILER (note, that this was predictable once you started watching the movie anyway, and will not ruin your movie experience). ANyway, I liked it because there's sort of a secondary tribute to 80s teen movies. The jocks v. geeks, with one geek being propelled to the cool crowd for devious reasons ... plus the soundtrack has no less than 4 songs that are covers of songs featured in John Hughes movies, not the least of which is Morrissey's "Please, Please, Please Let Me Get What I Want." Very cool.
Anyway, it comes recommended. It's not groundbreaking, but it definitely does not suck.
-
ANyway, I liked it because there's sort of a secondary tribute to 80s teen movies.
Which brings me to my favorite quote from the Eric Snider review -
When someone remarks that a particular school program is unfair, Will says, "If life were suddenly going to get fair, I doubt it would happen in high school." John Hughes must kick himself for not writing that line 20 years ago.
Well now I'll definitely have to put it on my list of movies to see.
-
The final quote as also very Hughes-esque: (SEMI SPOILER, BUT AGAIN VERY PREDICTABLE) "In the end, my girlfriend became my enemy, my worst enemy became my best friend, and my best friend became my girlfriend. But that's high school for you." it's like a gender swapped cross between Pretty in Pink and Some Kind of Wonderful. Or maybe just Breakfast Club happening outside of dentention and with a plant controlling girl instead of a preppy.
-
Saw it. e were you (or anyone else) going to write a review of this movie? If not, I will write one.
So here is a little tidbit for your future genetic scientists. Will Stronghold has hazel eyes. His parents both have blue eyes. Think about it.
-
Well, I submitted a review. Do with it what you will.
-
I ran it (http://www.timewastersguide.com/view.php?id=1131)
The low production values for sets and effects didn't bother me at all. But I can't argue that they are definitely low, and most people will see it.
-
I saw this on Saturday and just loved it. It's VERY cheesy, and is basically exactly what you expect it to be. It's uncomplicated, funny, has lots of little subtle jokes. You really have to go into it wanting some light-hearted, campy humor; if you can do that, you'll enjoy it.
-
We very well could see a TV series of this or another movie since it's allready made back what it cost accordeing to Boxofficemojo.
-
According to something I read somewhere, possibly on imdb, the kids in the movie had a potential TV series written into their original contracts. One can only hope that it will be cool, but given the nature of most Disney channel shows I highly doubt it.
-
I'd hope for an ABC primetime and not Disney Channel.
-
According to something I read somewhere, possibly on imdb, the kids in the movie had a potential TV series written into their original contracts. One can only hope that it will be cool, but given the nature of most Disney channel shows I highly doubt it.
What are you talking about? Obviously you have never watched Kim Possible or Even Stevens or Lizzie McGuire. All three of which were very clever shows. I watched them over many things (mostly lame reality shows, which was the prime time competition). I've yet to see a Kim Possible episode that does not make me laugh, Louis Stevens was one of my all-time favorite TV characters, and I will never be able to hate Hilary Duff because she was so good as Lizzie McGuire. Unfortunately, these great shows are only reruns now, and the shows Disney has on currently--Raven and The Suite Life and Phil of the Future--are abysmally stupid. But they had that really great year.
Who knows. Maybe they are due for another good one.
-
I don't think fell said there WERE no good ones, just that MOST were not.
Should we make a list? (Even if I concede even stevens (which I won't (nested parenthetical remarks are fun) becuase I despised it) I'll add in PB&J Otter and Recess. Over against that we have Weekenders, Book of Pooh, the three you mentioned, some one about an alien girl, The one about the alien teenager (i'm noticing a trend here) and most every other show I've seen on Disney. THey *can* make decent ones, they just usually *don't*.
-
Dave the Barbarian is fun too, though I think that one was canceled back when Kim Possible was.
-
You forgot to close one set of parentheses.
-
Some old man english grad you are.
-
Some old man english grad you are.
I don't have an English degree. so you're right. I'm a pretty pathetic English grad.
-
What are you talking about? Obviously you have never watched Kim Possible or Even Stevens or Lizzie McGuire. All three of which were very clever shows. I watched them over many things (mostly lame reality shows, which was the prime time competition). I've yet to see a Kim Possible episode that does not make me laugh, Louis Stevens was one of my all-time favorite TV characters, and I will never be able to hate Hilary Duff because she was so good as Lizzie McGuire. Unfortunately, these great shows are only reruns now, and the shows Disney has on currently--Raven and The Suite Life and Phil of the Future--are abysmally stupid. But they had that really great year.
Who knows. Maybe they are due for another good one.
I have to disagree with you on one point and that is Phil of the Future. It is a show that has very clever humor, similar to Lizzy McGuire, but a little wacky because of the potential they have with future gadgets. If you don't think it's funny, you haven't given it a chance. When I watch it, I find myself laughing through the whole thing. It is really quite funny and I don't need to worry about language or adult themes or anything. It is a great show.
I agree with you about Kim Possible and Lizzy McGuire (although I though Even Stevens was just okay). They are really fun shows and although I understand that Hilary Duff wanted to do other things and not only be thought of as Lizzie McGuire, I wish she had decided to move her show to ABC and continue doing it. Oh, well. All good things must come to an end.
-
Kim Possible can be entertaining, I admit, but it doesn't stand out among the rest of the superhero shows on TV--given the choice I'd watch Batman or even the new TMNT (which isn't very good) before Kim Possible. Maybe it's that pesky Y chromosome of mine.
-
I actually don't mind the new TMNT, though I'm comparing it to the old Acrhie version so it's not like I'm judging it against very hight standards.
-
the new TMNT comic beats the pants off the current comic done by Eastman, and it's based on the current cartoon, even adapted some of the stories (though from a very different perspective).
-
We went and saw Sky High last Saturday. We enjoyed it every bit as much as we could hope from our highest expectations. (Terrible sentence...) It was a lot of fun.
-
I just saw this movie and, like the others, I found it very fun, but without much depth (which it doesn't need cause it's suppose to be a light fun movie).
One issue I had with the plot, though, (THE FOLLOWING IS A SPOILER) is that Royal Pain obviously remembers everything that happened to her before becoming a baby for the second time, and yet she thought that by turning all the superheroes into babies, she could raise them to be super villains. How does this make sense? Wouldn't they remember that she was the one to turn them into babies again? And that before then they stood for justice? If you ask me, she's just asking for double trouble. She would have to deal with not only the children of these heroes, but their now young parents as well (granted, it would be a few years until they would be able to fight, but there would still be more than otherwise). Don't you guys agree? (I'm sorry if this has been talked about, but I didn't see anyone mention it.)
-
Not that a movie as light as Sky High needs it but your objection could be explained if Royal Pain did not in fact remember the events but only knew them from the stories her foster father, now sidekick, told her as she grew up for the second time.
Meh?
-
That's what I reckoned. *shrug*
Or else she's just insane (caused by going through puberty twice, probably), so her plans don't have to make sense. heh.
-
Or else she's just insane (caused by going through puberty twice, probably),
*shudders*
That would drive anyone insane.
-
That's what I reckoned. *shrug*
Or else she's just insane (caused by going through puberty twice, probably), so her plans don't have to make sense. heh.
Well, that's part of the reason I figured she remembered. Why would she be so mad about going through puberty twice if she didn't remember the first time? Doesn't make sense. I must agree that it is because she was too mad to realize her mistakes (or more likely, the writers were too oblivious to realize theirs. It may be a light movie, and it was still fun, but it'd be nice if the plot made some sense :)).
-
no, see, those are different options, not the same.
Either she a) DOESN'T remember, and was just raised that way by her foster father, or b) she DOES remember and was driven insane by repeating puberty, which means her plan doesn't make sense
And beside that ONE problem, the plot DID make sense, and it's a problem very easily worked around, without changing the movie.
-
Whoa, boy! Wow, you must really care about this! Personally, I don't care. I'll still watch the movie again sometime cause it was fun and cute. I just thought it was an interesting point, so I thought I'd point it out. If you don't agree, that's all right. I still think it's a flaw, though.
-
I think she was planning on brainwashing the babies, so they would forget their prior lives.
-
And beside that ONE problem, the plot DID make sense, and it's a problem very easily worked around, without changing the movie.
MORE SPOILERS
Well, I didn't catch that the reason for turning the superheroes into babies was to raise them as supervillains. I also did not think that she lost her memory--which led to MY problem with the plot: If she did remember everything, why did she need to steal the Pacifier gun instead of just making a new one herself? She was, after all, able to fix it when it was broken...
-
Yeah, that is weak! She should have totally been able to build a new one!
I think she was planning on brainwashing the babies, so they would forget their prior lives.
And that's a good idea, but it should have been explained if that's true. They shouldn't leave us to make up our own reasons. It would not have been hard when she was explaining to baby Commander to add the brainwashing, but as I recall she just said that she was going to raise them to be evil.
-
Both objections (the plan and the gun) are solved by the notion that she lost her memory but that she was raised to know her own history by her father/sidekick.
Pay attention Tink, these explanations have been offered to you three times now.
No one else cares very much about the movie either but it's annoying einough to pursue when someone obviously didn't read one's post before responding to it.
-
For your information, I read that explanation, but that doesn't mean I accept it. (And rude for saying that I "obviously" didn't read the post, cause duh, I did. And if you think it's so annoying to talk about, you really don't have to read the thread or respond to it ;).) She seemed pretty pissed that she had to go through puberty twice. Why would you care so much if you didn't remember the first time? Anyway, it's really a mute point since there is NOT conclusive evidence one way or the other. I just thought it was interesting. If you don't agree, that's your prerogative. But you don't have to argue with me and try to convince me. I liked the discussion we were having. Isn't that the point of a forum--to discuss, and then decide on our own opinions? Please don't be a troll :).
-
She seemed pretty pissed that she had to go through puberty twice.
Because it's funny? Because she sees that she's already done it once, she shouldn't have to do it again.
Really, not accepting it seems pretty much just a stubborn way of trying to ensure that you have managed to find the plot hole.
If it really doesn't matter to you, why do you have to keep re-hashing it?
anyway, as for trolling, yeah, no trolling. but Tink, I think you're seeing trolling where it doesn't exist. In my last post, I was explaining something you didn't understand (you clearly didn't, or else you have a very very queer manner of intentionally misrepresenting someone's position in order to say it doesn't make sense). When I corrected you, you started firing off about how sensitive I was being. So, perhaps you're a) not expressing yourself well enough, because it seemed to me too that you still didn't understand what we were saying, and/or b) thinking people are more emotional than they are.
-
e, I'm sure you're right and I was overreacting, but it's hard to tell with type and you were using a lot of capped words (which is supposed to mean real emphasis and yelling, right?). I must have misread. If you don't want to be mistaken, you could use italics for emphasis.
And I wasn't saying you were a troll, I was saying that Skar was walking towards trolldom and I was trying to steer him away. I did understand what you were saying (once you explained it in the next post) and I probably wasn't explaining myself well. So I guess you were right on both accounts.
-
THIS IS YELLING
This is not YELLing. It does indicate emphasis, and it's hecka easier than tags.
I didn't think you were accusing me of trolldom. Nor did I originally respond when you misunderstood how I was reacting. I know you meant Skar, and what I mean is, you probably misunderstand his position. Skar has firm opinions, but I can't recall a single instance where he's trolled. Trolling is intentionally saying something controversial just so people will fight. Skar didn't appear to be doing that. He did, however, appear to be a little frustrated, but not greatly, about how you did not seem to understand what was being said.
For the record, there's nothing wrong with anyone disagreeing with you on this, or even being passionate in their disagreement -- which are the only things I can reasonably expect you had difficulty with Skar's post. I don't think anyone's done anything more wrong than misunderstand someone else. so let's just drop that.
-
Well, maybe that's how you use it, but I didn't know that. And I've never known anyone else who uses it that way, so how was I suppose to know? Now I do know, so from now on I won't misjudge. :)