|
Post by XerxesTheCat on Feb 11, 2006 19:10:54 GMT -5
I had low-expectations, but the new 2006 Pink Panther film is a riot! It's non-stop comedy for everyone! Go see the movie! You WON'T be dissapointed!
I loved it, naturally. Zavy gags here and there, extensive plot, halarious ending, you couldn't ask for more.
*begins humming the Pink Panther theme*
|
|
|
Post by Captain Hygiene on Feb 11, 2006 19:42:52 GMT -5
I was just looking for a zavy movie to see
|
|
|
Post by XerxesTheCat on Feb 11, 2006 20:20:25 GMT -5
Hey, I invented a new word unintentionally!
"Zavy", it's zany gravy! Tastes great on mashed potatoes!
|
|
|
Post by losingmydignity on Feb 11, 2006 21:06:14 GMT -5
It's a combo of savvy and zany right? Pretty groovy...
|
|
|
Post by TarlCabot on Feb 11, 2006 23:13:42 GMT -5
This is a joke, isn't it? It has a 22% rating on Rottentomatoes.com. Ebert gave it 1.5 stars. My local paper gave it a D.
You must be joking.
|
|
|
Post by Afgncaap5 on Feb 11, 2006 23:47:50 GMT -5
I was planning on seeing it as it is. Nice to know it's got some fans going into it.
Sure hope it's as Zavy as you say it is.
I don't know if I want it to stay true to the original Pink Panther movie or not, though...
|
|
|
Post by RafaelH on Feb 12, 2006 3:59:11 GMT -5
The Trailer looks horrific.
|
|
|
Post by XerxesTheCat on Feb 12, 2006 12:45:36 GMT -5
Here's the problem with most people. They go to a remake with high hopes that it'll surpass the original. Anyone who thinks it'll do that should have themself committed. All, anyone can do is hope that the movie's funny. It may not be good (I thought it was good), and it may not be bad. But, it IS a great comedy, that is worth seeing.
And yes, the originals are better. But, that goes without saying, right?
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Feb 12, 2006 13:36:33 GMT -5
Making The Pink Panther without Peter Sellers is like remaking Indiana Jones without Harrison Ford.
Just don't do it.
Steve Martin used to be funny. Now he's doing awful race relations crap with Queen Latifah, cheezy family remakes with Bonnie Hunt, and terribly ill-advised remakes of real comedies.
And this thread belongs in Mitchell's Movies, so that's where it's going.
|
|
yousonuva
Moderator Emeritus
I'm not insane but I am King of the Universe
Posts: 14,309
|
Post by yousonuva on Feb 12, 2006 14:10:12 GMT -5
Here's the problem with most people. They go to a remake with high hopes that it'll surpass the original. Anyone who thinks it'll do that should have themself committed. All, anyone can do is hope that the movie's funny. It may not be good (I thought it was good), and it may not be bad. But, it IS a great comedy, that is worth seeing. And yes, the originals are better. But, that goes without saying, right? As the stats go, people should realize that most remakes are just opportunities for studios to exploit the mindless/artless common man but to think that there's no hope of a remake being better than the original or that one should be commited for thinking so, sounds commitable to me. If it's done well, I have no problem with remakes and though none come to mind, there are some movies that were better than their original. As rare as that is. I'm not a fan of Roger Ebert but he said something about remakes once that really made sense. He said the only movies that really should ever be remade were the mediocre ones. Maybe a movie that had a great premise but bad editting or acting or whatever. So I say we remake Time Chasers and totally revamp it and give it a nice glossy make-over......naahhh.
|
|
|
Post by RafaelH on Feb 12, 2006 17:58:44 GMT -5
Steve Martin used to be funny. Now he's doing awful race relations crap with Queen Latifah, cheezy family remakes with Bonnie Hunt, and terribly ill-advised remakes of real comedies. Yeah but between garbage like Cheaper by the dozen and Pink Panther, he made Shopgirl (not only acted but wrote the novel and the screenplay) which was a great great underrated movie. I loved it. Martin should do or is doing the Bill Murray path and I think that is the way to go.
|
|
|
Post by mightyjack on Feb 12, 2006 19:06:21 GMT -5
It's cool that you enjoyed yourself -heck I just recently learned that Underworld 2 has been panned. I don't care, I don't read the reviews or rotten tomatos or whatever. I liked it, had a good time and since it's my money and my happiness at stake, that's all that matters.
My Brother wants to see Panther real bad but no one else (wife and kids) wants to go. He keeps saying, "doesn't that look hilarious?" - Since I'm not that big on slapstick, physical humor I just say, uh sure, if your buying I'll go with you. lol
|
|
|
Post by Afgncaap5 on Feb 12, 2006 20:37:25 GMT -5
The thing about the Pink Panther movies is that they were written by people who understood why slapstick was funny. It's not, "Oh, look, he's injured, let's laugh!" It's all about the situation leading up to it, and how the scene goes after it.
MILD SPOILER BELOW FOR THE ORIGINAL MOVIE!
For instance, one of my favorite scenes in the original Pink Panther is when The Phantom falls out of a window or something. See, I don't even remember the premise as the violence itself was actually underplayed.
Following it, however, when Litton just walks out of a wall of snow, cheerfully waving to the people standing there, I burst into laughter. Not because he's walking away unscathed, but because the story's plot premise pretty much demands that he not act cold and wet, as he probably is. Doing so would lead to questions, which would reveal the truth about his life, and so what's the only way to respond? Act like he's a dignified, rich eccentric who was SUPPOSED to be in the bank of snow! And the movie proceeds without asking questions.
Man...we need more Blake Edwards movies...
|
|
|
Post by RafaelH on Feb 13, 2006 1:47:11 GMT -5
It's cool that you enjoyed yourself -heck I just recently learned that Underworld 2 has been panned. I don't care, I don't read the reviews or rotten tomatos or whatever. I liked it, had a good time and since it's my money and my happiness at stake, that's all that matters. I paid for Underworld 2. Boy did I. But I don't consider it paying; more like "gave my 6 dollars away" . That movie was not only awful but confusing. I gave up in the middle and started playing Tri-gol in my brother cell phone. True story.
|
|
|
Post by mightyjack on Feb 14, 2006 1:19:47 GMT -5
Ah well, to each his own. It's involving but not confussing. At least not for my brain (I mean hell, I've sat through several Nicholas Roeg films - no one can confusse me as much as that man)
I've just really lost the stomach for movie or music reviews. All it amounts too is that someone gets jacked about a flick, wants to share the experience, and everyone else takes a dump on them.
I'm just tired of the negativity. So to hell with it, Xerses had a great time, bully for her.
|
|