Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Do RIDDICK, AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS and THE TERMINAL suck' Frosty Skywalker seems to think so!!!

Ahoy, squirts! Quint here with Negative Nancy Frosty Skywalker... Hehehe... In all seriousness, he could very well be justified in his views. I haven't seen any of the below flicks yet, so I can't say. I hope he's wrong. The early word from CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK has up to now been very good and I just love Spielberg flicks... Can't defend AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS, though. I can smell that one from here...

Before we get on with Frosty, I must bring up something that disturbed me about Harry's JUNE DVD post... He did a great job, don't get me wrong... but how can you leave out the genius of BACK TO THE BEACH? Frankie, Annette, Pee-Wee, Stevie Ray, Dick Dale, Gilligan, The Skipper, Don Adams... Classic stuff! Available June 1st!!!

Just had to get that off my chest... Now on with Mr. Skywalker's words of doom and gloom!

Hey Harry/Drew,

Frosty Skywalker here with a few quick things...

First about Riddick. I have heard from a great source working on the project that Universal is making wholesale cuts to the film to make it a popcorn summer action flick, and they are cutting the deep subtext that the film apparently had. From what I heard the film is now straight action and later this year we will get a DVD that is the theatrical cut and a short time after they are already prepping the directors cut with over 30 minutes of cut footage. These wholesale cuts are the direct result of poor test screenings where the audience was confused. Thank you NRG for reducing a plot driven summer action flick to typical fast food entertainment. Actually it is not NRG but just dumb people who are the cause...but it still bothers me.... Also a little off the subject I heard they have done some digital work to Judi Dench's face....

Around the World in 80 Days. I saw this flick forever and a day ago and I do not even want to write about it. The film is awful. Dreadful. Whatever other word describes a waste of time. Yet I have to make a quick point. If you are 12 years old or under, you will probably like the film. I am past the demographic the film is trying to reach. As I have gotten older I am starting to realize I am moving past the ability to enjoy even high school flicks. I just do not care anymore about the trials and tribulations of high school, or the drama that goes with it. But getting back to Around the World, if you have a kid brother, or if you are 12 or under, you will have some fun. But unlike some films that have some adult enjoyment, even with a cameo by our governor, nothing can save this waste of celluloid.

Now onto The Terminal. I know a lot of people have been saying the film is good and the test audiences and critics have loved the film....let me say they are lying. The film is a shocking disappointment. I have to declare that The Terminal is Terminal. Let me start out by saying I enjoy sappy and romantic films, and I also like candy coated entertainment. But this film could make a diabetic go into a coma. I have seen on the site that people have summed up the film so lets not waste anytime on the plot. We know Tom Hanks lives in an airport and this is his story. Well I went in thinking with all the people involved this had to be worth my time. I was wrong. Tom Hanks and Catherine Zeta Jones have NO chemistry. The film is completely unrealistic (I know it is a movie, but when it is based in reality you have obey those laws). I found scenes had no motivation. In the film there is a dinner scene between Tom and Catherine, and in that scene (which I have to begrudgingly say was quite funny) they both toss their pager's onto the runway. Why?! He says nothing, and she rambles on about things that I did not care about. Her character is awful, and she looks like she mailed in the performance. Not that the script made it easy to do anything. It felt like Spielberg said okay Tom is in the airport so we need a love interest...and make her really undesirable...but we'll cast a really attractive woman so no one will care about her....

I know you probably think I have it in for Spielberg or even Tom Hanks. I don't. I think Tom is a great actor, and Steven Spielberg is one of the greatest popcorn entertainment directors of all time. I am just frustrated by their actions. Spielberg has a freedom that almost everyone who is involved with film covets. He can greenlight his own projects and decide on just about everything involved in their production. Many artists will die never knowing that freedom. Therefore with that freedom I really think he should be making films that make you think, films that others cannot make, films that are about the human condition. This does not have to be all the time, but to make a huge summer film, and for the film to be a big scoop of Vanilla Ice Cream...well anyone can do it. I just expect more from the people involved.

You remember when you were a teenager and an adult film came on cable (not porn), or you went to the theater and saw something your parents liked and you were ashamed to say you enjoyed it. This is not that film. I saw it for free, and I want my time back.

I would like to mention that this summer thus far has been one huge letdown, I have seen some of the other big guns of the summer, and rest assured, the best is yet to come.

Frosty Skywalker




Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • May 31, 2004, 5:56 a.m. CST

    Damnit I really thought Riddick was going to be good...

    by Jon E Cin

    I am gonna see it anyway..but I was thinking a Dune type film. Even though VD is terrible.

  • May 31, 2004, 6:34 a.m. CST

    So that's why Riddick has a great trailer. The movie sucks.

    by el zar

    Guess i'll just watch the trailer over and over again.

  • May 31, 2004, 6:36 a.m. CST

    Judi Dench is incredibly hot, why the digital touchup?

    by lush

    It makes no sense. I'm disapointed by the "ATWI80D" review, I can't believe they apparently fucked up a fool proof story. Fuck the twelve and under demo.

  • May 31, 2004, 7:24 a.m. CST

    Around The World in 80 Days is a VERY GOOD movie !

    by Tirry

    I don't Believe this review ! I saw Around The World in 80 Days and it's a decent movie ! Jackie Chan is awesome ! Steve Coogan wonderful !... the Cast is great : C

  • May 31, 2004, 7:36 a.m. CST

    what 80 days trailer?

    by Big_Kahuna

    you must have seen a different trailer, i'm a massive fan of steve coogan but the trailer weas insanely unfunny and it looks as though the film will blow goats

  • May 31, 2004, 7:41 a.m. CST

    Spielberg should make WAR OF THE WORLDS already!!!

    by godoffireinhell

    Fuck this rom-com bullshit!

  • May 31, 2004, 8:18 a.m. CST

    "80 Days" looks incredibly stupid!

    by mbaker

    I'm sorry, but this is a very lame vehicle for Jackie Chan. It simply dosen't do the book justice. Another stupid "kids" movie from the Moise House since they don't give a damn about the rest of the family. Besides, if this movie bombs, (Which i'm sure it will) there's always "Rush Hour 3". with Hullk Hogan as the baddie ("You mean Tito! Toto is what we ate for dinner last night, BROTHER!")

  • May 31, 2004, 9:03 a.m. CST

    He never saw Riddick!!!

    by Krigan

    Read the article people, especially you Quint. He is reporting a scoop on it that he has heard there is massive cuts. He says from what I heard it is just a straight action now. If he saw it he would not say from what I heard!! Now If this is true it certainly sucks to have that much cut from the film but this is not a review cause he never saw it and does not claim to have.

  • May 31, 2004, 9:49 a.m. CST

    I think "popcorn" doesn't fit Spielberg anymore

    by Drath

    Because "popcorn" has been used to describe the shitty immitators that infest Hollywood now, and Spielberg's worst movie is better than any of those. We need to start calling the bad crap what it is: packing peanuts. Speaking of which, is this stuff about Riddick fact or just rumor? It's not a review like the headline said, so I'm not ready to put the bad word out on this one. Also, I have no plans to see 80 Days because from the trailer it looks like a silly Flubber-esque kidfest, which is just not something I feel like seeing (maybe by the time the DVD comes out I will, but not now). I'm keeping my hopes up for the Terminal though.

  • May 31, 2004, 10:32 a.m. CST

    Frosty thinks "Phantom Menace" is a GOOD action adventure flick.

    by OgieOglethorpe

    NOTHING!

  • May 31, 2004, 11:34 a.m. CST

    I,m still have to see riddick but man

    by skiff

    I,m going to see it but man I thought it was going to be good

  • May 31, 2004, 11:37 a.m. CST

    "Universal is making wholesale cuts to (Riddick) to make it a po

    by NiceMarmot

    Eh? What the hell was it before the cuts, a romance/musical? The trailer I saw made it look exactly like a summer popcorn action flick, just like the first movie.

  • May 31, 2004, 12:05 p.m. CST

    These were reviews?

    by Jack Burton

    They didn't say anything new. I thought Twohy had final cut approval on Riddick? "80 days" has had negative press and the other two have been fairly quiet so far. Sounds like a plant. I still have faith in "Riddick".

  • May 31, 2004, 1:34 p.m. CST

    AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS

    by FidelioMe

    Man,someone on AICN must have it in for this movie. All I've read on here about it are two negative reviews - one from some guy who had a videotape of the rough cut but all he said was he hated it and one from someone who didn't even say anything specific about it. Whatever happened to REVIEWING a movie?

  • May 31, 2004, 1:47 p.m. CST

    Look at it from Saddam's point of view...

    by Rob_Graves

    You need to relax guy! Put your feet up! Those dogs are barking! Relax!

  • May 31, 2004, 1:47 p.m. CST

    Go see Riddick

    by ThePeacemaker

    Riddick just might be a good movie...In fact we all know it is going to blast Pitch Black to the Lake of Fire. I know I am not the only one who hated pitch black...I never could make myself like it. Anyways, never mind most of the negative reviews you see about the movie. Go see it for yourself and decide if it is worth sitting through.

  • May 31, 2004, 1:59 p.m. CST

    Link to "80 Days" reviews on Aint't Cool News.com

    by Tirry

    Two Positive : http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=15981 http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=16826 Negative : http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=17201

  • May 31, 2004, 3:21 p.m. CST

    Why is Speilberg wasting valuable time?

    by 007-11

    Wasn't he desperate to make "Memoirs of a Geisha" a few years ago? I'm not trying to rag on the movie, but come on, this isn't anything special. It's not like this movie requires some grand vision and execution. McG could pull this thing off. There are so many more great projects out there, but he's pussyfooting around with this crap people will only see because of Tom Hanks?

  • May 31, 2004, 3:30 p.m. CST

    sterilization for those who use the word

    by Andy_Christ

    I fucking hate the term "popcorn movie," and I want to beat with a baseball bat any movie critic who uses the word "romp." There should be a quota system. You can say "romp" in two reviews per year, anything above that limit results in summary decapitation. I know he didn't say it here, but "popcorn" reminded me of it.

  • May 31, 2004, 4:21 p.m. CST

    Very impressed by Riddick!!!

    by chien_sale

    I saw it yesterday and it was...surprising to say the least. I mean the shear bravado of coming-up with of all of the sets, the designs, the scope of it all and the ideas in it, blows any sci-fo soap opera i`ve seen in a while. It reminds me of Brotherhood of the Wolf as in looking ten times what it cost with a capable hand at the helm. The difference with BOTW is that there`s a solid lead this time. I hate Vinny but his character rocks!

  • May 31, 2004, 4:25 p.m. CST

    The teaser should say:"if you hated the Matrix movies, see this

    by innertMoustard

    "...action sci-fi with no psychobabble bullshit and no crap CGI..."

  • May 31, 2004, 5:25 p.m. CST

    'Unrealistic'

    by Mac & CHEESE

    This film is based on the true story of an immigrant who has been stuck at Charles De Gaulle airport in France for years. He is still there now. They don't know where he came from as he 'lost' his passport, but they won't let him into the country, so he is stuck. Sometimes life is stranger than fiction.

  • May 31, 2004, 5:36 p.m. CST

    Any pointless internet critic who think's he is better than a Sp

    by watashiwadare

    It is not enough to say it is bad, you can only say YOU didn't like it. The reason is because some people have accomplished due to great talent and great thoughtfulness and probing intelligence. To dismiss that in a weak fit of hubris is just another silly coolnews review no one takes seriously.

  • May 31, 2004, 6:04 p.m. CST

    by proper

    terminal=no more to be said except no thank you.Riddick=looks interesting i'll keep a open mind.80 days=this has been remade too many times and i have avoided them all(even the cartoon animal version with the annoying tune,hang on how did i know that? ooops).J.Chan should sack his advisors.These films waste his talent as much as battle creek brawl did in his prime.

  • Why is it that summer flicks always suck bug time on PAR years, while the odd years always have great flicks??? Anyone ever noticed that? 1998... 2000... 2002...these were all terrible years for filmmaking, and not just in the States. And now herecomes 2004, with the crapfest featuring Shrek 2, Day After Tomorrow, Spidey 2, Potter 3, Riddick (Pitch Black 2), Big Fish... ORIGINALITY, anyone??? I think the greatest odd year was 1999, with tons and tons of groundbreaking films of all sorts, but last year there were a bunch of good flick too!

  • May 31, 2004, 7:15 p.m. CST

    thoughts

    by Necrowafer

    RE: the cutting of Riddick "outrage" -- unless you know what the film was like beforehand, and unless you know exactly what was cut, why be upset about cuts? Yes, studios make moronic cuts as a matter of course. They also make some pretty damn good ones. (I wish studio heads had stepped in earlier, say, on Simon Well's _The Time Machine_.) Twohy is not a master filmmaker or a visionary, IMO, so I'm not second-guessing anybody. Only way to know for sure is to see both versions of the film. And I'm not sure I care to see it even once. The magic of _Pitch Black_ was that it was a small film. Condensed. Intimate. Not a lot of eye candy. Left more to your imagination. I don't think we'll see anything of that nature in _COR_. Which brings me to the Spielberg thing. Frosty says above that most people in film only dream of the kind of freedom Spielberg enjoys. True. But I think that degree of freedom is most often destructive to the creative process. Spielberg and Lucas were both better when restrained by the system, budget, etc. With small budgets and a studio eyballing everything you do, you get _A New Hope_. Living "free" on Skywalker Ranch with no one telling you, "George, you can't write dialogue to save your life; get another Brackett ferchrissakes..." you get _Attack of the Clones_. So Speilberg has creative freedom. The thing about freedom is, it allows you to do what you want -- not what other people think you ought to do, be they studio heads or talkbackers. --Wafer

  • May 31, 2004, 8:44 p.m. CST

    When I saw the Terminal trailer at DAT Friday Night...

    by Boxclocke

    ... I leaned over to my friend and said in my best "Mr. Voice" impersonation: "From the director of Always, and the boring segment on The Twilight Zone..." He agreed. There is not a bigger Spielberg fan in the world than I, and I certainly don't expect The Terminal to be anything less than a sweet, endearing, enjoyable sort of movie. I just don't expect greatness. Which is only a letdown because Steve can vomit greatness. With the right script. And Stan Winston making sure the hydraulic vomit mechanism is perfectly lifelike. Anyway, The Terminal won't suck. It just won't kick too many asses.

  • May 31, 2004, 8:58 p.m. CST

    Um, The Terminal IS BASED ON A TRUE STORY

    by HardcoreRocker

    Just thought I'd point that out. It can't be that unrealistic, can it? www.rockithardcore.com

  • May 31, 2004, 9:12 p.m. CST

    Frosty, Are you a Hater?

    by NubtheSquirrel

    Dude, Troy: Best epic of the summer. Shrek 2: Best Film of the Summer (so far) Day After Tomorrow: Was a great disaster movie despite my problems with the plot holes. Worst so far: VAN HELSING. Nothing could be worse than that. Maybe 80 days but Van Helsing licked balls. This summer has not been a disappointment. Last summer was a bigger disappointment than this to be honest.

  • May 31, 2004, 9:15 p.m. CST

    I doubt he's even seen the films

    by sambrook

    Let's face it, his reviews are tame, bland and hardly in-depth that seemed to have been based around the trailers and clips available to all. If these are his proper reviews then I pity him - my ass could write better reviews. And how has he seen these? And the other big hitters this summer? Fuck off has he! if he's got that much access in Hollywood why's he posting on a site like this? And why doesn't he mention the other films? Or review them? Attention seeking whore, nothing more. Nothing to see here, people. His opinion counts for shit. Apologies to the guy if this really is true and the best he can do but I'll remain cynical.

  • Call it a Twizzlers movie or a Ju Ju B movie, anything else. It's getting old. And the trailer for Around the World in 80 Days was an abortion.

  • May 31, 2004, 11:54 p.m. CST

    Wafer's right.

    by Omegaman

    Sometimes the suits are right. For instance, they probably saved the new Exorcist flick. Ill bet the Schrader version really would have been a complete bore, and a disaster at the B.O. Ive beeen to the Riddick site and I have to admit I cant figure out what the hell this movie is about either. It really does seem confusing. I still wanna see it tho even tho Im a lil disappointed in the pg rating.

  • Judi Dench was incredibly hot and did show her nipples (sort of) when she played Titania in the 1968 version of "A Midsummer Night's Dream."

  • June 1, 2004, 1:52 a.m. CST

    I think Frosty's Riddick source is full of it

    by FelatioHornblowr

    Riddick is now a 1h59min film. The early test screening version (which was very well received) was 2h15min. 16 minutes does not sound like "wholesale cuts" to me. Especially when most of these cuts were just the sort of "filler" shots that need to be cut for a summer action movie.

  • June 1, 2004, 1:54 a.m. CST

    Moreover...

    by FelatioHornblowr

    ...I refuse to believe that any Vin Diesel film will ever have "deep subtext."

  • June 1, 2004, 1:57 a.m. CST

    "...deep subtext..." + Vin Diesel...?

    by Eugene O

    Highly unlikely.

  • June 1, 2004, 2:11 a.m. CST

    Spielberg and "true stories"

    by Lazarus Long

    To the above talkbacker who mentioned that The Terminal was based on a true story and therefore couldn't be unrealistic, do you remember a film called Schindler's List? How about the scene at the end where Liam Neeson as Schindler breaks down, crying "If only I could have saved one more"? THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. Spielberg, always afraid of letting his audience process the characters and themes themselves, had to force it down our throats with this unnecessary, oversentimental scene. For me, it ruined what was a really good (not great) film. Polanski, on the other hand, did very detatched work on The Pianist and still made a realistic, moving film (also based on a true story). What I can tell you about the real story behind The Terminal is that, if I'm not mistaken, the real guy stuck in the airport was from an Arab country, and the terminal itself was in Paris' Charles de Gaulle airport. It's said that idiotic anti-French and anti-Arab sentiment in America probably caused Spielberg to wimp out, setting it in New York FUCKING City (how patriotic and ironic), and making Hanks' char from some make-believe Eastern European country. There's realism for you. I loathe Tom Hanks at his most "inspiring" and "human", and Spielberg manipulating the strings with stock caricatures as in Saving Private Ryan pisses me off to no end (Catch Me If You Can barely escaped this and managed to me a really good film). I'll only see it if I hear a LOT of raves.

  • June 1, 2004, 2:48 a.m. CST

    by TheBuffalo

    "I'll only see it if I hear a LOT of raves"? Jeez loser, make up your own mind and don't wait until others tell you what to like and what not

  • June 1, 2004, 4:02 a.m. CST

    Will not see another Spielberg movie as long as I live.

    by Darksider

    Please give War of the Worlds to a real sci-fi director. Someone who doesn't have Lucas, ILM, or Winston carrying the movie for him. Were the actors don't all look Jewish. Were there is no "Spielbergian" Hollywood fluff ending. Someone who also knows how to move a camera. Someone who actually graduated from film school for real. Anyways, 80 Days looks like a kids/family film which is fine with me. Arnold's going to make a career out of cameos now. I'm going to give Riddick a shot because Pitch Black didn't suck. I hope Chronicles is dark as well, just with a bigger budget. We need hardcore sci-fi movies to make a comeback.

  • June 1, 2004, 5:13 a.m. CST

    I didn't release Schindler's list on dvd the week afterThe Passi

    by Darksider

    Stupid.

  • June 1, 2004, 6:37 a.m. CST

    Elitist and racist

    by Darksider

    You were just saying that FIRST posters were stupid and should be removed and made two cracks on gay people on other topics. Pot and kettle. I just think that Spielberg is way overrated as a director and that MORE diverisity could be in his films i.e. more races and ethnic groups.

  • June 1, 2004, 9:46 a.m. CST

    This is EXACTLY how I felt about 'Day after Tomorrow'... They're

    by TheGinger Twit

  • June 1, 2004, 10:07 a.m. CST

    STEVE COOGAN . . .

    by PullMyFinger

    is the man.

  • June 1, 2004, 3:50 p.m. CST

    "Jeez loser, make up your own mind and don't wait until others t

    by minderbinder

    What, like we're supposed to go and see every film that comes out, just so we can "make up our own mind"? Sorry, I don't have the time or money to waste on shit movies. So I read reviews and hear what other people have to say. Not that I always agree, but how else to decide whether to spend (waste) time/money on a film? I totally agree in this case, I'll totally wait for reviews since the trailer makes the film look like ass.

  • June 1, 2004, 6:31 p.m. CST

    exactly

    by Lazarus Long

    If I'm a loser, what does that make all the pituitary cases whose entire post consists of some one-line juvenile remark? AS the above poster mentioned, I don't have time to see shitty movies, and it's even more disheartening when they come from talented directors. I have a lot of issues with Spielberg and many of his films, but to say he doesn't know how to move a camera betrays either your naivety or your blinding bias. The man IS one of the most gifted shotmakers in the business, like him or not. Yeah he does a few cliche things in a lot of his films (the wide-eyed, bright "revelation" shot, e.g.), but don't say he can't use the camera. He was gifted before Janus Kaminsky came along, and will do fine without him. To reiterate, unless I read good reviews from a critic I like, or a friend with similar tastes, I probably won't bite. As I also said, I despise Hanks in cutesy shit like this.

  • June 2, 2004, 8:26 a.m. CST

    comprehension abilities.

    by megtdog

    it's ok its a matrix fan. go back to sleep

  • June 3, 2004, 1:53 a.m. CST

    Darksider....

    by one9deuce

    you're either an incredibly gifted troll, or the most ignorant person in the world about film in relation to how much you think you know. Nobody in the history of film is more gifted in shotmaking than Steven Speilberg. You don't go to film school to get what he has, you have to be born with a gift. THOUSANDS of people graduate film school every year.