Movie News

Moriarty disembowels THE WILD WILD WEST

Published at: June 30, 1999, 1:55 a.m. CST by staff

Well folks, Moriarty here really seems to have felt like he had just sipped douche juice after seeing THE WILD WILD WEST. However, I now feel it as my duty to inform you that apparently Moriarty despises Kenneth Branagh on screen. Now, while I believe Kenneth is responsible for the worst bloody tampon of a movie I have seen in the last decade of film (FRANKENSTEIN), I do enjoy highly his work in HENRY V, HAMLET, DEAD AGAIN and his character here in WILD WILD WEST. I actually believe there is some damn good undertones to his character... BUT.. hell.. I had my say in my review... So I'll turn things over to the Evil Genius who feels if you willingly pay to see this movie, you deserve the digested brown fluid with corn bits that you will ingest for the 2 hours it'll take to see this film. So here's the professor...

Hey, Head Geek...

“Moriarty” here.

There are very few things that make me as angry as when I see a racial or ideological group painted with a broad brush in a film and made to look stupid or weak. You can imagine then my shock to witness the vigor with which Evil Geniuses are slandered in the miserable, hideous, agonizingly painful WILD WILD WEST.

Allow me to backtrack a bit. I had no desire to see this film. It’s not that I was actively against it. I just thought the script was crap and couldn’t imagine it got any better in front of the camera. I saw the trailers and thought they were noisy and dull. I figured it was the kind of movie I could just skip and never miss.

My henchmen think they’re funny, though. They thought it was a good practical joke to drug my drink this evening and spirit me away to the Egyptian Theater, where I woke up just as the film was starting. When I realized what film it was, I decided to just sit back and enjoy anything I could about the film.

That attitude lasted for about the first nine minutes of the film. At that point, the pain became overwhelming, and I spent the next seven and a half hours of running time (or so it seemed) wishing various types of ill fortune on every single person involved with this enterprise. Well, almost everyone. Two people escaped my wrath, and I’ll single them out by the end of this review.

First, let’s address the story issues I have with the film. I guess the first would be that THERE’S NO FREAKING STORY HERE AT ALL! Altogether, maybe five or six major events happen in the film, with the rest of it being either someone summing up all the exposition so far or pointless special effects taking up screen time. Basically, the film starts with James Bond (played with all the range of a Daisy Air Rifle by Will Smith) boinking the girl from THE JAMIE FOXX SHOW in a water tank. That would be the water tank that people get their drinking water from, I’m guessing, but let’s not dwell on that. As they’re boinking, they’re interrupted by the arrival of Ugly Bad Guy #1 (played under about 60 pounds of Rick Baker makeup by Ted Levine). The water tower collapses and James Bond fights the bad guys naked. Across town, Mandy Patinkin (played in an exceptionally annoying manner by Kevin Kline) is in drag. There’s more fighting. Something explodes. James Bond and Mandy Patinkin then have to meet the President (played by Kevin Kline for no good reason whatsoever). He tells them to work together. They go fight on a train for a while. They go to a party, where Evil Dr. Foghorn Witless (deeply overplayed by Kenneth Branaugh) announces to everyone that he’s a bad guy. There’s some more fighting, and they rescue Tits’n’Ass (played with very little clothes by Salma Hayek). They ride their train again, then get chased through a cornfield by flying razor frisbees. Then they see a giant mechanical spider that they have to ride a flying bike onto, only to have more fights with various Ugly Bad Guys. Evil Dr. Foghorn Witless then dies.

Powerful dramatic material there, folks. The thing that really makes this film not just a dud but one of the more actively offensive pieces of giant-budget garbage lately is the so-called sense of humor. The film veers between feeble wordplay, sloppy half-hearted slapstick, and randomly offensive imagery like the exploding Lincoln head that introduces Evil Dr. Foghorn Witless. There’s exactly one line of dialogue in this film that made me smile, and that’s just because it didn’t profusely suck like everything before and after it. For the most part, the level of wit is along the lines of a moment after Mandy Patinkin’s flying bike finally works. James Bond asks him what he plans to call the device. Patinkin smiles and says, “Air Gordon.” Really. I didn’t make that part up.

This film is so bad, it’s like a black hole of entertainment. I’ve now forgotten the last three good films I saw because this film obliterated them. Barry Sonnenfeld, Jon Peters, and the team of professional retards they had commit this crime on paper orginally should all be drummed out of their respective guilds. I’ve thought for some time now that Sonnenfeld was a pale shadow of his former collaborators the Coens, not to mention Tim Burton, whose style he seems to ape at every opportunity. The difference is that those people are all real filmmakers. They all know how to pace a scene, compose a shot, create some sense of dramatic or comedic tension. MEN IN BLACK wasn’t bad, but it felt slight, like a trailer for a better, longer movie. His second ADDAMS FAMILY movie was at least funny. GET SHORTY is probably the only film of his that felt complete, but even that was overstylized, frequently overpowering the smart Scott Frank script with useless visuals. This time out, Sonnenfeld is so far out of his depth that he seems to have given up completely. He doesn’t even try to tell a story here. It’s just noise and shouting and people running around in front of bad rear projection shots.

Will Smith, Kevin Kline, and Kenneth “I killed Darabont’s FRANKENSTEIN script” Branaugh all have major sins to answer for here. I may have made fun of their characters above, but that’s because not one of them offers up anything like a fully formed performance here. There’s a definite sense of slumming from all there of them. Smith has an innate charm that nothing could take from him. I mean, he survived ID4 intact, right? This time out, though, I think it’s lazy work on his part. He’s Will Smith in every frame, and we get nothing new or different from him. Put him in a black suit and sunglasses and there’s no change whatsoever. His relaxed comic style seems natural set against the backdrop of today, but he’s a walking, talking anachronism here. I know, I know... “it’s a fantasy version of the Old West.” Bullshit. This isn’t a fantasy version of anything. There’s rides at Walt Disney World that are more convincing than this film. At no point do I believe that I was looking at anything other than modern actors on sets and soundstages. In addition, there’s a drag scene with Will as a belly dancer that I hope they make him watch several times a year as penance. It’s horrifying, unfunny, and seems to last at least 45 minutes. Kevin Kline can be great in comedy (A FISH CALLED WANDA) and awful in comedy (IN & OUT), but I’ve never seen him look so bored. I hope he got paid a lot of money for this film, because it’s almost end-of-a-career awful. Still, he’s not the worst actor in the film. No... leave that to today’s Olivier. Once again, Kenneth Branaugh proves that he should have his tongue removed before he is allowed in front of another camera. I’ve cut farts more subtle than his work here. Aside from the visual kick of him without legs (thanks, but I already saw FORREST GUMP), there’s nothing going on here. He’s just a racist little jerk. Wow... how funny is that? Besides, as I stated at the start of this review, I am offended by how he portrays an Evil Genius. I’m an Evil Genius. I know many other Evil Geniuses. You, sir, are no Evil Genius. I’m not going to beat up on Salma for her performance, since she’s just in the film to have most of her breasts showing at all times. I’m sure someone convinced her this would be a good career move. It wasn’t.

There are two technical contributors to the film who did nice work. Bo Welch is a gifted production designer who’s done some exemplary work over the years when working with artists like Burton. That’s probably why Sonnenfeld loves using him so much. Welch brings real imagination to the proceedings, and his mechanical spider in interesting to watch for about 90 seconds. Then it does the same thing over and over and becomes just another phony backdrop. The sets are interesting ideas, but Sonnenfeld doesn’t shoot them with any sort of flair, so it’s hard to tell just how much fun they are. The other standout work in the film was done by mechanical effects supervisor Michael Lantieri, who is one of the true magicians working in film today. He’s the man who let Roger Rabbit and Eddie Valiant share a coat, who helped Casper pour a real glass of juice for Christina Ricci, and who convinced us that the raptors were real. He mixes the real and the pretend with aplomb, and this is the kind of show he was born to work on. There’s a lot of mechanical effects for him to create here, and he brings his usual level of excellence to bear.

Aside from that, though, I can’t say enough poison about this film. I’ve never done this on AICN before, but I’m going to beg you all to avoid the film. Don’t just take my word for it. Wait and let the suckers see it this weekend. Listen to how foul the word of mouth is. If you feel like you have to see it, then pay for something else and sneak into WWW. For God’s sake, though, don’t give this film a single penny of your money. This is the exact kind of crass commercial crap that we at AICN try to warn you about. This is nothing but an effort to take the money out of your wallet so it can line someone else’s. There’s nothing to recommend here, and anyone who pays to see it this weekend gets exactly what they deserve. If I could have my two hours back, I’d gladly trade it for the experience of sitting through this abomination. All I can hope is that Barry Sonnenfeld is out there somewhere, whining about the Internet like he has for the last few weeks (hey, Barry... it’s not our fault your movie blows), reading this review. I hope I’ve managed to shit in his head just a little to make up for how much he shit into mine tonight. When I hear someone complain that the testing process has been compromised and doesn’t let artists tweak their films fairly, I have to listen and give weight to those thoughts. Are we bad for films? But when the “art” under discussion is something as painful and pathetic as this, then the whole point is moot. Nothing could have saved this film, Barry, and nothing can save you if you keep making films that are this lazy and stupid.

Right now, I have to run watch my new Kubrick DVD box set or the new GHOSTBUSTERS deluxe edition... something to scrub my brain clean of the disease Warner Bros. put there tonight. I’ll try and recover for some other reviews this week. Until then...

“Moriarty” out.

Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 30, 1999, 2:17 a.m. CST

    Frankenstein

    by Morgus

    I must be the only person who loves MARY SHELLY'S FRANKENSTEIN. It's one of my favorite horror films AND one of my favorite films of the decade. What about it bothers you so much, Harry, that you'd liken it to a bloody tampon? Ha!

  • June 30, 1999, 2:17 a.m. CST

    A must see...

    by Bingo D. Clown

    For masochists? Hahahahaha!

  • June 30, 1999, 2:25 a.m. CST

    phew!

    by kev

    I'm so glad that this movie is gonna bomb so badly, at least it won't mean another Will Smith dominated summer......hurrah!

  • June 30, 1999, 4:05 a.m. CST

    That plot sounds like video game

    by paragonian

    In a video game you fight things until you get to the main bad guy who you kill and end the game. Resident Evil and Metal Gear for the Playstation however have somewhat complex and original plots and interesting characterization which this movie most likely doesn't have. The Romero Resident Evil game will hopefully be just as scary as the game and not just a gorefest with bad acting and dialogue. Those types of games require more intelligence, problem solving and imagination than this type of movie by a long shot. Think of how many Fargos, Pulp Fictions, There's Something About Mary's, Swingers, Smoke Signals, or a lot of other great films you can make for the price of ONE of these shitfests. I hope Warners uses the profits of The Matrix and Eyes Wide Shut to have Jon Peters killed, it could be like a kill the moron producer fund. I'd pay to see WWW if it went to such a worthy cause.

  • June 30, 1999, 4:19 a.m. CST

    ummm, Harry....

    by Epsilon3

    Harry, interesting use of feminine hygine products in your intro. Kind of sexist, yet truly crass. Way to go.

  • June 30, 1999, 5:26 a.m. CST

    I'll see Wild Wild West.

    by RodimusPrime

    No offense "Moriarty", but I don't exactly think of critics as gods. I'll go see the movie and make up my own mind. I'd urge everyone else out there to see it too, and make up their own minds. Urging people to avoid a movie is sort of counterproductive, don't you think, Moriarty? What are we all going to tell others when they ask if it's a good or bad flick? "Well, I was going to see it, but I read a bad review so I stayed away" ? This, you see, would lead the fellow you're talking to to reply along the lines of "Oh, I see, you are a sheep with no mind of your own!" And yes, Sithlord, The Phantom Menace DID rock.

  • June 30, 1999, 5:44 a.m. CST

    TPM sucks just as much as WWW - to those with any sense, that is

    by Salon Kitty

    To me, there is no distinction whatsoever between movies like TPM and WWW. They both suck ass, they both use hype like there's no tomorrow, and movies like these will eventually lead to the downfall of cinema..... Will Smith & George Lucas have to be the two most arrogant bastards working in film today. Wasn't Smith the guy who said that WWW was gonna be the movie to see this summer? Well, he was obviously talking out of his ass, because anyone with ANY sense will stay away from God-awful bullshit like this. But, (and this brings me to my next point) the fact that a movie sucks didn't stop ANYONE from going to see TPM, now did it? All those guys who say that TPM rocked are in 100% denial. I liked "A New Hope" & "Empire Strikes Back", but it's pretty obvious to me that TPM wasn't worthy of the name Star Wars. Lucas knew that hype was the major weapon in his assault on the box-office, and therefore used it constantly. Quality is irrelevant to the success of a movie these days. And the more people who repeatedly pay to watch films which are over-hyped shit-fests, (TPM!) will have "unwittingly" brought about the creation of much more of the same. Demand quality, not lame-ass movies whose only reason to exist are as hype-machines to sucker the mindless masses into parting with their cash. For this reason, I detest Lucas and his whoring money-grabbing ways. And Will Smith is just as bad, but from the other side of the camera. This guy thinks that anything with him in it is automatically gonna be a box-office smash. Okay, so he starred in ID4 & MIB and now he's suddenly the greatest thing ever (in his opinion). ID4 simply sucked, and MIB was only a mildly entertaining time-waster at best. Not nearly as good as some guys make it out to be. But it did take several hype lessons from George Lucas which improved its performance at the theater immeasurably. And, almost every FX sequence in the damn movie was shown in the trailer, for fuck's sake!! I felt cheated when I finally saw the flick. Yup, I HATE the way directors and film studios promote their movies. Never once do they credit the film-going public with having any intelligence... As for me, I'm not gonna watch another damn thing at the theater, until these guys realize that any old crap just won't cut it anymore...... Fuck hype, fuck Will Smith, fuck Lucas, fuck TPM, and last but by no means least, fuck WWW!!!

  • June 30, 1999, 5:53 a.m. CST

    I third what SithLord said...

    by GregX

    TPM did rock.

  • June 30, 1999, 5:57 a.m. CST

    On Moriarty's style...

    by Achilles

    Hey Moriarty, I really like your reviews. I generally find them to be accurate and reflective of my own opinions. I would go as far as to say that I usually consult one of your reviews before I view a a heavily-hyped film. But once and for all, just stop the lame "I am an evil genius" routine at the beginning of each review. It is always unfunny, it just wastes screen space and yours, mine, and everyone else's time. Your insights are great, just can the lame attempt at comedy. You are really the only reviewer I can pay attention to on this site. Hallenbeck is a moron, and don't get me started on Harry's reviews. Why the hell does he insist on laying out the details of his entire day in the review? Harry, nobody cares what you ate or where you went or how many frigging Shiner Bocks you drank (good beer, by the way). It has no bearing on anything. Just tell about the film! Period!

  • June 30, 1999, 6:19 a.m. CST

    that's funny...

    by Uncle Cracky

    ...the only reason I read these reviews is so I can find out about the reviewers' daily lives and private personalities. Who gives a rat's ass what they think of a movie? I've got an organic decision-making device of my own!

  • June 30, 1999, 6:20 a.m. CST

    Rodimus, I take some issue with you...

    by Otter_

    Rodimus, I don't agree with your opinion about telling people to see this movie and judge it on their own; in that way, money is still going into Warner's and Jon Peter's and Sonnenfeld's pocket. My opinion? Let the public listen to ALL the reviews, and let them judge from there. I can take bits and pieces from different reviews and decide whether I want to spend my money or not waste my money on a movie.From what I've seen and heard about "Wild Wild Waste", I choose to wait and see it on video: not rent it or buy it new even, but buy a previously viewed copy for 9.99 so I can spend the least possible for this movie. In the case it IS a dog of a movie, I can erase the tape and use it as a blank.

  • June 30, 1999, 6:27 a.m. CST

    Frankenstein and Kenneth Branagh...

    by Peregrin

    I have yet to see WWW, and so I really can't comment on that film, but I would like to reply to Moriarity's insistence that Kenneth Branagh has his tongue removed. Are you fucking out of your mind? That's really all I need to say...Anyone who would claim that Kenneth Branagh isn't one of the most gifted actors (if not the most gifted actor) working today isn't fit to post a review for the WB's Monday night line up. (Not to mention he is probably one of the best directors out there as well, quietly he has created an impeccable body of work that jumps across genres -- Dead Again, Henry V, Peter's Friends, Frankenstein, Much Ado About Nothing, Hamlet...)

  • June 30, 1999, 6:51 a.m. CST

    sounds like a fun popcorn movie to me.

    by samscars

    I have been waiting to see this movie for a while now. My second most anticipated film of the summer to watch, after Star Wars. And now, I want to see it even more. Especially since Moriaty did not like it. You see, I want to see a fun, entertaining, blow my eardrums out, all around good popcorn movie, and this is going to be it. I am not biased and can enjoy all types of movies, hyped up blockbusters or art films. I am not saying it will be the best movie ever, but I am sure it will be a thrill ride. That is what I want to see from WWW, a wild popcorn thrill ride. When I want to see an art film, I will go see EWS when it comes out. That is my opinion, in which I am entitled.

  • June 30, 1999, 6:54 a.m. CST

    Movies in general today.

    by =Trustno1=(2)

    Look I dont know why everyone trashs every single movie that comes out. I personnally have doubts about www but thats just me. I come to this site to read reviews of movies as some times the good folks here hit em on the head. But they are just reviews. They are other peoples opinions. I have read reviews for movies on this site and then seen the film only to end up loving it and buying the film. I personnally get sick of hearing peopletalk about how good films like eyes wide shut are going to be. I cannot stand the fact that hollywood continues to push smut on us all the time. Want a movie to do good? Well then just put some model with half a brain and no acting skills at all in it and let her take off her closes and say I love it when you....well you get the idea! Its pathetic!! We as consumers need to stop going to mindless t&a films and tell hollywood that we want more real films!! And by real I dont mean real life films, I mean films with real scripts. I think that if you liked the trailer to this movie then go see it. If you get burnt then ouch, if you are entertained then hey cool, after all this is what movies are made for.

  • June 30, 1999, 7:14 a.m. CST

    Wild Wild Waste

    by Tooki

    This is not a popcorn movie. This is not a fun movie. This is just a really...Really...Bad "movie". I got the chance to see it about a week ago, I didn't like it from the start. I don't know what this movie has going for it except those hippie sunglasses at Burger King. And yes, TPM did Rock.

  • June 30, 1999, 7:35 a.m. CST

    about other reviews....

    by Auggie

    Speaking first being able to see other reviews, look what I've found on Imdb: Wild, Wild, West was a fun, exciting, action packed movie that had wonderful acting by Will Smith (especially Will), Kevin Kline, Salma Hayek, and Keneth Branaugh. This movie was one of Will Smith's funniest movie's yet. 'I think Will is an incredible actor with a lot of talent and charisma. This movie is a must see for anyone with any taste at all. If you don't like this movie you have to be the most boring, unimaginable, unintelligent person there is on Earth. Wild, Wild, West was 100 times better than Star Wars and is the movie of the year!' ..now, what I want to know is why does everybody have to trash TPM in order to make other movies look good??? BTW: I live in Europe and haven't seen TPM or WWW yet, so I will just distance myself from any comments..

  • June 30, 1999, 7:43 a.m. CST

    So, RodimusPrime...

    by Palmer Eldritch

    ...if I follow Moriarty's advice and go and avoid WWW then I'm a mindless sheep, on the other hand I should I follow your instructions and go and see it, am I not a mindless sheep who's 5 quid poorer, - and more to the point, if I hate it will you reimburse me? How many films am I expect to go and see? Do I also have to see The Deep And Of The Ocean, Gloria, Idle Hands, Soldier and make my own mind up on those too? Or is WWW a special case, is there some reason that we're all compelled to make up our minds and go see this particular movie at 0ur own expense, what's your agenda? THERE'S SOMETHING YPU'RE NOT TELLNG US MAAAANNNN!

  • June 30, 1999, 8:10 a.m. CST

    MORIARTY'S REVIEW........NOT TOO BAD.

    by JaneDoe33

    I've crapped on Moriarty when his reviews contain too much fluff and poo at the beginning. But this review doesn't have too much bullshit. Keep it up.

  • June 30, 1999, 8:33 a.m. CST

    range of a daisy air rifle?

    by Psyronin

    The evil genius is at it again, ripping off Dennis Miller.

  • June 30, 1999, 8:39 a.m. CST

    Casting your ballot . . .

    by Lord Shell

    A semi-valid point is made about pre-judging films. It's not really fair to condemn a film you haven't seen, but on the other hand, every time you go to see a load of crap, you're casting a ballot. That ticket you clutched spasmodically while retching at ID4 was, unfortunately, your vote for Roland and Emmerich saying "Hey, it's ok if you make a lump of shit-because I'll go see it anyway!". Those ticket sales are how they judge the response to a movie. And let's be honest here, don't certain films have that "This is another BIG BUDGET BLOCKBUSTER! (Zow!) Which will have no redeeming value, but will have lots of cool FX!" feel to them just from the trailer? I don't ALWAYS have to see a film to know it's gonna suck (ex: Godzilla) so why should these assholes get my vote (i.e.-my hard-earned money) for putting another piece of celluloid trash on the screen? If it looks like crap, smells like crap, and feels like crap, it probably IS crap. So DON'T GO! If you feel somehow cheated, then wait for it to be on cable. It shouldn't take long, and cable has a redeeming feature: If you don't like it, you can change the channel.

  • June 30, 1999, 8:47 a.m. CST

    THIS IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT!

    by Mr Angry

    THIS is a review. Here Moriarty (aside from the now very old 'evil genius' persona, which is frankly boring) actually says what he thinks in a visceral, direct manner, and proceeds to tell us WHY he thinks it in a way that leaves no room for doubt. TAKE NOTE HARRY. This is what a review should be. OF COURSE WWW is a shitfest, stop whining Barry Sonnenfield, you wanker. And, yes, TPM kicks serious rectum in a manner that most people don't even appreciate yet. In ten years you will be doing a Pauline Kael and saying "well, actually, I like it better now." SW is basically a fable that changes form with your own world view and outlook (this is why acidic little wieners without an ounce of ability to enjoy anything in life don't like TPM) and why SW will be watched in 20 years with as much enjoyment as now. WWW on the other hand is manure that you wouldn't even chuck on your rhubarb and which will be forgotten in 5 months. Fuck you Sonnenfield and Peters! And to the rest of you HAH!

  • June 30, 1999, 9:01 a.m. CST

    OK Rodimus; and tampons

    by creamy goodness

    By that logic we should see every damn movie ever made. You don't seem to understand the point of a review, do you mate? Your argument only works if Moriarty had said only: "Don't see this movie. Because I said so!" Which he didn't. He gave us a start to finish description of his reactions to the movie. I for one am glad to read this review. Have been giving half apologetic reviews of trash for far too long. It's about time people started giving these Hollywood megahype POSs (Godzilla & Co) their just desserts. Hollywood makes so much garbage, it's painful! And mainstream reviewers are usually overly kind and fawning to things like Godzilla or Batman & Robin (ugggh). These movies deserve to be ripped apart, spat out onto the ground, trampled on by circus elephants, and then handed back to the directors with a note saying "Try again, jackass." Instead we get more of them. I want more nasty, honest reviews dammit. Oh, and PS: Harry, I like you, but the aimless sexism is distracting. Men (not all but a lot) seem to have this fear of tampons for some strange reason, when they're really just specialized band-aids. Granted used band-aids can be pretty gross, but relax ok?

  • June 30, 1999, 9:07 a.m. CST

    "testing process"

    by Palhaco

    Moriarty makes a great point here about the Hollywood system. If studios would take good or great scripts, put them together with good or great producers and directors (who fit the material) and then support them, they would get good or great films and many people would go to see them. Unfortunately, most studios see films as ONLY product, and are more concerned with marketing and the damage control of the testing process after they have funded a multi-million dollar piece of dreck. Filmmakers are filmmakers and audiences are audiences - - why do studio execs constantly have audiences remake films... The most successful films are almost always the unexpected ones that were made, not "packaged". Of course, there are commercial movies like Armageddon that gross a lot money - - but their net is usually tiny compared to their gigantic cost for stars and overblown production.

  • June 30, 1999, 9:28 a.m. CST

    You're Not Helping

    by Anton_Sirius

    OK, ha ha, what an amusing review. Morairty made fun of Will Smith- tee hee! The problem is, a review this vitriolic does nothing but fuel Hollwood's growing paranoia towards the 'net. Sorry, Moriarty, but you really didn't tell me anything I couldn't have guessed for myself based on the trailers. While good movies can have bad ad campaigns, bad movies never never never have good trailers. All you did is give the impression that you had some agenda other than impartially reviewing the film- did Sonnenfeld piss you off at a party? Did Branagh sleep with your girlfriend? I DON'T agree with the Sonnenfeld/Schumacher camp of whiners who seem to think if you can't say something nice about their movies, you shouldn't say anything at all. But when you are this, well, EVIL in a review, it does call into question your motives. You said yourself you weren't exactly looking forward to WWW. So why did you see it? That 'drugged by henchmen' schtick is really cute, but you can't hide behind it forever. You went in expecting not to like it, and surprise!- you didn't. I'm not arguing with your review, I'm simply saying that you're leaving yourself wide open to charges of bias or conflict of interest, especially for THIS film at THIS time. You could have spent that time and site space promoting Summer of Sam, or Run Lola Run, or clipping your toenails for all I care. All this review did was give Sonnenfeld more excuses for WWW's 'failure' (remember, Godzilla had the same horrible press, and still made enough money for them to consider a sequel), and call your journalistic integrity into question.

  • June 30, 1999, 9:31 a.m. CST

    ...neat-o

    by nimby

    I must say, this is one of the few talkbacks in recent memory that hasn't descended into a swearing, cussing, pissing-match... Everybody (at least MOST everybody) has stated their point in fairly straight-forward and mature way. Wow. Of course, that isn't to say that I think you're all right in your opinions... For instance, not going to see WWW because you trust Moriarty's opinion does not mean you're a mindless drone. It's funny; ther are those on here that acutally suggested that "how can I know what to say when my friends ask whether or not they should see WWW if I haven't seen WWW?" (or something to that effect) For some reason, you think that taking Moriarty's suggestion is mindless, but someone taking yours is sound advice. As far as the popcorn movie: that's dodgy. My friends saw Batman&Robin thinking it would be a good popcorn movie...boy, were they wrong. Anyway, see the movie if you want to, don't if you don't. Just know this: like that other guy said, your ticket is a ballot...I for one am going to try to avoid WWW at all costs...that'll be enough rambling from me, methinks. Oh, and yes, TPM did rock.

  • June 30, 1999, 9:33 a.m. CST

    Kenneth Brannagh and the death of talent

    by Lurch

    I had decided to pass on WWW the moment I saw KB was involved. It has been truly sickening to watch Brannagh slide from being an exciting, talented filmmaker/actor to the pathetic hack he is today. His first films (Henry V, Dead Again) showed great promise both in terms of directing and acting, but with every subsequent project he has gotten worse and worse. Frankenstien was the most laughable pile of excrement I had seen up to that point. Everything about it sucked - even DeNiro! But Kenneth hit his all time low with Hamlet - this was pure ego at its worst! Hours too long, KB chewing up the scenery left and right; this was just painful to watch. For those who claim he's the best around, I ask that you really look at his work without the background idea that he's a genius and so his stuff must be good. The fact that he's now doing drivel like WWW only emphasizes my point. BTW - WWW will make at least 100M, so don't get too excited about its failing; there aren't enough strong movies out right now for competition. It's sad but the summer belongs to the kids, and all they care about is FX and star power - quality doesn't enter the equation.

  • June 30, 1999, 9:46 a.m. CST

    Motivation

    by NJFILM20

    This is exactly the kind of special effects laden, commercial piece of shit movie (if you can call it that) that makes me so fucking happy that I am going to school for film. If this kind of garbage gets funded then studios must be willing to shell out 500 mil for an original script

  • June 30, 1999, 10:12 a.m. CST

    Now, Moriarty...

    by HobbitDiddler

    ... when you say: >This is nothing but an effort to take the money out of your wallet so it can line someone else

  • June 30, 1999, 10:42 a.m. CST

    Geeks

    by quiscustodiet

    Here

  • June 30, 1999, 11:06 a.m. CST

    WWW and the www

    by fonebone

    I don't know what the dread pirate is talking about -- this talk-back has been excellent. I agree that no one who expects more out a movie that what we got from "Godzilla" or "Waterworld" (or, tho some disagree, "TPM") should pay to see "WWW" during its theatrical release. It's frustrating to me that so many people seem to like "TPM," but hey, that's their prerogative. What's great about the web is that everyone can express their views, and the truth will out. I loved "Get Shorty," but does that mean I have to like everything else Sonnenfeld makes? If he sells out, or gets lazy, he should be called on it. I only hope that "WWW" is avoided by those who should know better.

  • June 30, 1999, 11:10 a.m. CST

    Reviews, respect and the modern-day Welles

    by T. Earl Grey

    As has been noted, there is nothing wrong with taking the advice of a reviewer you trust. What I do is take what's said by a number of reviewers and make a decision based on a composite of what they all said, weighed against the intensity of my initial desire to see the film. Nine times out of ten, this works out great. On another note, I have to echo the sentiments of those who thought Harry's tampon comment and Moriarty's reference to "retards" were out of bounds. Let's watch the unnecessarily degrading talk, gentlemen. Finally, I have to express my dismay that Kenneth Branagh is turning out to be the modern-day Orson Welles. "Henry V" is one of my top three favorite movies of all time. Since then, nothing Branagh has done has measured up to that high benchmark. If his performance in WWW is as bad as the reviews indicate, it just confirms my fear that he, like Welles, will continue to slide until he ends up a pale parody of his own former greatness.

  • June 30, 1999, 11:14 a.m. CST

    Moriarty, I understand where you're coming from, but WWW is wort

    by quentin2

    Harry, you fat bitch. Like I said in the other Talk Back: 50% of your brain is genius, and 50% is pure shit. "Frankenstein, a bloody tampon"?? This is coming from a guy who has a six-foot BUZZ LIGHTYEAR in his room!!!!! COME ON! Branagh's Frankenstein was actually the best film adaptation of the novel ever on the screen!!! Have you ever even read the book? I bet you love Boris Karloff, right?? JEEZ. Moriarty, I'm sorry you don't realize that Kenneth Branagh is one of the most talented actors out there today. He and Anthony Hopkins are among the best actors alive! (Instinct did suck, but it wasn't Hopkins' fault) Will Smith wasn't necessarily "good" in this movie, but how can he be when his character is a COMMERCIAL??? His character is a commercial for the movie!!! But, c'mon, open your eyes you "evil genius"! I'm not so sure about the "genius" part! Will was ten times better in this movie than his UTTERLY disgusting performance in ID4. But we really can't blame Will. Blame the directors he's worked with. Sonnenfield wants to maintain Will Smith's commercial image. But, if given the right role and the right dialogue (and no god awful one-liners!), I think Will Smith could be a really good actor. Just watch Six Degrees of Seperation. I think when he was in that film, he was more of an "actor". Now he's just a business man employed by a studio. But, unlike you, I feel that WWW is worth watching! WATCH IT ONCE ON THE BIG SCREEN, AND THAT'S IT! This is one of those movies that will LOSE ANYTHING IT EVER HAD once it goes to video. Branagh makes up for the bad characters in this film, I think. And the special effects are nice. Don't even talk about Salma Hayek! I think she's a sex kitten, but her good looks are all she's got going for her. In this movie she is a bonafied hole in the mattress (if you'll excuse the term). Screw the characters. This is just one of those FX movies with nice imagery. I saw ID4 just for the FX, but actually.... ID4 wasn't even worth seeing at ALL!

  • June 30, 1999, 11:17 a.m. CST

    to LeiahumpinEwok

    by quentin2

    Leia, are u Lane??? Is it you, ol' buddy, ol' pal?....

  • June 30, 1999, 11:29 a.m. CST

    WWW vs. Godzilla

    by MrNiceGuy

    I think it's rather fair to say, given what Moriarty and other reputable critics such as Roger Ebert have said, that Wild Wild West is this year's Godzilla. A much-anticipated, effects-laden remake of an older property, coming from a creative team just off their greatest success yet. Just as Godzilla turned a profit for Sony, so too will Wild Wild West survive terrible word-of-mouth to make some money. Prediction: huge opening weekend (of course), huge drop-offs (of course), $160 million domestic cume. Just a guess (referring to the number), but it seems reasonable given what Godzilla did. And thank you, Moriarty, for the energetically negative review. Nonetheless, this is one terrible film I'll have to see to believe, I'm afraid.

  • June 30, 1999, 11:51 a.m. CST

    This movie season.... The movies that suck, the movies that don'

    by quentin2

    THE PHANTOM MENACE did indeed rock! Guess what? When A New Hope came out, people said the exact same thing about it!!!! But does anyone care twenty years later? NOPE. I think some people just expected Ewan McGregor to do a back flip out of the screen, run into the isles, and give them a blow job or something. Trust me, the hype for this film started TWO YEARS AGO! AND IT WAS FAN-CREATED!! Some assholes were expecting to get an orgasm and ejaculate in their pants, and they're mad that it didn't happen. They're mad that Natalie Portman and Jake Lloyd didn't fuck like animals, and their mad that Jar Jar didn't say "Yessum, masa Qui-Gon" every two seconds. So they create this bullshit backlash. Trust me, it WON'T last. Give a year or two. By the time Episode II comes out, people will have fond memories of TPM. .................................. WILD WILD WEST: Read my above review. ................................ NOTTING HILL: This movie is pure nonsense. It has the promise of a believable romantic comedy, but Julia and Hugh let you down BIG TIME. This film is a purley commercial project. It's an ad for the actor HUGH GRANT, and it's a kiss-ass at JULIA ROBERTS. Don't see it. ................................ AUSTIN POWERS 2: Trust me here, Harry's review was RIGHT ON. SWSM is funnier, more clever, more witty, and WAY cooler than the original. The characters are all TWICE as funny, and they're written just a tad better. It's a shame that this film is losing out to Big Daddy. ................................ BIG DADDY: It was bad. The few (and I do mean FEW) funny moments it had were not enough to make this movie watchable. Adam Sandler is actually decent in this film, but the script is horrible, and the kid!!! OH GOD, DON'T GET ME STARTED ON THAT KID!!! (actually, he was played by twins), but the kid is fucking AWFUL!! This is an example of Jake Lloyd succeeded where this little brat failed. .................................. SOUTH PARK: What the fuck are you doing reading this BS???? Get off your fat ass and GO SEE THIS MOVIE RIGHT NOW! I never liked South Park. After the first episode, it got really bad. BUT THIS MOVIE IS PURE BEAUTY. Except for a FEW parts, this film is perfect. I laughed hard so many times. It's too funny to offend or seem stupid. Go see it. .................................... SUMMER OF SAM: No, I haven't seen this movie, but I predict that Harry's review is dead-on accurate. Go see it. Spike Lee is a great director. And, if nothing else, Mira Sorvino is a sex-kitten. ............................... EYES WIDE SHUT: Of course, I have not seen this film!! BUT, I'D BET MY RIGHT HAND THAT THIS WILL BE WORTHY OF BEING KUBRICK'S LAST! BELIEVE THE HYPE! .................................. BLAIR WITCH PROJECT: I have seen this one... and yes. The hype is true here. I swear to God, I cannot go camping!! And I really wanted to camping this summer! I just can't! I'd never be able to close my eyes at night. Some people are gonna think this is a poorly-made film, but they'd be dead-wrong. Just immerse yourself in it. After a while, you become a part of it. You're THERE in the forest with them! You experience what they experience! It's a totally UNIQUE horror film. Be ready for something completely unlike anything you've ever seen.

  • June 30, 1999, 12:09 p.m. CST

    Moriarty, you hit the friggin' bullseye!

    by PORKY

    Great review! You're also absolutely dead on about "In and Out" and "Frankenstein" - two abysmal failures. "In an Out" was so bad, my wife and I had to eject the video half way through because we were becoming embarrased for the actors. As with WWW, that movie was unfunny, uncalled for, and unbelievable. Keep your style and wit(or wits about you) Moriarty, you are fast becoming my favorite critic.

  • June 30, 1999, 1:15 p.m. CST

    WWW

    by E

    Without doubt, Mild Mild Mess, sorry, Wild Wild West, is the film to miss this year. This is an unbearable 200 million dollor flatline. Rarely has a film produced this much monotany. Will Smith is played out. If he plays himself one more time you can put a tombstone on his career. We should've known when he started bragging back at Show West. And Sonnenfeld's recent remarks reeked of desperation. Lord I hope people choose South Park over this waste.

  • June 30, 1999, 1:24 p.m. CST

    This movie is BAD

    by MatrixOracle

    I thought Kline was funny in IN & OUT. I liked both ID4 and MIB. But this movie was frickin godawful. Sure, some of the gadgets were cool and the explosions were pretty nice. But the plot/script is complete shit. Every article I read about this movie had Smith or Sonnenfeld or somebody saying that it was funny. NEWSFLASH: IT ISN'T. NOT EVEN A LITTLE BIT. I didn't laugh at all during this movie. I might have smiled or snickered, but that's it. I thought BIG DADDY , SPY WHO SHAGGED ME and THE MUMMY were funny... heck, I even laughed in THE MATRIX. Those movies were FUN... this isn't, in any way. Even THE AVENGERS was better than this, at least the story moved along at a good pace and it was a bit funny. This movie's plot never takes off, it felt really slow. The best part about this movie was the DEEP BLUE SEA trailer, which you can download anyway. Do yourself a favor, do not see this...

  • June 30, 1999, 1:25 p.m. CST

    to Salon Kitty, anti-Hollywood chic & I think WWW will suck too,

    by BigJackieV

    I'm sorry to single you out Salon Kitty, but there's something inherent in a lot of talkbacks that I just hate, and that is arrogance and hypocrisy on the part of all the anti-Hollywood folk (you know who you are). And I quote: "Demand quality, not lame-ass movies whose only reason to exist are as hype-machines to sucker the mindless masses into parting with their cash." And I quote thee yet again: "Never once do they credit the film-going public with having any intelligence..." And just who are you? Comdemning Hollywood for assuming people are stupid while at the same time assuming people are stupid!?! By the way, I myself am not one of the "mindless masses" suckered into films. I did enjoy TPM though was vastly disappointed with it. I do not think it was the best movie in the world by far, nor do I think it was an embarrassment to the Star Wars franchise. By the way, who hyped up the movie, Lucas or everybody else? Two trailers and a few commercials is pretty standard stuff for a big summer flick... I'd also like to say, any movie that advertises itself is 'independent' is itself riding a kind of hype machine. So what if the film-makers raised the money on they own? Is it a better movie because of that fact? Fuck you, no! Independent films let different styles and minds emerge, and for that AND THAT ONLY is the label 'independent' worth using. Let us not forget that indy films aren't in the public eye for a reason...that being NOBODY CARES ABOUT THEM and half of them are SHITE, just like in Hollywood! I mean, if it rings your bell, go ahead, but Jim Jarmusch (sp?) can kiss my ass for "Dead Man." I'd also like to say to everyone that wants the 'mindless masses' to 'broaden their horizons' and watch more indy flicks...you have already 'broadened' your horizon and what happened? You have become arrogant assholes closed off to popcorn movies. Yeah, they ain't art...that's exactly why they are made! In conclusion, I think Wild Wild West looks awful. I like Will Smith and Barry Sonnenfeld, but the trailers are crassly commercial (Yes, I just said crassly commercial while being a defender of Hollywood). A cake is only good when you follow the freakin' recipe. Sorry for taking up so much space...and again, apologies to Salon Kitty for singling you out.

  • June 30, 1999, 1:33 p.m. CST

    my grammar and the Ali biopic with Smith and Sonnenfeld?

    by BigJackieV

    I didn't read over my talkback post...sorry bout the coupla grammar mistakes, don't flame me for it...While I'm here again, is Barry Sonnenfeld ever going to make a small film that he can handle again? What's up next for him? If it's true that he's with Will Smith for the Ali biopic...a good movie maybe? Who better to portray the big talk of Ali than...Big Willie? Hmm...maybe...

  • June 30, 1999, 1:49 p.m. CST

    Er, Moriarty, one thing....

    by Gag Halfrunt

    Kenneth Branagh appearing legless in Forrest Gump? Wasn't that Gary Sinese you were thinking about? Other than that though, top review. This film is the type of tripe that we can do without...

  • June 30, 1999, 1:49 p.m. CST

    Moriarty's reviews are almost always right on target.

    by dennis

    Though I suspect that, like myself, he has an innate hatred for Will Smith. The man has charisma, but he and that wife of his make my skin crawl. It may sound cruel, but I have followed this project from the start, only with the hope of seeing it fail. The concept behind the t.v. show and film is interesting, but once they cast Will Smith, I knew it was going down the gutter. They could've spun the concept into something darker and more intellectual, but NO, they had to make a popcorn-y flick. And what could send off a bigger warning signal that the casting involved in this? "Smith and Branagh together at last!" Jeezus. Branagh is talent, but like Smith, he has WAY too high an opinion of himself. Get ready to crash and burn, babee!

  • June 30, 1999, 2:43 p.m. CST

    If we're lucky, this film will bomb and Peters will lose SUPERMA

    by KingKrypton

    Wouldn't it be nice if WWW tanked GODZILLA-style (i.e., not making enough cash domestically to break even and totally humiliating all involved)? At least we'd have a chace to see Jon Peters get booted off SUPERMAN and WONDER WOMAN. That guy is creative cancer at its worst...

  • June 30, 1999, 3:23 p.m. CST

    DWD: The Only Thing Pathetic About 'The Phantom Menace' Is...

    by DwDunphy

    ...The legion of people telling me that I'm wrong, incompetent, or any number of other derrogatory things because I like it. I liked it enough to see it five times. I liked it much better than the lacking Austin Powers 2. However, just because I didn't like AP2 doesn't mean the movie has no merit, doesn't mean that it's fans are ignorant or mentally deficient and doesn't mean that it's critics are 100% right. I just didn't think it was funny. Does WWW suck? I don't know. I haven't seen it. I don't think I'm going to plunk down almost $10 to find out. But I'm not going to eviscerate anyone who does. Why must the act of enjoying the movies degenerate into this ridiculous firefight all the time? It's like kindergarten all over again, damn it!

  • June 30, 1999, 3:25 p.m. CST

    Preach On Salon Kitty!

    by Fuzzyk

    TPM sucked. I saw the first screening on opening night. I waited 4 hours in the rain. I told my friends we were about to see the best movie ever, instead I saw TPM. Mister Lucas, while complaining about studio execs destroying the art of film-making made a horrible movie all on his own. He used the hype to line his wallet. He was critical of the bad press, blaming the film reviewers, instead of his painful movie for its unkind, but accurate reviews. We are now seeing more of the same with WWW. I am going to see Run Lola Run and try to avoid hearing the makers of WWW blame the media for all of of their woes.

  • June 30, 1999, 4:09 p.m. CST

    TPM

    by Bet

    Stainless, you don't know what your talking about!!! Go out, spend so money and see a few movies.....

  • June 30, 1999, 4:14 p.m. CST

    2Cents

    by Garyman

    I'm not much for saying anything but... After I after I read Moriarity's review I really thought twice about seeing WWW. I was going to go this morning and catch an early show but I read the review and then thought differently. You read reviews to get an opinion on a film that you haven't seen. You don't accept that opinion as your own you just use it to help you decide if indeed this movie shodl be seen by you and you alone. The other thing to take into account is whether or not you have the same taste/opinions as the reviewer. I have read Moriarity's other reviews and I value his opinion. Therefore when he say it blows, I think: "Hmm. This movie might blow." I don't think reviews are an end all to a decicion about a film(I saw Armageddon), just a helpful tool. I want to see WWW for interesting effects and I did like 'Get Shorty' so I'll give Sonnenfield a chance. But after the review it might wait till video. Oh, Moriarity, keep up the evil genius shctick. And to everybdoy else: lighten up.

  • June 30, 1999, 4:27 p.m. CST

    Moriarty, I'm disappointed in you...

    by eltronic

    Your review just doesn't reflect the absolute agony that WWW is. I found the color patterns from pushing on my eyeballs more entertaining than this so-called "popcorn movie". If any of you still decide to see WWW, take my advice, and see it in a theater with stadium seating. If the pain of living through this movie becomes unbearable, you can end your misery by throwing yourself down the theater steps.

  • June 30, 1999, 4:45 p.m. CST

    RE: ORIONSAINT

    by Salon Kitty

    Don't delude yourself, ORIONSAINT - there are MANY people who absolutely HATE "The Phantom Menace". And guess what? THAT'S SIMPLY THEIR HONEST OPINION!! Obviously, a person's opinion of something is an alien concept to you. I dislike TPM and nothing what anyone says is gonna alter that fact. It was an over-hyped piece of shit (kinda like WWW, now I come to think about it!). Also, if you read my post properly, you'd see that I AM in fact a Star Wars fan! I just don't like TPM. Now what's so fucking hard to accept about that? In my opinion, the incessant hype and outlandish marketing attached to a movie so utterly lame was quite frankly disgusting....... However, the real problem with guys like you, ORIONSAINT, is that you simply resort to calling people "a loser" instead of making a constructive argument. This is usually an indication that the individual in question doesn't have a point of view that's gonna make any sense. In which case, please shut the fuck up! If you want some pointers on how to disagree with what a person says WITHOUT calling them a loser, check out BigJackieV's post from above. It sure made a lot more sense than yours did!

  • HEY, DIDJA KNOW THAT BARRY SONNEFELD USED TO DIRECT PORNOS BEFORE FEATURE FILMS?! THI IS TRUE! ALSO, TO DO THIS MOVIE WITHOUT CONRAD, RED WEST, CANGY AND ANYONE ELSE THAT MADE THIS SERIES WHAT IT IS, IS AN EGOTISTICAL SAWED-OFF PRICK! I'LL SIT THIS ONE OUT! THANKS, MORIORITY! GREAT REVIEW! I THINK I'LL STAY HOME AND WATCH THE TRUE, REAL WILD WILD WEST!

  • June 30, 1999, 5:09 p.m. CST

    RE: Sociopath

    by Salon Kitty

    So, there's another guy who posts at AICN (other than ORIONSAINT), who doesn't know how to make a reasoned argument. "Go fuck yourself" is the best you can do, Sociopath!?!? Well, holy fucking shit! Why aren't I surprised? I mean, that puts it all in perspective, don't it!? I simply give an honest opinion on a movie I detest, (TPM) and I'm told I'm a loser who should go fuck myself! I think it's pretty obvious that some people just can't accept a viewpoint other than their own. In which case, I'd recommend you guys move to fucking China as soon as possible. They respect beliefs like yours there!

  • June 30, 1999, 5:12 p.m. CST

    Where's Run Lola Run playing, by the way?

    by BigJackieV

    Now that I'm calm after my little (or big) anti anti-Hollywood rant, I must ask: just where in the hell is Run Lola Run playing? I thought it was still riding the festival circuit...is it in limited release? I've been hearing great things about this flick. And how limited is Blair Witch on July 16? All the major cities?

  • June 30, 1999, 5:17 p.m. CST

    Wild Wild West - that bad, huh?

    by Eos

    Maybe I'll sneak into the next showing and see for myself. I don't think anything could be worse than 'Plan 9 from Outer Space', though. That was in a league of its own. PS: 'The Phantom Menace' was incredible. PPS: So was 'Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.'

  • June 30, 1999, 7:52 p.m. CST

    hey, here's another great remake idea, kids!

    by zooty

    no, no, really...this will make millions, and it fits the formula perfectly! let's do a 90's remake of SHAFT! Yeah! and to replace richard roundtree, we'll hire jim carrey! cool! he'll be so funny, nobody'll notice he doesn't fit the rest of the movie. but just in case, we'll distract the audience even more by making it a comedy! wow! and forget that issac hayes stuff. the new improved film will have a mambo/calypso feel, like jim did in the Mask! i'm tellin' ya, that's a guaranteed summer hit! ...makes about as much sense as will smith in the wild wild west. robert conrad was jim west. ross martin was artemis gordon. micheal dunn was dr. loveless. the scripts were corny and the props were sometimes cheesy and it was okay with me. let will smith do a hip-hop-a-long cassidy movie if he wants to, just call it something else.

  • June 30, 1999, 9:02 p.m. CST

    STAR WARS

    by alcester

    the only thing that can save these movies is to let Ridley Scott or James Cameron direct the next one, make it for adults, and not 5 year olds, LUCAS got lucky with the first one, then he saw how much money the merchandising can make and lost all sense of priorities.

  • June 30, 1999, 9:12 p.m. CST

    Movies are for stupid people

    by humonguloust

    All movies are shit. People who watch them are the reason that children get raped. I hope Harry dies with my cock on his ass. There has never been a movie that has been worth seeing. All science fiction is especially bad.

  • June 30, 1999, 9:14 p.m. CST

    Moriarty reigns

    by Sardonicus

    I don't see how anyone could want to see WWW this weekend (or any weekend) after reading this review. Damn your henchmen for dragging you into the slime like that. I, too, hope that Barry Sonnenfeld reads your words regarding his flop-to-be. Few things are sacred to a man like me, I'm a born iconoclast, but one thing I hold dear in my memories is the good times spent enjoying the Wild Wild West series along with my father. Dredging up known commodities for another dance across the screen is to be expected from the major studios, but hearing of the peanut-brained Jon Peters' involvement here was something I found personally insulting. I'm at a loss to mention the names of the persons involved in the creation of the series, but their work was ahead of its time and wonderfully creative. There's a old expression that I like to use that is especially appropriate here --- "This fish stinks from the head." The blame for this WWW mess begins with Warner Brothers and continues to smell all the way down. Warners, aside from Eyes Wide Shut, which they've really been unable to taint, needs to take a good hard look at the ideas behind their future projects. Are they inventive and original (difficult to pull off for a studio) or blatant attempts to grab your dough (Come on, remaking The In-Laws with DeNiro and Crystal?)? You want the money? Earn it. To paraphrase my favorite Toydarian, "We need something more real." More real than poodoo, at least. (Oh, and to the reader who said Moriarty erred in thinking Branagh was in Gump, I believe he meant the "no-legs" FX used on Branagh in WWW was what he'd already seen in Gump. Evil geniuses don't make trivial mistakes. They may destroy a rainforest or two, but never err in trivia.)

  • June 30, 1999, 9:38 p.m. CST

    The Phantom Menace: Great. Wild Wild West: Probably awful, but I

    by RodimusPrime

    You know, I have been talking with alot of people on many different areas of the internet about The Phantom Menace. The people who liked the movie are usually the well-adjusted, got-a-job, doing well in school types. The people who DON'T like it are usually reject NERDS and dysfunctional GEEKS who think they know all there is to know about Star Wars. Give me a break. 99% of these LOSERS weren't even born in 1977 when the first Star Wars movie came out. I remember it well, the theatrical experience was fantastic (although I was very young). I get a kick out of some of the dummies who put down TPM everywhere. They seem FURIOUS that it has made over $350 Million. They seem upset that its the #4 movie of all time (and climbling). They have their panties in a bunch trying to stop the repeat business this movie is generating. I've seen it 5 times now myself, with various people. It just gets better. George Lucas is a damn genius. Take the Midi-Chlorians. They are a concept that GEEKS and fanboy NERDS despise, but the more I think about them, the cooler they become. It is a completely unexpected and strange plot development. How long will it be before losers like Kevin Anderson begin putting the Midi-Chlorians in their lame novels? Lucas never does what's expected of him, and that's why TPM is so good. It's a true classic and I am waiting eagerly for Episode II......................................................About WWW (and hey, Harry, stop calling it THE Wild Wild West, please, you are the only one): Yes it will probably suck, BUT I was planning to see it since last year, and no negative review will stop me from seeing it for myself, THATS ALL I SAID. If others want to stay away because of Moriarty or Harry, FINE. I'd just prefer to make up my own mind..................................................................One last thing, Harry. Please cut the references to feminine hygeine products. Why aren't you discussing that thing the proctologist jams up your ass to check your prostate??

  • June 30, 1999, 9:49 p.m. CST

    TPM rocks. Yojimbo, your ass is mine.

    by Warrior

    RODIMUSPRIME: you run your mouth too much, but TPM **IS** great. YOJIMBO: You are slime, asshole, writing in just to spew your shit! Say something intelligent, or better yet just fuck off. You're the kind of retard I'd like to run into in real life. You sound like you could use a good shitkicking, and believe me I'm just the guy to give it to you.

  • June 30, 1999, 9:58 p.m. CST

    Question for the great humonguloust...

    by Uncapie

    Did people get raped when they watched the ombre chinois(That's an educated question for anyone truly educated in the art of cinema.)? Also, was that cock "on" Harry's ass or "in" Harry's ass? I mean, I just don't understand the concept of your cock "on" Harry's ass unless it was severed Loraine Bobbit-style or perhaps you just completed the act of "inflagrante delecto" with Mr. Knowles and you were pausing for a quick smoke and a cold frosty after completion. Could you please clarify this? Oh, and by-the-way, DON'T GO SEE "WILD, WILD WEST". IT SUCKS! BIGTIME!

  • June 30, 1999, 10:16 p.m. CST

    A challenge to all "movie" fans

    by humonguloust

    I challenge you to name one good film. You can't. And don't say TPM or WWW because that would be ludicrous. By the way, anyone who has ever seen a film is going to hell. Ever hear of a graven image? Pictoral representations of the human face, whether still or moving, photographic or painted, are sinful and are forbidden by Mosiac Law. Read Exodus, pussies.

  • June 30, 1999, 10:21 p.m. CST

    THEY DON'T CARE

    by Mel

    You know, for all your guys' whining the sad fact is that neither John Peters nor Warner nor Sonnenfeld give two shits what the kind of people on a geek website talkback think. They'll get their multi-million dollar paycheck and I can assure you they'll have the last laugh -- USUALLY. However, in the case of Wild Wild West this is something quite different. The negative hype for this movie has now spread much wider than the 'film makers' could have hoped, and that is buzz that starts on the internet, is read by major print/TV press like Ebert and E!, and is affects their opinions which in turn are spread to tens of millions of people. If you remember, Godzilla had fantastic hype on the web right up to opening day, and only a week later the terrible reviews poured in. And that still underwhelmed at the box office. Godzilla should have rightfully made $250+ million, and could have had it met expectations. Wild Wild West doesn't even have good hype behind it, it's just been all suck from day one, and downhill from that. I think after the opening weekend, all involved are going to be STUNNED how badly this movie fails at the box office. In all my informal talks with people about this summer's movies, I'm constantly surprised how Wild Wild West is singled out as the big fat turkey to skip of the summer. And these are by casual moviegoers, who haven't even seen the movie. Warner under-estimates the movie going public, who grow in savvyness to studio product yar by year. I think films like The Mummy are a good example of a trend you'll start to see whereby even summer blockbusters will start to tighten up into at least semi-decent films. And especially in a summer like this, when there are SO many films to choose from, you need to have at least a semi-quality product if you want it to run over a month. Mummy and The Matrix surprised everyone by being excellently constructed by summer blockbuster standards, and the result is you have these movies now STILL going strong months later, with probable $200+ million domestic grosses on each. If these movies had the kind of useless word of mouth WWW has, they'd have remained B grade blockbusters and hovered at under $100 million by end of summer. WWW is likely to experience a 50% drop off every week -- a good $40 million first weekend, then drop to $20 million the next week, then $10 million, then out of the top 10 within a month altogether, cuming about $120 million domestic TOTAL, if the film's lucky. Not enough to break even, and a sore, much-needed lesson to Warner. They backed a vision with The Matrix, and the footage, concept, design and execution was spectacular. The end product was something they found they didn't have an uphill battle marketing (ala WWW) and the result is a film made for 1/3rd the cost, making literally double as much... and one that will run and run and run on cable, video and DVD. When will they realise that good blockbusters equal good business. It's simply in their interest. Producers HAVE to start looking beyond just the opening weekend, hi-concept pull (i.e. the 2 million or so dweebs who, regardless of quality, will say lets gto see the new will smith movie, for no reason other than that's what they've been fed). What it gains in opening weekend and star power and effects it loses in cost, and the long term financial pull. In an alternative universe where Wild Wild West was a fantastic, fun, witty, sharply executed modern re-invention of the western -- marketed as a blockbuster with Will Smitch, I guarantee it would have broken the $250 million mark. Instead they have a total stinker that'll hurt the careers of all most involved, and cost them literally hundreds of millions of dollars in opportunity cost. Warner and others think they can turn over a quick buck with putting out on the rails crap on a holiday weekend, and they probably can, but isn't the extra effort needed to make it a good film worth the hundreds of millions of dollars you're losing from terrible word of mouth, from terrible reviews, from every critic on earth telling people not to bother, from everyone who saw it once never paying to see it again on video? Do the math guys. 'Mel'

  • June 30, 1999, 10:28 p.m. CST

    "On" Harry's ass is all the pleasure I could stand.

    by humonguloust

    How could anyone but the truest of "cocks"wains ever "peni"trate the full zaftig moon of Mr. Knowles ass? The massive rolling folds of lukewarm skin choked with subdermal fat deposits and punctuated by a melange of black- and white-heads like some great treasure map to a distended chafed orifice are likely all my diseased member could handle before chucking dick snot all over Harry's size XXXXXL gap shorts.

  • June 30, 1999, 11:38 p.m. CST

    I liked it!!!

    by MR.MAGS

    WWW had some very weak spots to it. The Will Smith Belly Dancer scene was an embarrassment to watch. (Could you picture the REAL Jim West,Robert Conrad, doing that?) Overall though, I think it remained faithful to the show's original concept but on a much grander scale. I rate it 3 MAG WHEELS on a scale of 1-6 with 6 being reserved for all-time great movies such as "Our Man Flint". I will be expressing my thoughts on this site in the future. I too am a Pop Culture Geek. The sad part is I bet I could make movies with a lot more humor and imagination then some of this crap we are seeing on today's screen. ( I am sure all of you feel the same.)

  • July 1, 1999, 1:40 a.m. CST

    I thought it was a Kool Moe Dee movie...

    by Debaser

    A few comments: First, Mel, apparently Sonnenfeld DOES give a shit about what the internet geeks think considering his pissing and moaning about them giving his movie the reception it more than likely deserves. I have not seen WWW nor do i plan to. I dont expect much from any movie that has a fast food tie-in(including TPM, *especially* TPM) AND i *really* don't expect much from Will Smith, seeing as how in every movie he's in, he plays... WILL SMITH! The exception being Six Degrees of Separation in which he played Gay Will Smith. I predict this movie will be an embarassing flop. No sequel. As I said, i havent seen this movie, so i wont try to review it, yet it does seem to be..well, just plain stupid. I wish things were different, because I loved the TV show, and this could've been a good movie had it stuck to the source material. We get it, Will Smith is a pimp. He gets so much split, it's crazy. He can kick everybody's ass and make jokes at the same time, then go get some more poon tang. I just cant stomach it any more, and I'm so fucking tired of studios thinking that every single TV show from the 60's would make a great movie in the 90's. Look at all the movies out there that are based on a 60's TV show, they suck. I just wonder what it will take to get these fuckers to make movies that at least entertain the audience, instead of thinking about how the characters would look on a fucking box of fries.

  • July 1, 1999, 8:28 a.m. CST

    Don't you think your exaggerating?

    by EL Duderino

    Okay, forget I said that. All of the reviews for the site have to be in some way exaggerated. The critic for the Iron Giant was acting like he'd literally seen God. Now, I took heed to all of the negative buzz I've heard about Wild Wild West, and I tried to avoid it until one of my friends wanted to meet up and see South Park. Of course, the security was beyond reason to the point where if you walked by the theatre where it was playing a bunch of radios would start going off and a swarm of anal-retentive staff members would flock to your position. With that in mind, we decided to really see Wild Wild West. It all started out to be a bad decision, the idiot staff made everybody wait 30 minutes past when the movie was supposed to start so they could clean when the floors were some of the stickiest I've ever laid foot on. Well, I kept in mind the movie was supposedly going to suck, so maybe that helped, but I still think it was pretty enertaining. None of the movie made since, and there was WAY too much drag in this movie, but the cool 80-foot spider and the rest of the eye candy helped this movie out trememdously. So it still wasn't great but a lot better than I had imagined. BTW, whoever wrote this critique has an obsession with dirty female products.

  • July 1, 1999, 11:54 a.m. CST

    humonguloust is a pagan

    by Rolande

    What the hell kind of post is that, Humonguloid? Asscrack. Why are you on a movie site if you feel that way?

  • July 1, 1999, 11:56 a.m. CST

    WWW - uh, watch the trailer and you KNOW it is bad

    by Omega

    WWW, I've seen the trailer and I feel like I should demand my money back from the theater just for having to sit through 2 minutes of that thing. Can Will Smith play anything beyond a smart ass cool guy? The guy's acting is as shallow as his "rapping." Hey Will in your next movie are you going to play the guy who the girls swoon over and you "Damn!" several times to great comedic effect? As for Branagh, I was a big fan until he ruined my favorite book of all time, FRANKENSTEIN. Now I wish he would just go away. Any body that destroys a story so beautiful, deep and rich deserves to never work again. He turned a intellectual horror story into some lame horror movie. Wake up people! Frankenstein, the doctor, is the bad guy of the movie and the monster is the true victim. Mankind is the monster. Mankind is filled with hateful, ignorant, weak creatures, while the monster is a victim of his own birth and creation. Ah, forget it. If you think Frankenstein is supposed to be a BOO! scary movie/book, then you're too damn dim to understand the true meaning of Shelley's masterpiece. Why do I even bother?

  • July 1, 1999, 1:26 p.m. CST

    WILD WILD SHITFEST. For the love of GOD, don't see it...

    by ABking

    WWW is the WORST FUCKING PILE OF SHIT I have seen in a long while. It makes GODZILLA look lika a masterpiece. I WISH SOMEONE WOULD HAVE KILLED ME before the movie ended.

  • July 1, 1999, 3:55 p.m. CST

    WWW

    by gojirafan

  • July 1, 1999, 4:03 p.m. CST

    WWW

    by gojirafan

    I have to agree with most of what has been said about this disaster of a movie. I actually was hoping for something better because I think Kenneth Branaugh is a fantastic actor and would like to see him in a commercially successful movie...but this ain't gonna be it! So far this hasn't exactly been a great summer movie season...more of a "take this and enjoy it because we don't give a crap" Hollywood attitude attack. TPM I have to admit, while not a great film, enjoyable (especially if viewed more as a prequel than a stand alone movie). But I think with some of the mid-summer releases due for July and August such as The Haunting and Blair Witch Project perhaps the summer movie season can finish with a bang. By the way any word on a release date for Blair Witch? Gotta see that one!

  • July 1, 1999, 9:22 p.m. CST

    Once again, our resident Evil Genius delivers the goods

    by Oberon

    Just a brief, but utterly sincere, note of heartfelt thanks to Moriarty from this urgent warning of the horrors of Wild Wild West. I'd heard the early bad buzz, saw the questionable trailers, but it did have Bo Welch's impressive design work and Salma Hayek's impressive body work, and so I was still wavering on the fence until I read this and was saved from disaster. And when Hunter and Butler said the samn damned thing (stripped only of profanity), that clinched it. And we're saved 14 quid, which we can do something useful with - like buy PowerBall tickets. AICN's mission has never been clearer - to deliver the good buzz on deserving movies, but above all to throw out the road flares when a SPEED 2 or BATMAN AND ROBIN keels over and stinks up the cinematic highway.

  • July 1, 1999, 11:43 p.m. CST

    what?

    by SleazyD

    I think some of you people are way to into "not" enjoying a movie. I saw WWW and while not a smash hit in my opinion, I enjoyed it. I wouldn't pay for it, which I didn't, but it's not THAT bad. These are supposed to be entertainment. While not entertaining to some of you, they are to others. And your opinion stands, and I accept that, but that gives people like Moriarity no reason to personally insult people for their style of acting. I guess that's his style though, but some of you are really sorry. You jump on the bandwagon and thrash this movie before it even came out and you won't see it and if you do...you won't even give it a chance because of your thoughts beforehand. relax. oh yeah, I love Jar Jar

  • July 4, 1999, 2:43 p.m. CST

    The OPRAH Factor.... READ AND SEE!!!

    by Beej-Martin

    ok folks, I'm throwing in a new way to know a film is a dud BEFORE the reviews: They get the entire frigging cast on OPRAH to promo it!!! Happened with Batman & Robin and the week before the opening of WWW, there were the uncomfortable case on Oprah -- just one new way to avoid scum before you hit the theatre, hope Ms. Oprah is getting paid enough by the studios to push this tripe BTW!

  • July 5, 1999, 1:03 p.m. CST

    Sorry, but it definitely sucked!!...

    by Serafin

    I have to agree with Moriarty TOTALLY on this, Wild Wild West really sucked. I just saw it yesterday (the only reason I went is because a friend of mine dragged me) and I thought it was not funny and the story was boring. I didn't even think that the special effects were that great either. The gadgets were far more fun than the effects, like all of the gizmos on the train. I really hope that this movie does not get a high box office gross because you know what that means: A SEQUEL! Dear god, please don't let them make a sequel to this horrible film! That's all I've got to say....

  • June 12, 2006, 11:10 p.m. CST

    FIRST!!!!!!!!!

    by Womb2dooM

    also, TOO SOON!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Aug. 8, 2006, 8:24 a.m. CST

    Howdy, time traveller!

    by Wolfpack

Top Talkbacks