Cool News
A Spyder spins a review about INSPECTOR GADGET
What the hell is this crap about John Brown becoming INSPECTOR GADGET? John Brown was the man that fought Jeb Stuart in the pre-years before the Civil War... When he was attempting to raise awareness of slavery as a moral wrong that must be righted. Ya know... I really don't want to see this movie. I love INSPECTOR GADGET the character and the cartoon... My fear of it being a bastardized version... well, this review didn't unconfirm that fear. Sigh... Well, the Spyder delicately walks this earth on translucent webs of his own construction... but he also dabbles in spoilers a bit, so beware...
"Along came A Spyder..."
Hail Mighty Harry and Crew,
Long time reader, first time writer. I don't know if this movie is of any
interest or not, but I don't get to many screenings, and figured I oughta
write a quick review when I had the chance.
I was able to see Disney's latest turn-a-TV-show-into-a-spectacle attempt,
"Inspector Gadget." After having skipped their rendition of "My Favorite
Martian," I probably would have passed on this one, too, but I had free
passes by way of a friend. What can I say, I have no pride. I decsended from
my web, hopped in the Spydermobile, and spun my way over the the multiplex.
"Inspector Gadget" opens next Friday, so what I saw was probably the final
version of the film (nothing rough, score or FX). I should warn folks now
that this little review may contain some spoilers. I wouldn't exactly call
them the typical ruin-the-plot variety of spoilers, but they do give away the
few times in the movie I actually laughed.
First off I must confess: I once had an ambition to write a "Gadget"
adaptation of my very own, many years back. My version would have been a
drastic departure from the cartoon series and this Disney version (envision
"Robocop" meets "Virtuosity", with a dash of James Bond -- less kid friendly,
more kick-ass). However, knowing that the Mouse Empire must remain kid
friendly, I had no problem with an adaptation that would have been more in
line with the cartoon series.
This didn't quite measure up to my hopes, though.
What I had hoped for was something like the cartoon series' style of keeping
the rest of the Gadget supporting cast fairly grounded, and leaving the
bungling Inspector to be the most cartoonish in personality and actions. The
contrast between the over-zealous Inspector and the rest of the "real" world
could have provided a lot of well-written laughs. The movie took everyone
into a fairly cartoon state; fine for Sheri Oteri's mayor, a political parody
well acted, but a little too far for everyone else (especially for a veteran
like Dabney Coleman who could have provided a grounded anchor for the rest).
The setup: John Brown (Matthew Broderick), well-meaning security guard and
Riverton Police Academy hopeful, is on duty at the Bradford Robotics Lab
where Dr. Brenda Bradford (attractive Jolie Fisher) and her husband (ST:
DS9's Odo, Rene Auberjonois) are working on a crucial piece of their Gadget
project, a robotic foot. In bursts automated thugs, courtesy of soon-to-be
"Claw" Sanford Scolex (Rupert Everett). The robots steal the foot, whack the
father and make their escape. Swearing to bring her father's killer to
justice, Brown hops into his trusty Chevette and speeds off in pursuit of the
bad guys. The ensuing chase results in Brown being blown very nearly to bits,
and Solex's hand smashed, thus paving the way for the creations of Inspector
Gadget and Claw.
I won't bore you with the rest of the plot, because there isn't much of one.
A lot of the connective tissue of the movie is either omitted, or breezed
past quickly to get on with the next sight-gag (upon which the movie depends
for most of its quickly fading laughs).
Broderick is fine as the Inspector. It's a fairly over-the-top kind of role,
but he does manage to convey at least a little of the "heart" that supposedly
powers his robotic body. (part of a weakly played way of saying he doesn't
need the little black feather to be himself)
Scolex is a poorly motivated bad guy whose true intentions aren't revealed
until rather late in the film. The appeal of Claw in the cartoon series was
that you never saw him, but you knew he was fairly diabolical (with that
great raspy voice). Everett may only have been following orders with his
rendition of the villain, but I didn't ever really see him as much of a
threat. They never really do much with the whole "Claw" thing, other than the
line you hear in the trailers: "Just 'Claw.' One word. Like Madonna." The
character is pretty much Scolex wearing a claw, rather than some wicked
bad-guy named "Claw." There was nothing terribly sinister about him. It would
have been more intresting to see less of him up front, building the sense of
a sinister villain, with a spectacular pay-off towards the end.
Aside from that, I'm almost positive the claw jumps from his left hand to his
right during the final sequences. (watch the
grab-Brenda-and-fly-a-helicopter-at-the-same-time sequence, and judge for
yourself.) There are a few other technical gaffs (night becomes day really
quickly after the Inspector is rescued from the junk-heap), but nothing that
your kids will notice.
Those zany Disney folks made the Gadgetmobile a character unto itself, voiced
by D.L. Hughley (ABC's "The Hughley's"). Though Hughley did a fine job with
his dialogue, the car idea is a little too cutsey-kid-friendly. The editing
(or directing, who knows) pieced his bits together so rabid-fire that it's
tough to follow his comedic quips during the sequence where Gadget is first
introduced to the car. An interesting idea, a la "Knight Rider," but one that
could have been pulled off with a little more finesse.
Gadget is more or less tossed into the police force, which does provide a bit
of animosity for between Quimby and Gadget, but that whole angle could have
been handled a little more satisfactorily. There are a few ad hoc "training"
scenes where Gadget learns his abilities (sort of), but would have been far
more effective is to have thrown the "Inspector" into the Academy he once
dreamed of attending, and having the cartoonish antics of Gadget play off of
the other, legitimate, recruits.
Product placement reaches new hieghts in this film, or at least more blatant
levels. Scolex's limo is smashed by a "Yahoo!" billboard, as the trademark
yodel plays over the sign's descent. The Gadgetmobile is well stocked with
Coca-Cola and M&M/Mars dispenser (which does lead up to one pretty funny
line, "I got the Skittles kicked out of me."). A Sharper Image catalog with
Gadget's picture on it flies across the screen during a publicity montage;
the same catalog in the mailboxes of Sharper Image customers this week. The
list goes on.
There are really only a few moments where I actually laughed out loud. I
won't spoil them for you here, since they may be the only really pleasant
surprises you get out of the movie.
For all it's shortcomings in the writing department, the film does play up
the "all you really need is heart" theme, and is fairly kid friendly. Though
the theme itself is treated pretty lightly (this film's a fair amount of
fluff, unsurprisingly). Lots of physical comedy, with just barely enough
insider jokes thrown in to keep the adult-movie-saavy audience at least
paying attention. Not nearly as emotionally engaging as "Tarzan," Disney's
latest animated entry. For all the live-action and special effects, this is
much more of a cartoon.
If you've got kids, and need a matinee to take them to in order to enjoy some
air-conditioning, this one's alright. Not great. I'd pick "Tarzan" over it,
myself.
If you're not going just to entertain kids, then you may want to pass. I
found the film lacking in the writing, and rather disjointed in many places.
The bad guy isn't terribly satisfying, but then again, this is for kids. Go
see "Lake Placid" and root for the aligator (haven't seen it yet myself, but
I'll probably be cheering for Bridget Fonda when I do).
Hopefully, I'll get to see an advance of one of Disney's next big flix, "The
13th Warrior," with Antonio Banderas. Haven't read "Eaters of the Dead," but
the advance trailers have really got me excited about the film.
Back on the web until the next screening,
A Spyder
-
+ Expand All
-
Cinema at it's worst - a poorly executed script of a kid's cartoon that will draw in the punters, and stock full of shitty product placement. This is the nadir of commercial cinema at the turn of the millennium, AND it'll probably make heaps of money...
-
Well, that's all a bit disappointing then - and I had really high hopes for this one. Is 'Brain' the dog in it? Anyway, seeing as the studios seem obsessed with re-inventing, what TV series do we reckon is next, or have they done everything?
-
will probably be the Scooby Doo movie, which I've heard may star Jim Carrey as Shaggy and a CGI Scoob...
How's about The New Shmoo? -
I lost all hope of this being a decent movie when I saw the Disney logo pop up.
-
Maybe I'm wrong, but wasn't Gadget an idiot but his niece Penny and her trusty dog (whose name I can't remember) were the one's who always solved the crimes? What happened to them?
-
I saw them in the ad. I'll be seeing this movie later on in the week. I hope it's as good as the cartoon. Remember when Gadget used to arrest every innocent person he encountered, but never spot the MAD agents? And it was DOCTOR Claw, DAMMIT, not "Claw". And Mad Cat better appear!
-
Lake Placid has them...LOOK AT THOSE SNAPPERS!!!
-
Listen, I loved the cartoon show too, but that doesn't mean I have to settle for a piece of crap film. Man, the people behind this one have absolutely no idea what made Inspector Gadget cool, nor, I suspect, do they give a shit. Matthew Broderick should not have been in this movie either - that little cheeky hack merchant is nowehere near funny enough to play the lead in this. *sigh* Go-Go-Shitty-Movie.
-
My hopes were dashed for the movie when I saw Dr. Claw. You're not supposed to see Dr Claw darn it!!!
Who are these people who feel the need to destroy every television series that is/was on TV? ACK!!!! -
Maybe I was too old when the cartoon came on. I always thaought it was crap with everything stollen from other shwos. Get smart, mission impossible, six million dollar man ect. The guy above was right. Every evpisode was the same. I think that the movie couldn't be any worse than the crap that inspired it.
-
There's alot of sexual humor and unrealistic violence that aren't appropriate.
Disney, fresh from remakes of George of The Jungle, Little Indian, Big City, That Darn Cat, Mighty Joe Young, The Absent-Minded Professor, The Parent Trap, My Favorite Martian, The Incredible Journey, and 101 Dalmations, is going to fail again with this $90 million bomb.
The trailers were(seriously) some of the worst ever. Completely unfunny and unfaithful to the series, even having closing the teaser with a "Coming Summer 69-WHOOPS!-99". Uh, this series was in the 1980s, and Penny was blonde, and the dog saved the day, and these jokes are really not funny.
I really like Matthew Broderick. I wish he'd pick better roles. The Robo-Gadget looks so stupid in Inspector Gag-Me, too. -
Kids will probably enjoy this. I didn't like George of The Jungle and everyone I know loved it. Decide for yourself, but it looks like an expensive mess. Not an awful movie, but probably a noisy, empty, unfunny movie. I am alot more upset that Disney continues to remake. I can't wait for next year's remake of The Mighty Ducks. Just kidding(that would be funny, wouldn't it? It came out in 1992). They have sequels to Toy Story(good idea) and 101 Dalmations(very, very bad idea) arriving soon while other studios are doing ambitious kids movies. Disney has to get a new live action head.
-
Jul 19, 1999 9:02:33 AM CDT
Why was Broadrick chosen for Inspecter Gadget and not Hugh Grant
by spike lee
I have not seen the Inspector Gadget cartoon in a long time, but I remember him having a British accent. And you would think that Disney would be looking for a project they could pimp Roberto Begini on, or all those English lessons would be thrown away. Nothing against Matthew Broadrick, but I can't see him as the inspector. Where is Professor Falcon when you need him?
-
Big T here. First off I want to say the idea of a Gadget remake aint that bad but you gotta be careful. Making Gadget smarter is good, making an evil gadget was good (or so i think after seeing the trailer)but Claw is the weakest of all the links he should have been kept just like he was in the tv series along with the cat who could have been done cgi in this film. Instead the cat looks like mr bigglesworth before the freezing process. Big T out.
-
I guess the old adage is true... Those who CAN, do. Those who CAN'T, write reviews. Wannabe writers always make the worst reviewers. And I wish everyone would cool it with the, "The movie's not as cool as the show was when I was a kid!" EVERYTHING was cool when we were kids. Lighten up and let the kids enjoy this version, which they'll think is cool. -Fred4Sure
-
I like the idea of this as a movie, I hate the execution. I agree with most of the posters that Claw cannot be seen, he has to be a hand and Mad Cat, and that's it! You can use whatever voice you want and then reveal him at the end to be the character from the beginning but don't let us see him. They should have pulled a George of the Jungle and left the goofy humour in and the sense of fun. Ah, well...maybe I can look forward to a Dune Buggy movie!
-
Am I the only one who still understands what a Snapper is?!? Hint: see a George Carlin show on HBO and you'll get your fill on the "snapper". I actually got excited when you said LOOK AT THAT SNAPPER! after the bisexual Catherine-Zeta Jones comment. Oh yeah, seeing Roberto Benigni as Inspector Gadget would have been cool, but he'd probably spend the entire movie talking about making love to everybody, and he is just starting to get recognition for his work in America, so better not screw his career just yet. Mad Cat will probably show up in the movie, but it will just be a picture of a cat with a chain collar, nothing more with that.
-
I'll bet this reviewer never saw the Inspector Gadget series. I DID. I saw EVERY GODDAMN EPISODE AND I KNEW THAT IN EVERYONE OF THEM, CLAW WAS NEVER REVEALED! AS MUCH AS ALL OF US WANTED HIM TO BE REVEALED, HE WASN'T, BECAUSE IT WAS WISE FOR THE CREATORS TO KEEP HIM A MYSTERY. NOW, THESE FUCKING JACKASS FILMMAKERS INSULT THE CARTOON SERIES BY MAKING A RETARDED ASS FILM, JUST LIKE THOSE FUCKING RETARDED ASS SUPER MARIO BROS MADE A FILM BASED ON MY ALL TIME FAVORITE NINTENDO GAMES! WTF IS GOING ON! WHY IS IT THAT IN THE GADGET MOVIE TRAILER, I SEE MOST OF THE PRACTICAL JOKES RELATING TO THE CROTCH OR SEXUAL? AND WHY DOES GADGET HAVE AN ADULT FEMALE COMPANION? IS THEIR SOMETHING WRONG WITH PENNY? PENNY'S ALL THE GODDAMN COMPANION (BESIDES BRAIN) THAT GADGET NEEDS! CHIEF QUIMBY, WELL, HE'S JUST DUMB! NOW BACK TO CLAW... WHY THE HELL IS HE REVEALED AS A HUMAN? OR BETTER YET, WHY THE HELL IS CLAW REVEALED AS A HUMAN IN THE TRAILER? WHY DON'T THE FILMMAKERS SHOW THAT AT THE END OF THE FILM?! OH AND IF CLAW'S A HUMAN, THEN WHY ISN'T HIS CLAW ROBOTIC/METALLIC, INSTEAD OF THIS DAMN FUCKING ROBOTIC BIRD-LIKE PERCHING ARM... WHY DO WE WANT TO SEE HOW GADGET BECAME WHO HE WAS? TRANSFORMERS: THE MOVIE WAS WISE, IN THAT IT PLAYED IT OUT LIKE THE CARTOONS... THE MOVIE WAS ESSENTIALLY A BIG, LONG EPISODE... WHY DIDN'T THE FILMMAKERS THINK OF THAT? THEY PROBABLY WEREN'T FANS OF 80'S CARTOONS AND IF THEY WERE, I WOULDN'T BELIEVE SHIT ABOUT IT! GODDAMN INSPECTOR GADGET THE MOVIE SUCKS! MARK MY WORD!
-
when I said, "Why didn't the filmmakers think of that?", I referred to the filmmakers of Inspector Gadget. Don't worry... I wouldn't say that to the makers of Transformers: The Movie, cause that film kicks sooo much goddamn ass!
-
Yes, you read that subject right! I picked up a copy of Tranformers:The Movie at a toy fair in London the other week, went home, watched it. I was particularly excited about the "original rock soundtrack" To my suprise, Megatron fights Optimus Prime and fucks him up to the strains of "You Got The Touch" which is the song which Dirk Diggler records in Boogie Nights. Now I thought that song was made up for Boogie Nights as it's the cheesiest fucking song on God's green earth. "You got the touch, you got the pow -eeerrrr! After all is said and done, you never walk you never run. You're a winner! You got the move, you know the street, break the rules, take the heat, You're nobody's fool! (key change) You're at you're best when going gets rough, you've been put to the test but it's never enough! YOU GOT THE TOUCH!" I think the bass is taking away from the vocal...
-
PLANT..PLANT..PLANT!! This movie's gonna suck anyway, but this sounds like a disgruntled employee from Disney. Maybe an animator who hates their live action stuff. It's kind of like he wants to bash Disney at one moment, but kisses their ass at the next. Is anyone really excited about the 13th Warrior from the trailers?? Who scores tickets to Inspector Gadget one week prior to opening??? That's fucking weak!!
-
The Transformers movie is a very very good adaptation of the cartoon. Probably one of the best and most faitful adaptations of ANY cartoon. The song "You Got the Touch" and "Dare" are both cheesy but good. I have the movie (of course) and also the CD soundtrack. But then again, my name *IS* Rodimus Prime (hehe). By the way, Transformers: The Movie features Orson Welles (his last movie role), Leonard Nimoy, Robert Stack, Judd Nelson, and Eric (Monty Python) Idle. For those of you who didn't know. Go rent it and watch it again. TIL ALL ARE ONE!
-
Well, Rodimus, renting Transformers: The Movie is easier, when compared to buying an actual copy. I look in Suncoast, and they don't have shit! The bigger problem is, I don't know where the hell to rent the uncut version of Transformers, cause I went to the nearest Captain Video store and they had a copy and I rented it for $1.00, but I didn't get the original version (let alone the part where one of the transformers says, "Oh shit!" or something... what Transformer said that?). Ebay's probably the best bet, but it's like usually $30.00 to get the movie, on the auction site! Oh well. TRANSFORMERS: THE MOVIE WOULD LOOK FRIGGIN AWESOME ON DVD! Can't say the same for the piece of shit Inspector Gadget Movie. If anyone even thinks on making a live-action version of Transformers, GET A LIFE AND A CLUE!
-
Maybe you should read my comments again, because I never said anything anti-Brodrick at all. I honestly don't mind him at all playing Gadget. That doesn't concern me as much as the ACCURACY of which Inspector Gadget the movie depicts. As a nice guy, I am taking a breath and for your sake, I will explain to you why I acted this way in almost all caps... You see, in order for a cartoon or video/computer game to really work on the big screen (live-action, that is), it has to look, feel, and contain every bit of accurate info from where it came from. The clothes must be right. The characters must look and act right. Everything must be right. Making a live-action feature based on a computer/video game or a cartoon series is as tough as making a remake (it also generates just about the same amount of controversy, if I'm not mistaken). The Flintstones movie did an exceptable job at creating the environment from the cartoon series itself, even though the script wasn't anything to brag about and Rosie O'Donnell was to big to play Betty Rubble. Now for Super Mario Bros the movie, the filmmakers got it all wrong, ALL wrong. I mean, why the hell was the movie so murky-looking in the first place, when it was supposed to be cute, bright-colored, just like the video games? Also, why was Luigi in love with Daisy and Mario getting all the women? Both Mario and Luigi were in love with Daisy in the video games! There's just no excuse as to why the filmmakers (or better yet, the screenwriters) couldn't get the details right. There's also no excuse as to why Luigi didn't wear a moustache. What, was John Leguizamo intimated to wear a moustache or something? Wake up Hollywood! Anyway, my point is, that when movies like Inspector Gadget or Super Mario Bros come up, I don't care about where the actors come from nor am I concerned on making a Matthew Brodrick hatred site. As a computer/video game and cartoon lover/analyst, I demand that the details and the look be right. They don't necessarily have to be EXACTLY cartoonish/gamish, but they do have to give the viewer sort of the same excitement as when he/she played the video/games or watched the cartoon series. The attitude has to be right too. It's all about the details, my friend. Making cartoons or video games into movies ain't easy, but try to focus on the mainstream audience and the audience of the cartoon series or video games equally.
-
Actually, it was Spike who says that dirty word. I actually dragged my mom to take me to see that movie in the theatres. The line was spoken just after Unicron gobbled up a small moon that the now adult Spike and the ever-friendly Bumblebee are on. The exact line, I believe, was "Oh, Shit, what are we gonna do now?!?" It got quite a laugh from all the parents in the audience. When I saw Boogie Nights, and I heard Marky Mark start to sing "You got the Touch," I nearly split my sides laughing. I get the feeling I was the only one in the theatre who knew where that song came from. How the hell did this topic get started, anyways?
-
By the way, PipsOrcle, What do you mean, you don't want to see a live-action Transformers Movie? I'm telling you, if you took the original Transformers Three-episode mini-series, re-wrote the dialouge and let "the wizards at Industrial-Digital Flat Anvil Light and Earth Magic" work their . . well, magic, that would be one kick-ass movie. I still get chills when I think of Prime, his arm outstretched, screaming MEG-A-TRON!!!!!!! Hey Harry, How about a poll of projects we'd most like to see go live action, assuming it was done right? My vote goes for Transformers, Dyno-Mut (and Blue Falcon), and The Herculoids. Some nights, the Geek really shows, doesn't it?
-
It seems that no matter what inane piece of crap Hollywood dredges up to remake there are always plenty of retards willing to play "number one fan" for it. C'mon, people. Don't act like the TV show Inspector Gadget was some kind of intelligent and exciting creative cartoon. It was lame-brained and dopey even then. If you saw the damn commercial for this film at the same age when you ACTUALLY ENJOYED Inspector Gadget, you would likely instantly proclaim it to be the coolest film ever. Now, you see people complaining, "I can't believe they turned this into some kind of kiddie-action flick." What exactly was the cartoon? It was retarded, recyled, and redundant... Me personally, I can't wait for the day when they're finally down to remaking shows like "KnightRider" and "AirWolf" and then all these retard fanboys can jump up and cry about preserving the integrity of the genius original series. Oh doesn't anyone believe that for are cartoon series to be any good, it has to have at least more than one plotline to repeat?
-
Anyone who wants to buy the Transformers movie should point their NETSCAPE (oh...ok I.E. too, for those who are lame Microsoft users)to this URL:
http://www.videoflicks.com/VF/22/022379.HTM
Prime out.
-
- I think the only live action one that has any potential "Resident Evil" was done right it would KICK ASS (and blow zombie heads apart too). I mean, its kinda hard to screw up by making it kid friendly (Street Fighter, anyone?) Oh yeah, and the Final Fantasy CGI movie ought to be good. . .
-
This movie is truely terrible. Only see it if you are held at gunpoint. This thing is so bad that I can't say anymore.
-
what are some of you people talking about!!!???IG was a fine
film.the only mistake was showing
claw!he still had the diabolicalness to kill a man!!
everyone's characters were the same as the shows!ig was the same
in one scene he opens a locked car
for two guys who broke out of prison who were tryin' to steal a
car.penny got evidence claw killed
dr.bradford and stole the robotic
foot instead of gadget!in the end
penny and brain have those wrist
and neck communicaters!!!!!quimby
doesn't blow up cause' ig isn't
an inspector yet!!!!o'teri was hilarious!!the theater was packed
with kids and parents who laughed
at the funny scenes which there was alot of according to the kids!!at the end everyone was clapping!!!and besides what everyone has been saying parents were laughing at each joke.there
was only one scene that was adult!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!some people make this movie out to be a travesty and you cant watch it
without being held at gunpoint!!??
what!!!!!!!!?????????for people who say that the filmmakers are
are horrible one of the creators
of the show was producer!!!stop over reacting!!it was good movie
for the people it was made for
the kids!!!!!!!
-
Well okay... I guess I'm too damn negative when it comes to Transformers being a live-action movie. However, my biggest concern is that it'll be hacked by Shitisney (Disney) or some other nitwit. Beast Wars will probably be a live-action instead (not that it's a bad series or anything)... Well, maybe, but I'm not as pissed off about studios making movies based on cartoon series and video/games as I am when I see the result. Not a lot of adaptions have done well.. I'm a big fan of the Transformers cartoon series and if the studios really understood cartoons and translated the result well, then I'd respect them. However, if a Transformers live action turns out the way Inspector Gadget and Super Mario Bros did, then my hatred is going to increase. Well, making a Transformers live action film is kinda risky. Still, I hope to god that if it's ever made, that it will be done right (and have the original talents of the voices... including Frank Welker and Peter Cullen).
-
The fact that that one of Inspector Gadget's creators was a producer of the movie doesn't mean shit! That's a producer, not a writer or director. The creators of Super Mario Bros were in the film at the end and the movie sucked big time! I think Hanna or Barbara (or is it just Hanna Barbara) was in The Flintstones and that movie wasn't perfect. Just because a creator of a show is involved in a movie adaption, doesn't necessarily mean it's good. I mean, The Flintstones and Super Mario Bros I didn't like (well, I liked The Flintstones better than SMB the movie), but I'm not saying that all adaptations of cartoon series or video games, with the original creators involved, are bad, but in most cases the actual adaptations have been at least relatively disappointing.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Baz's THE GREAT GATSBY explodes with one helluva dazzling trailer! -- 171 total posts 154 posts
- G.I. JOE: RETALIATION Delayed Nine Months...Thanks To A Force More Sinister Than Cobra!! -- 141 total posts 141 posts
- UPDATED!!! A Six-Pack Of New Character Posters For THE DARK KNIGHT RISES Forecast A Lot Of Gotham Rain And Snow!! -- 265 total posts 129 posts
- Who Is The Voice Of Batman In WB's Animated Two Part THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS? -- 129 total posts 129 posts
- Cats Beware!! An ALF Movie May Soon Come Our Way... -- 126 total posts 126 posts
- Zach Galifianakis Is Ignatius J. Reilly? -- 81 total posts 81 posts
- AICN COMICS REVIEWS: INCREDIBLE HULK! DANGER CLUB! CLiNT 2.1! JAMES BOND! BATMAN INC.! AND MORE!!! -- 62 total posts 62 posts
- The Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day… the horror… the horror… -- 45 total posts 45 posts
- Quint has seen Andrew Dominik's crime thriller KILLING THEM SOFTLY starring Brad Pitt! Cannes 2012! -- 41 total posts 41 posts
- The Next Season Of DOCTOR WHO Was Delayed To Fall Just To Build Anticipation?? -- 68 total posts 38 posts