Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Mr. Beaks rips THE LONGEST YARD to itty-bitty shreds before urinating on it. I wonder if he liked it'

Wow.. never been FIRST before :x by Kampbell-Kid	Mar 11th, 2005 04:27:21 AM

Thank You by DenRode Orm	Mar 11th, 2005 05:10:55 AM
Endelig en fyr som siger sin mening. Tror filmen er sjov, men den tager nok ikke skade af en video/DVD seeing
I'll judge for myself by AWDH	Mar 11th, 2005 05:53:56 AM
I think this is the second review of Longest Yard posted on the site. The first one was an all out rave and this one is the opposite. I guess I'll judge for myself. "The young, multi-cultural audience with which I saw the film last Friday received the film as if it was the defining motion picture of their lifetime. They laughed, they cheered
Come on Mr.Beaks, don't be shy, tell us what you really think. by Big_Bubbaloola	Mar 11th, 2005 06:12:01 AM
Good god, talk about ripping into a movie!! The venom was almost pouring out of my screen!
So does Caretaker buy the farm in the remake? by CKnightShift	Mar 11th, 2005 07:57:27 AM
'Cuz you just know that Chris Rock in flames is gonna make for some pretty salty cussin'...
How do you commit DWI in CA and end up in Prison in TX? by the G-man	Mar 11th, 2005 08:14:48 AM
You don't. But then, you don't see short out of shape 40ish men playing pro football either so I guess that is par for the course.
A bad Adam Sandler movie???? by Barry Egan	Mar 11th, 2005 08:17:21 AM
That's a shock. Are we supposed to believe that Sandler is a former pro quarterback? I'm all about the willing suspension of disbelief, but this is kind of a stretch.
It become totally clear at this point that by WeedyMcSmokey	Mar 11th, 2005 09:10:54 AM
Hollywood no longer has to make actually engaging films, original projects or, frankly, good movies. It just doesn't matter - people will go see tham no matter what, obstensibly to escape for two hours from their miserable lives, and they're not interested in film as anything more than a entertainment product - a visual Toys'r'us that they're entitled to. So it becomes a simple financial equation for the studios - Judging by ticket reciepts they're not often wrong. Thankfully there are alternatives. Just not a a theatre near you.
Sounds like the Mean Machine remake by Kungfumanchu	Mar 11th, 2005 09:29:06 AM
In that if you've never seen the original, you'll probably enjoy it. If you have seen it, you'll be like I was watching MM: too busy noticing the differences & groaning at the sheer laziness of the rest to actually enjoy it. Anyone know what (if any) special features the new "Lockdown" edition dvd of the original will have? I'd love to see or hear some of the old interviews/stories Burt tells about the filming of it. Saw him once years ago on Roy Firestone's old ESPN show talking for a solid 30 minutes just on that one subject. It was pure f'n gold & probably funnier than anything that will be in the new version.
I may rent this... by Childe Roland	Mar 11th, 2005 11:04:39 AM
...just for comparison's sake, but I don't think there was any need to remake this movie for an American audience (the British remake I can understand if not condone, since Hollywood seems to feel compelled to remake any good foreign film that comes to its attention). The original is a classic. My friends and I used to watch it on HBO and then go outside and play guards vs. cons (it was much more fun than when we played Deliverance - I never got to be Burt). I imagine this is exactly what motivated Sandler to make this movie. He never got to be Burt, either. Glad Hollywood could help him work through that issue at the expense of making, perhaps, an original film for a change?
Adam Sandler vs. classic films by Palhaco	Mar 11th, 2005 11:40:26 AM
He would surely do better by trying something new, more along the lines of "Punch Drunk Love", rather than profaning the memories of classics like "The Longest Yard" and (even more so) "Mr. Deeds Goes to Washington".
"Sandler by Orionsangels	Mar 11th, 2005 11:54:35 AM

I can't wait till the "Smokey & the Bandit" remake. THE ROCK is by Orionsangels	Mar 11th, 2005 12:08:40 PM
Tom Arnold as Sheriff Buford T. Justice!
I think they should remake Deliverance with Hulk Hogan as a hill by Lord Shatner	Mar 11th, 2005 12:35:38 PM
"Squeal like a pig, brother"
After watching this movie, I sent Chris Rock a check for $80.00 by Headless Roland	Mar 11th, 2005 02:15:00 PM

Ashton Kutcher and Seann William Scott in a remake of "Semi-Toug by Tar Heel	Mar 11th, 2005 03:38:29 PM
Or not. Hey, that was another good, bawdy 70's sports flick.
I saw this two weeks ago... by slone13	Mar 11th, 2005 03:39:08 PM
I quite enjoyed it. I never saw the original. And I have a hard time stomaching Burt Reynolds in ANY role. It's not a "Sandler" movie, so it doesn't work to compare it to other Sandler movies. That being said, it's way better than Mr Deeds, 50 First Dates and the stupid one where he adopted the kid.
Heads up for Palhaco: Mr. Deeds went to town, Mr. Smith went to by Barry Egan	Mar 11th, 2005 03:44:21 PM
But your point is well taken.
by UES	Mar 11th, 2005 04:02:36 PM
"Sandler
What is this mention of "Mean Machine"? That wasn't the name of by IAmJacksUserID	Mar 11th, 2005 04:57:47 PM
It was an alternate title and was the name on Burt's jersey, but that's it.
voicebox 5, you need some perspective .. by Lou C.	Mar 11th, 2005 05:11:06 PM
"Right now, we are going through a stage verging on devoid of talent." That's the craziest thing I've read since Harry's review of Unleashed. Look, I sympathize with you, but you have to remember something: Just because The Longest Yard is remade, it doesn't mean the entire film industry is lacking in talent. Tons of bad movies have been released every year since movies have been made. It's just that the really awful ones have been forgotten. Since we're around for all these steaming turds, and often read about their progress on the Internet, it feels worse than it is. I've seen plenty of great movies over the past 5-10 years, so perhaps you should ignore all the shit and realize there IS stuff out there worth seeing.
Headless Roland, you Rock by Homer Sexual	Mar 11th, 2005 06:12:12 PM
I wish I had made that comment. Ironically, this flick will probably hit and give Chris Rock the chance to receive many more $80 checks (and I am a fan of CR, except in movies).
Bill Romanowski gave away the ending on ESPN radio!!!!! by The JackBULL	Mar 11th, 2005 07:43:16 PM
what a twit!!!!
I Wish... by Everett Robert	Mar 11th, 2005 08:27:05 PM
I had a witty, swarmy comment to make, but I don't. What's next...Guess who's coming to dinner...oh wait, now it's Guess Who and the roles have been reversed and made into a "comedy" instead of the serious poignet study the first was...I will see this for one reason, Romo, even if he is a twit, I gots to support my Raiders...how sad am I?
Chill, Beaks. It just reflects the evolving sensiblity of Adam by Tall_Boy	Mar 11th, 2005 08:59:20 PM
Snoogans.
I'm still waiting for the Operaman movie... by Pan Demonium	Mar 11th, 2005 09:34:57 PM
...No? How about Canteen Boy: The Motion Picture? What I'm saying is, Sandler is an annoying hack... Pan out.
Well, no shock here by AlwaysThere	Mar 11th, 2005 11:23:57 PM
ROTS will kill it, among other things.
NEW RULE: Adam Sndler sucks. He's as funny as the gas chamber sc by Bill Maher	Mar 11th, 2005 11:37:40 PM
Too bad it wasn't in a real prison, so someone could have shanked his sorry ass. Rappers, you have guns -USE THEM!
I really thought this one might work. by pomattovich	Mar 12th, 2005 12:12:53 AM
I thought Burt's involvement suggested that the film would meet his approval. I really would love for Sandler to make a good comedy. I want to like him. I really do. Why does he make is so difficult?
Before Grey's time.. by phelion2	Mar 12th, 2005 03:52:45 AM
This was already in production before Brad Grey took over at Paramount, just to let you know.
I quite enjoyed it. I never saw the original. by Bart of Darkness	Mar 12th, 2005 06:53:55 AM
Sir, you are the target audience for this film! You've never seen the original? Did you wander on to this movie geek site by accident whilst surfing for "Jackass" out-takes?
Voicebox 5, I agree with you to a point: by Barry Egan	Mar 12th, 2005 09:05:40 AM
I agree that the quality of films has steadily declined. In his book "The Big Picture," William Goldman has a great arguement that pretty much proves that the films of the 50s were head and shoulders above the ones being cranked out today. One of the reasons people are complaining about he dullness of the Academy Awards and nominations in recent years is due to there being so few great films and performances that you can usually predict who will be nominated/win. There is no anticipation. And you are right to point out that the stars of today lack in comparison to the stars of the past. In fact, many of the actors and actresses who have made a commitment to making quality films or collaborating with quality filmmakers are routinely savaged on these talkbacks. However, I don't think it's fair to say that there are fewer talented people out there than there were in the 50s or the 70s. I think the problem is that those talented people are having more and more trouble breaking in to the industry. Most talented people are very creative and have a vision that the mainstream will have to catch up with. Think of the books and films that were flops in their day that do on to be lauded as classics now. There are probably thousands of actors/directors/writers with and exponentially greater amount of talent than Adam Sandler who are waiting tables or working at Starbucks right now. They can't catch a break. The 70s were some type of Bizzaro time where the studios let creative people run wild and look at the results. The cool thing about the 70s has always been that the audience went along for the ride. Would "The Godfather" be the box office smash today that is was in 1972, or would people complain that it was "slow" or "boring?" USA Today ran an interesting piece yesterday (3/11/05) about teenage girls flocking to see all these piece-of-shit horror films that have been forced on us in recent weeks. God help us when the majority of the films produced are geared around 14 year old girls. This would account for the lack of good films. This would account for Freddie Prinze, Jr and other non-talents making it in pictures while really talented people struggle to make a living. I'm astonished (and thankful) when a really talented actor like Paul Giamati can make it in the business despite being an average-looking guy. It's a shame that a guy like Sandler can't use his money and position to help boost the careers of people other than Rob Schneider and David Spade. Do you ever wonder if stars like Sandler even like movies in the first place? And if they do, what movies do they like?
Nerds get A life, or better yet build a Time machine and go back by The Founder	Mar 12th, 2005 11:38:29 AM
Seriously though, do some of you ever get tired? Who in their right frame of mind actually for even the breifest of a nano secong thought this movie was going to be a masterpiece??? Sandler has been out long enough and made enough movies that we all should know what type of movie to expect. The movie will be funny and forgetable, just like a lot of the 80's comedies that a lot of us grew up on, and guies what most them aren't classics and are forgotten.
What's up with all this love all of a sudden for Paul Giamatti?? by The Founder	Mar 12th, 2005 11:54:38 AM
I've been noticing high praise of this man as of late on this site. Nothing against him, and he's a decent enough actor, but when did he become this oh so great actor all of a sudden? I finally saw the famed Sideways that a loot of people on this site b!tched about getting robbed at the Oscars, well guess what, the movie wasn't that d@mn good, in fact it was boring at times, with a few comedic moments in between. The only person who got robbed in that film of an Oscar was Thomas Haden Church for supporting actor. This man was the one who made the movie watchable, as well as the Asian chick. If you wanna b!tch about an actor that deserves a better career, then here's one, cause this guy has personality, is likable, funny, and can do drama. Giamatti isn't a huge star cause he not what Hollywood deems attractive, he's not a huge star cause he's boring. There are a few successful actors in hollywood that are just average looking guys, but they have personality or the american public connects with them, say like Adam Sandler or Chris Rock who also are average looking guys. Last i checked neither of them were on hollywood's list of hot and sexy celebrities and yet they have successful careers.
Thomas Haden Church is Lowell, period. by RaulMonkey	Mar 12th, 2005 12:12:06 PM
Of course there was a fabled time when Michael Imperioli was Spider, period.
How horrifying by Cabron	Mar 12th, 2005 04:53:42 PM
This sounds utterly awful. How insulting to the legacy of a great film.
I'm still going to see it by SykkBoy	Mar 12th, 2005 05:10:47 PM
I loved the original and will be seeing tyhis one. I don't hold the original in THAT much esteem that an update will make me a crying pussy...the only thing bugging me is the changing of the line "I think I broke his freakin' neck" that line WAS the original movie...meanwhile, I'll go give them my $8 and then come back here and laugh at the movie nerdlings pissing their pants about almost touching a girl's boob while they were camped out waiting for the next Star Wars abomination...
People tend to remember the good and forget aaaaallll the crap f by Reverendz	Mar 12th, 2005 06:29:09 PM
Yes there were some good movies in the 70's, but there was a LOT of junk. A LOT. Same holds true today, some great movies surrounded by all kinds of junk. Add to that fact that movie attendence is down due to DVD's and video games and it makes perfect sense. Studios can no longer afford to gamble on movies like they could when they were the only game in town.
I don't know where to begin. by Barry Egan	Mar 12th, 2005 07:21:07 PM
Does anybody really need to defend Paul Giamati at this point? If people are unfamiliar with his work, check out the following: "Private Parts," "Saving Private Ryan," "American Splendor," "Storytelling," "Man on the Moon," and "The Negotiator." He lends a touch of class to bad films like "Big Momma's House" and "Big Fat Liar." He is simply one of the best character actors working today. He was also robbed of an Oscar nomination for "Sideway." Furthermore, I really would question the taste of anybody who doesn't recognize "Sideways" for being the great film that it is. I think most moviegoers have been so badly bludgeoned by mind-numbing schlock that a simple story, well acted and well told is lost on them. As fars as the "good old days" are concerned, of course bad films have always been made and always will be made. The problem today is that the major studios have all been bought up by major corporations and are no longer run by creative people who understand the artistic process. (And yes, film is an art form. Those who disagree should never visit a movie website again. Ever.) The studios want to make tentpole blockbusters that appeal to as many people as possible. They want to milk every dime they can out of a film that they view simply as product and nor art. I read this week that there are over 600 product lisences sold for the Fantastic Four movie alone. I saw "Be Cool" recenlty and it is the perfect example of product that is designed to appeal to every possible demographic and winds up appealing to nobody at all. Films have become so expensive to produce that the studios feel they can't risk making a film that doesn't appeal to the most people possible. The best films being made now are being made away from the reverse Midas touch of the big studios. I have no problem with big studio movies. When they are done well, they are a lot of fun and can be artistically enriching. Personally, I thought "Spider-Man 2" was one of the best films of the year and should have been nominated for Best Pictrue. Clearly, more great films were being made in decades past.
Some thoughts by Drunken Rage	Mar 13th, 2005 08:38:07 AM
Personally, I'd rather eat my shit than see a remake of "The Longest Yard" and I imagine the old Mad magazine parody is a helluva lot funnier. I hope they never do a remake of "North Dallas Forty" with Will Smith in the Nick Nolte role, but they probably will. Oh, and what's the big deal about "Sideways"? It was pretty damn boring and the Thomas Hayden Church was just a retard. Talk about over-hyped... at least it was good to see Virginia Madsen again.
G-man: States often lease prison space elsewhere. No law says yo by FrankDrebin	Mar 13th, 2005 09:53:49 AM
On the subject of decling film quality, I wish I could remember who recently said something like, "Quality costs money." The studios' goal is to get you into the theater, not create lasting art. They get better results putting their money into marketing than hiring the best. Also, when dumb teens flock to Adam Sandler films, then Adam Sandler is going to call the shots, and Adam Sandler wouldn't know Ernest Lehman from Ernest Saves Christmas.
A postscript to my last post (a postpostscript, if you will) by FrankDrebin	Mar 13th, 2005 10:03:20 AM
We're picking on Hollywood, but I don't think ANY industry isn't bottom-line oriented these days. Why does the food suck at the mall? Why won't HMO's give patients a full spectrum of tests? Why did Bruce Willis hire Florent Siri for "Hostage" instead of Ridley Scott? A:Quality costs money.
A postpostpostscript by FrankDrebin	Mar 13th, 2005 10:06:49 AM
In my native language, "decling"="declining". 'Scuzie!

Talkbacks

Mr. Beaks rips THE LONGEST YARD to itty-bitty shreds before urinating on it. I wonder if he liked it'

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks