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

Mr Paisley takes a brief look at Frank Oz's BOWFINGER and Brad Bird's THE IRON GIANT

my life has purpose, I'm first. Kill me now. by Tall_Boy	Jul 11th, 1999 10:52:55 PM
please.
Frank Oz by Lost_contacts	Jul 11th, 1999 10:56:20 PM
Frank Oz is not a very good director in my opinion. IN AND OUT was a very unrealistic and cheesy comedy that I wish I had missed. BOWFINGER seems like it will be more of the same...Too bad for Eddie Murphy and Steve MArtin...
I'm rooting for Iron Giant but... by Prankster	Jul 11th, 1999 10:56:30 PM
Let's take it down a notch. I'm worried that with all the hype, people will come back and slag it because their expectations were so high. Already there seem to be a lot of people under the misapprehension that this is the movie that will deliver animation from kiddie hell, and who will no doubt be back here on August 7th saying, "That was a kiddie piece of crap!" and accusing it (as some already are) of being a ripoff of anime (for the last time people, the book was written in the 50s, LOOOOONG before anime). There's no blood or sex in this movie, and I think that's what some people are looking for. Whereas this movie will hopefully be more along the lines of Toy Story, somethign that the kids can enjoy but the adults will as well.
Bowinger was great! by Darth Siskel	Jul 11th, 1999 11:31:58 PM
I saw Bofinger 4 months ago, & I can tell you, it was terrific. Great premise, & Steve Martin was great as he usually is. Eddie was funny like he used to be in the eighties! Mix in Heather Grahmm & who can complain?
Bad marketing for the Iron Giant.... by Sour60	Jul 12th, 1999 02:03:34 AM
I'm anxious to see this movie but was disappointed to see a commercial on the tele the other day that featured music by the Scorpions. Thats right, bad 80's Heavy Metal is being used to promote a movie that takes place in the 50's. Now I realize that this music is not in the movie but I don't see the logic in putting it in the commercials either. Are they trying to attract headbangers, and hi-fivin' mother fuckers or what? Not that I mind these people going to the movie but how are the kids gonna' see the screen if they're sitting behind a couple of miscreants with moussed hair who're gonna' be pissed when "Rock You Like A Hurricane" is'nt on the soundtrack.
Frank OZ II by ShadowMaker SdR	Jul 12th, 1999 04:28:43 AM
I cannot imagine how anyone can Frank Oz not a very good director. Have you seen Little Shop of Horrors? It's easily one of the best non 30's-40's-50's musical made. If a director can make you feel for Rick Moranis in that way, he's imho a very good director. I believe Muppets Take Manhattan is also a Frank Oz directed film. And that's also a really funny, well directed film. 'Saying Goodbye' is an outstanding musical number and has made me feel anxious to call long lost friends and relatives every time I've seen it.
Little Shop of Horrors by W. Leach	Jul 12th, 1999 06:01:13 AM
LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS is by far Frank Oz's best achievement as a director. It's one of my all-time favorite movies, and remains very close to its source: the 1982 off-Broadway musical...except for the last twenty minutes of course. As every LITTLE SHOP fan knows, the movie was shot with the original stage ending where Seymour and Audrey bite the dust, and the evil Audrey II takes over the world. Preview audiences hated this ending, so naturally, the studio tacked on a happy one, where Seymour destroys the plant and gets the girl. Ugh. If a movie is going smoothly in one direction, you don't suddenly swerve onto a gravel, unpaved road. The last twenty minutes don't support the first seventy. Unfortunately, I didn't get a DVD player until after the "Special Edition" disk of the movie was released (which was pulled within days). The disk contained the original ending, but without color, music, or sound effects...still, it would have been interesting to see the movie that Oz originally made. Hopefully David Geffen will soon either re-release LITTLE SHOP theatrically, or put it out on video and DVD with its original ending, scrapping the God-awful sacchirine one once and for all.
Iron Giant marketing by Pope Buck 1	Jul 12th, 1999 07:26:05 AM
I agree, the marketing campaign for "Iron Giant" has been appallingly bad, especially if it's as good as the people here say it is. The trailer I saw in the theatre (before "Tarzan") especially made me want to retch -- it made this movie look like a bad "E.T." ripoff. And the narration was so generic, it could have described half a dozen different movies. Better hope this one gets great word of mouth, because Warner isn't doing a thing for it with their ads.
i said it by lerner	Jul 12th, 1999 10:03:08 AM
a couple of months ago, i reviewed Bowfinger, and described my horrible dislike for the film. for that i was brutally penetrated, and harrassed. well along comes Mr. Paisley, and he says the same thing and for that i would like to say thanks. i really think you hit the nail on the head, and i hope that you do not fare as horribly as i did in this abusive section that is the talk back. once again i must say that the movie truly does suck on a variety of levels. i applaud your review and share your sentiments.
first poster, cheer up by Moby	Jul 12th, 1999 10:25:40 AM
There is hope. Seek and ye shall find. I believe that life is worth living, and I hope you do too. As for Iron Giant, why is WB trying to make this movie into a Free Willy sequel? It's like "the giant's big" and don't forget "people want to seperate the robot and the boy" which both sound like Free Willy 13 to me.
LittleShop SE by Finnegin	Jul 12th, 1999 11:25:53 AM
The cut ending actually does have music, sound f/x and vocals on the DVD. It's just that a lot of it is most likely temp stuff, that would have been fixed up at a later mix that, apparently, never took place.
Bad Movie or Bad Review? by noahg	Jul 12th, 1999 01:28:41 PM
I must admit, I was bummed when I read Bowfinger sucked, but then I continued reading to learn that the reviewer didn't like In & Out either, which I found to be hilarious and well acted. So when you say that Bowfinger is not funny and poorly acted (by Steve Martin, Heather Graham, and Eddie Murphy?? I doubt it...) I was relieved. Maybe, I thought, you just don't have any taste. But hopefully that's not true, because I think The Iron Giant looks pretty cool, and if you liked it does that mean it really sucks? Hmmm....
The review sucked!! by cooseman	Jul 12th, 1999 01:55:28 PM
First off he said that In & Out sucked. In my opinion In and Out was a rather funny movie, not great but it made me laugh. So if he says thet Bowfinger is the worst film he has seen. I would have to say it will be a great and funny film!!
Little Shop of Horrors by moviet00l	Jul 12th, 1999 02:16:53 PM
To W. Leech: I loved Little Shop of Horrors, too. It was a great movie, but I have to agree with the change they made to the ending. First of all, the original finale song "Don't Feed the Plants" that goes with the original ending really sucks. I understand they probably intended to use the movie's finale song and the original ending together, thus fixing a major flaw in the musical and retaining it's original ending, (by the way -SPOILER OF STAGE ENDING AHEAD - for those of you who don't know, Seymor actually FEEDS the dying Audrey to Audrey II at her request and then jumps inside himself hoping to cut Audrey II up from the inside. He, of course, gets eaten too. END OF SPOILER) so that first point is a little weak . . . BUT, I saw some brief footage once of the scenes they shot for the "Audrey II eats the World" ending - and I gotta say - it wasn't funny - it was just disturbing. I know a lot of people get off on being disturbed by a film, but that's best left to movies like "The Shining" and the upcoming "Blair Witch Project." A comedy, especially one being presented to the mainstream, needs a happy ending. I really believe that. I think the decision to change the ending saved Little Shop from being another Turner and Hooch.
Bowing to test audiences by Al_scoops	Jul 12th, 1999 03:10:27 PM
One last note about Shop of Horrors... I'm so tired of hearing about studios giving up the director/screenwriter's vision to appease a test group. If JFK tested poorly do you think Warner Bros. would've made Stone cange it and have Kennedy survive the assasination?
I'll never know about Bowfinger . . . by cds	Jul 12th, 1999 05:34:04 PM
The last thing I ever want to do again is watch Eddie Murphy playing multiple characters in sketch comedy strung together to try to make a movie. The trailer alone was unbearable. This movie is a mixture of some of the worst available elements. I can't see how it could possibly be worth watching.
Little Shop DVD by TopQuark	Jul 12th, 1999 07:53:23 PM
Being one of those lucky guys who got the quickly-pulled Little Shop DVD, I'd like to comment on the original ending vs. the released one vs. the play. First, quite frankly the original ending doesn't work not because it's unhappy, but because it's boring. It goes on and on and on. "Don't Feed the Plants" isn't a bad song, and works well in the context of the play, but not the way it's used in the original filmed ending. Part of the problem is the filmmakers altered the play story in ways that made the death of the leads not work. In the play, Seymore actually allows the dentist to die, mulling over the decision while the dentist chokes on the gas. He chosed to not act, thus is complicit in his death, etc. In the play, Seymore bascialy makes a deal with the devil and pays for it, whereas in the film, he's the nice guy who gets duped. The "Mean green Mother" number makes the plant out to be a bad guy of the piece, which really changes the tone of the ending. What's striking to me is that the filmmakers didn't notice that "Gee, 3/4s of our script is musical comedy and the last bit is Godzilla." An unhappy ending true to the play COULD have worked, but not the pointless, droning one they filmed.
To TopQuark . . by moviet00l	Jul 14th, 1999 08:21:53 AM
Original finale song aside (I still think it's awful) how is Seymour a nice guy who gets "duped?" He's just as complicit in the dentist's death as in the play, and allowed Mr. Mushnik to get chomped as well. It's been a while since I've read the play's book, but does Seymour actually shove Mushnik into Audrey II's maw? That would cross a line the movie didn't, but murder through inaction is still murder. I thought the character of Seymour stayed very true to the play
One more thing . . . by moviet00l	Jul 14th, 1999 08:36:19 AM
About Audrey II being made out as the bad guy. I thought the play made it pretty clear that the plant is the villian. Here are some lyrics from "Don't Feed the Plants" . . .(this is from memory, so forgive me if I get some of the lines wrong). . . "So the plants worked their terrible will / Finding jerks who would give them their fill / And the flytraps proceeded to grow . . .and grow . . / Till the did what they came here to do / which was essentially to / Eat Cleveland / And Detoit / And where you live!" How does the movie portray the plant's motivations or intentions as different? Man, have I over-analyzed this or what? I told you guys I loved this movie.
little shop by Bud	Jul 15th, 1999 11:04:10 AM
In the play, Seymour tells Mr Mushnik that the days receipts are in the plant, in gets in to look for them, chomp. The play also takes Seymour and Audreys relationship to much higher levels. Their sacrifice brings more shadings to those characters. Also, the dentists song, "It's Just The Gas", never should have been cut.
Paisley, you perv. by Wolfpack	Aug 11th, 2006 12:09:10 PM

Talkbacks

Mr Paisley takes a brief look at Frank Oz's BOWFINGER and Brad Bird's THE IRON GIANT

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks