I saw this movie in a second-run theater at a resort with its own brewpub. This was important, as I was allowed to: A. bring in beer with me to the theater; B. buy more beer as the movie became more painful; and C. since I only paid $1.50 for admission (really about $5.00 too much- and yes, I understand the math), I could spend the money I would have spent on a first-run ticket on the aforementioned beer. I have the utmost sympathy for those who sat through this film without such mental shielding.
At this date, it is obvious that this film killed a previously profitable franchise. It managed to have the cheesiness of the Adam West TV series, but yet lacked any of the humor which made the TV show watchable. What wa s left was a poor mish-mash: were Uma Thurman and Ah-nold supposed to be humorous villains? Genuinely evil villains? Misguided anti-heroes? Can anyone tell, or does anyone care after 45 minutes? This was the first movie to show that putting Uma Thurman in kinky outfits cannot salvage a mess of a film (yet, it was tried again- see "The Avengers"). Give me Julie Newmar anyday, instead...
As a dark film, this film fails. As special effects brain-candy, this film fails. As camp, this film fails. As an attempt to develop any characters, this film fails. This may very well be the least cost-effective film ever, in terms of the amount spent to make a useless pile of ____. A few suggestions as to how this "film"'s budget would have been better spent:
1. Endow a film school. Enroll Joel Schumaker.
2. A retirement annuity for Michael Gough. Really, he has been a great actor, and should not have to spend his older years appearing in this sort of embarrassment.
3. Give the money to Peter Jackson and tell him to do something, anything, with it. Definitely bound to get a better film, or more likely, two or three better films.
4. Give the money to any random person on the street and tell them to make a film with it. Highly probable to get a better film, or more likely, two or three better films.
5. Endow an MBA program. Enroll whoever green-lighted this.
6. Therapy for the people who thought this film was a good idea.
At this date, it is obvious that this film killed a previously profitable franchise. It managed to have the cheesiness of the Adam West TV series, but yet lacked any of the humor which made the TV show watchable. What wa s left was a poor mish-mash: were Uma Thurman and Ah-nold supposed to be humorous villains? Genuinely evil villains? Misguided anti-heroes? Can anyone tell, or does anyone care after 45 minutes? This was the first movie to show that putting Uma Thurman in kinky outfits cannot salvage a mess of a film (yet, it was tried again- see "The Avengers"). Give me Julie Newmar anyday, instead...
As a dark film, this film fails. As special effects brain-candy, this film fails. As camp, this film fails. As an attempt to develop any characters, this film fails. This may very well be the least cost-effective film ever, in terms of the amount spent to make a useless pile of ____. A few suggestions as to how this "film"'s budget would have been better spent:
1. Endow a film school. Enroll Joel Schumaker.
2. A retirement annuity for Michael Gough. Really, he has been a great actor, and should not have to spend his older years appearing in this sort of embarrassment.
3. Give the money to Peter Jackson and tell him to do something, anything, with it. Definitely bound to get a better film, or more likely, two or three better films.
4. Give the money to any random person on the street and tell them to make a film with it. Highly probable to get a better film, or more likely, two or three better films.
5. Endow an MBA program. Enroll whoever green-lighted this.
6. Therapy for the people who thought this film was a good idea.