Batman Returns (1992): 8/10

The most underrated Batman and Tim Burton movie ever made. I can understand why parents were pissed off when they took their crying five-year-olds out of this back in the day, but viewed as a quintisentially Burtonian fairy tale, it's a perverse blast.

I saw this movie once when it came out and I was appalled by the large number of under ten children who were in the theater, because they had come as a result of the film's despicable ad campaign with McDonalds kids meal tie-ins that made them and their parents think this was going to be appropriate viewing, when it wasn't. I never saw a Batman movie again after this and haven't seen one since.

Can a movie really be "blamed" for its marketing campaign, though? Then again, even the original Batman wasn't really appropriate for young kids.

I'm also reminded of reading horror stories of parents taking their kids to see Watchmen last year, despite its R-rating.

Monterey Jack wrote:I'm also reminded of reading horror stories of parents taking their kids to see Watchmen last year, despite its R-rating.

That's far worse, and far more inexplicable, than taking a young kid to see BATMAN RETURNS.

You shouldn't be a parent if you took your kids to WATCHMEN.

Monterey Jack wrote:I'm also reminded of reading horror stories of parents taking their kids to see Watchmen last year, despite its R-rating.

Yes, I was at one of those screenings.

AndyDursin wrote:You shouldn't be a parent if you took your kids to WATCHMEN.

That's the problem...parents think that all "superhero" movies are appropriate for Little Jimmy and Jane, and do little research beforehand. Especially in the internet era, this is unforgivable. It's easier than ever to do a few mouse clicks and determine exactly what inappropriate content is going to be included in a movie.

Monterey Jack wrote:

AndyDursin wrote:You shouldn't be a parent if you took your kids to WATCHMEN.

That's the problem...parents think that all "superhero" movies are appropriate for Little Jimmy and Jane, and do little research beforehand. Especially in the internet era, this is unforgivable. It's easier than ever to do a few mouse clicks and determine exactly what inappropriate content is going to be included in a movie.

I don't think you even need to do that much work. Anyone could see it had an R rating (for sex, violence, etc.), anyone who watched the trailers knew what kind of movie it was.

Seriously, if someone took kids to that movie and actually stayed there, that to me is tantamount to child abuse. Some of the images in that film were sickening for me as an adult, no child should be shown them.

SHUTTER ISLAND finally opens this weekend -- I think almost predictably (given the release date shifts) the reviews are mixed. A few people love it, but our local critic in Providence gave it ONE star -- one of the lowest reviews I've ever seen him give -- and called it a bomb and Scorsese's worst movie.

I don't always take his word for it, but it does seem like this might be the Scorsese who gave us CAPE FEAR (hated that one) as opposed to GOODFELLAS.

And (POSSIBLE SPOILER ALERT)

-

-

-

...if anyone goes to see it, tell me if I'm not wrong that DiCaprio's character really isn't one of the psycho inmates. Some critics have been carping the "surprise" isn't a surprise at all, so I guess that's it. If it IS the case, it's a twist you could see coming from the trailers!

Talk about predictable, this whole "he's really a psycho"/"it's all in his head" ending has become totally cliched.

David Edelstein also called SHUTTER ISLAND "dead on the screen."

Seems very likely this movie was bumped into February because it wasn't very good.

Ed Wood (1994): 10/10

"Worst movie you ever saw? Well, my next one will be better! Hello...?"

ED WOOD is one of my favorite Burton films. I've seen it innumerable times...excellent movie.

Mars Attacks! (1996): 7/10

For dark is the suede that mows like...a harvest.

John Adams (2008-HBO Miniseries) (5 of 10) Two years ago, I purchased DVD copies of this and "The Adams Chronicles". It took me more than a year to finally watch "The Adams Chronicles" and today I got around to this miniseries at long last. And there is no question in my mind but that the HBO one is the lesser production.

What this production reminds me of is that even when the history is presented competently and accurately, it's not going to hold my interest if I have to keep putting up with actors who are almost impossible and I mean IMPOSSIBLE to make out. It seems like this is the trend of today's thespians to constantly whisper and mumble every line of dialogue because this is "naturalistic", this is "realistic". I for one resent having to turn up the volume full blast just so I don't miss something.

And the overall quality really and I mean *really* fell apart in the last chapter in terms of storytelling. I had to laugh at a scene where the aged Adams berates artist John Trumbull over the fact that his famous painting of the presentation of the Declaration is rife with inaccuracies and then he goes into a rant about the true history of the Revolution being forgotten and that mythology is superseding the original. What's laughable is that this kind of scene had no possible basis in reality. First off, Trumbull was closer to Adams age, had done his portrait several times and was respected by Adams, and while Adams did feel the Declaration painting was filled with inaccuracies he nonetheless is also reported to have said that it did "capture the spirit" of the moment. So in short, a scene devoted to how bad it is that we alter real history with falseness is by itself a false one!

On the whole, a giant misfire in the end. It's not as definitive as it aspires to be. The poor mumbling from the actors was the real backbreaker for me.

I liked the mini-series a lot more than you did, Eric, but I agree on Giamatti. I felt he was alright the first few episodes of it, but as time went on, I felt he was miscast. Linney was perfect, for me, but Giamatti was too eccentric to portray a statesman like Adams. William Daniels' performance is the ideal mark there IMO.