folo-2

Ever wonder what kind of a movie Abbott and Costello would have made in their declining years if they had a large budget? Wonder no more.

I saw _Abbott and Costello Meet the Mummy_ the day before, so the analogy hit me with as much subtlety as this film did. Heath Ledger did an unfunny imitation of Lou's slapstick bumblings, and this movie as a whole seemed as expertly crafted as the boys' lesser efforts.

This unengaging mishmosh of ill-done special effects, hyper-stylistic sets, hammy acting, unfunny slapstick, nonsensical plotting and bugs bugs bugs had a few flashes of humor and stylistic brilliance, but they are few and far between, so that a best-parts version of the film would last maybe ten minutes. I didn't walk out, partially because I hoped for an eventual redemption. But if this had been a DVD, I would have stopped watching at least by halfway through.

A tedious movie with none of the sustained brilliance of Gilliam's earlier films. The occasion flickers of that brilliance are almost lost in the gray, cartoonish blandness.

...and not for film-goers that don't want to think.

People who read a funny book, who see a movie based on or inspired on it and who don't see the same thing and bitch about that fact just don't get it. Different media need different approaches. Their lack of vision blinds them, for instance, to the fact that this film that this film is well acted, with nice special effects and that it--unlike many other efforts--actually spent a few bucks on the screenplay. I just wish that they hadn't tried to stuff so much stuff into a single film; it could have easily been stretched out or even divided into a couple films. The music was nicely done, and the film well captured the spirit of the original.

Nope, it's not a classic, not the best film I've ever seen and not the worst. It was a decent entertainment that made me think for two hours that I had been dumped into a Vertigo comic book.

An above-average Roy Rogers oater, with plenty of songs, intrigue and a more cohesive plot than many. It's a satisfying and fast-moving piece of fluff. Roy is, as usual, likable, and Dale is far sexier than I remember her in the 1950s tv show. If you like B-grade westerns, you can do far worse than taking the time to watch this.

An almost enlightened view toward Native Americans is a large part of the fun. The pow-wow that the local tribe is holding is treated sympathetically, and Roy's relationship with the Native Americans is treated in a matter-of-fact, friendly manner. The Native Americans themselves are never treated in a stereotypical, demeaning manner; when Roy gets the local tribe together to chase the villains, it's such a warped parody of the usual cowboys-n-Injuns scene that I had to laugh!

I'm a big fan of the movie serials. I never watch even the best of them with the same critical eye as I do "real" movies. But even by those lowered standards, this film is a big bore-fest. People commenting on this list seem eager to use "worst movie of all time" to describe anything they happen to dislike, but I hesitate to use the phrase here, even though I am sorely tempted. I'm certain that there are other films that are worse than this, but I'm just as certain that I don't want to see them.

The movie is clunky and stereotypical, rather demeaning of Asians and women. That's actually par for the course for an action film of this vintage and is understandable even if not really forgivable. What is not really understandable is why an action thriller has only sporadic, stilted action, a cliffhanger has no real cliffhangers and something designed to bring you back to the theater week after week only makes you want to hurry ahead to the comedy. The plot--trying to keep the tourists out of Chinatown--is a ludicrous as the Monty-Pythonesque spike in the telephone gag used in the film. I saw the film on two DVDs; I bought the second part by accident and was confused a bit by it. I figured that starting at the beginning would help.

It didn't.

Try not to watch the film alone. It screams for MST3 treatment!