At the offices of a Japanese corporation, during a party, a woman, who's evidently a professional mistress, is found dead, apparently after some rough sex. A police detective, Web Smith is ... See full summary »
John Steed and his new accomplices Purdey and Gambit find themselves facing new and deadly dangers in the bizarre world of espionage. Mixing fantasy with a darker edge, the trio face ... See full summary »
An eccentric scientist working for a large drug company is working on a research project in the Amazon jungle. He sends for a research assistant and a gas chromatograph because he's close ... See full summary »
British Ministry agent John Steed, under direction from "Mother", investigates a diabolical plot by arch-villain Sir August de Wynter to rule the world with his weather control machine. Steed investigates the beautiful Doctor Mrs. Emma Peel, the only suspect, but simultaneously falls for her and joins forces with her to combat Sir August. Written by
John Hawkinson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Peter Bart's book "The Gross" covered the film's unfolding disaster in great detail. Among other facts: Warner Brothers greenlit the film largely on the strength of a star-packed cast and their appreciation of Jeremiah Chechik's work on Diabolique (1996) and were horrified when seeing what the first cut was like. The first screening took place in front of a "largely Spanish-speaking, working class" audience in Phoenix, AZ who hated the film; the studio then forced Chechik to cut many of his favorite scenes and conduct reshoots; and the final cut went from 115 to 89 minutes and was completely incoherent. The studio even refused to hold further test screenings, or to have an official premiere before the film's August 1998 release. See more »
Snowflakes on hands and face should melt. See more »
Well I don't know how this one slipped through the studio system but I'm very glad it did. When I heard about an Avengers movie I assumed we'd be getting a bastardised Hollywood formula movie, and it would resemble some of the recent Bond films more than the original series. But I was thrilled to find the film had the same wonderful sense of absurdity as the show. :)
I think a lot of people are unaware this is a complete comedy. This being the case it's not surprising people think it's bad, but that's their problem. The comedy style is not a popular one, it's a particular style of generally British humour, best described as complete and utter nonsense. If you have no appreciation for absurdity, then you will NOT like this film.
Nothing in The Avengers should be taken at face value, it's all a load of s***. Steed and Peel are full of s***, that's the point. No one acts the way they do, they are both constantly trying to out cocky each other. The world of The Avengers is a place where "small things are taken with the utmost seriousness and important things are not taken seriously at all".
The Avengers purposely doesn't explain things, it's not supposed to make sense, that would ruin it. It's the little things in The Avengers that make it shine. Small asides from left-field that seem to go over most peoples heads.
Fiennes and Thurman are different than Macnee and Rigg, but I'm not sure they're much worse. Fiennes could perhaps have been a bit more cheerful. Thurmans whole screen presence is so vastly different from Riggs that it's impossible to compare, but I did enjoy Thurmans version of the infalable Peel. Connery going nuts was fun to see too. BTW Eddie Izzard not talking was the point of him being there, get it. Having Eddie Izzard in your movie and not having him say anything is to my mind very funny.
It's very hard to explain to people who flock to films like The Waterboy, why a film like The Avengers is so funny. Most people I guess will just never get it. I got it, and I'm glad that there ARE plenty of other people who did too. Congrats to the makers for daring to be different and convincing the studio into letting you spend $70 million.
48 of 87 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?