I had heard of the “Rumble in the Jungle” before, but I didn’t really understand it as much more than a trivia question. A sport, two names, and a date. Honestly, whenever I pictured it, something more like the cover to “Superman Vs. Muhammad Ali” came to mind, and that’s all.
I had no idea there was a documentary about it until I went looking for theatrical documentaries. Now that I know, of course there would be a documentary, but I hadn’t heard about it before. Even though it didn’t come out until late enough that I would have been around to hear about the release.
I have never heard of this movie before deciding to watch it. I’m not entirely sure how it fits the romantic comedy beats if they’re already together, but a comedy about art thieves getting in over their heads, with Sandra Bullock, sounds very appealing. I’m not sure if I’ve encountered Denis Leary in a romantic comedy role before, but that doesn’t detract from my interest. I’m really not sure about Leary starring in a romantic comedy he co-wrote though, which sounds like it could go very poorly.
There are two reasons I avoided this movie. First, the original probably didn’t need a remake (I thought I reviewed that but I guess it was before I started this blog), and second, I’m concerned by how the Eddie Murphy version of the character is ostracized for being obese, not for being a nerd, which almost certainly means that fat jokes will fuel a lot of the movie. Why wasn’t it enough for the Dr. Jekyll side to be nerdy? 1996 was still a little before geek culture took over the zeitgeist. Was a black nerd drinking a potion to turn suave too close to Steve Urkel/Stefan Urquel, debuting three years earlier on television? Judging from Eddie Murphy’s live action movies since this one, I suspect he just thinks wearing fat suits is funny, and he’s Eddie Murphy so he can make whatever movies he wants.
I am kind of excited to learn that James Coburn is in this somewhere.
I’m not sure what to expect, but this sounds like a scheming revenge story, which is interesting to see Goldie Hawn in. Midler and Keaton, I can easily picture them scheming, but Goldie Hawn seems to be known for more innocent roles.
This seems to have been popular enough to get a TV remake, but nobody really talks about it past a basic log line, so it’s hard to have preconceptions.
At first I thought I might have been aware of this movie when it came out, but I think I was thinking of the live action scenes from Osmosis Jones, in which Murray plays a zookeeper who seems to mainly scoop elephant droppings and other low tier jobs. Here, however, he’s inherited an elephant from his estranged circus performer father.
A road movie/buddy comedy with an elephant is a really random mix that definitely creates funny moments, but how does someone come up with an idea like that?
I’m not sure if anyone else felt this way, but at the time that this and Space Jam came out, it seemed to me like you were either for one kids’ movie starring a basketball player or the other, and while I did get a Kazaam toy from whatever restaurant had the promotion, Space Jam had Looney Toons and space aliens, so it was no contest which one I went to see.
This is also the subject of a modern Mandela Effect misremembering, as a lot of people, myself included, started to remember the existence of a movie starring Sinbad as a genie named Shazam instead of Shaq as a genie named Kazaam. Which is strange that I fell into that too, because as I said above, I definitely remembered that it starred a basketball player, and Sinbad is a comedian.
Every now and then, comedians get famous for being annoying, and even though no one will admit to liking annoying comics, they seem to stay far longer than their welcome. From what I recall, I wouldn’t consider Pauly Shore the worst offender, but he’s certainly one of the most infamous. For my own taste, I can tolerate annoying humor fine, it’s just not my favorite. It’s awkward comedy that I can’t stand.
Anyway, I think that Shore and Baldwin are normies accidentally sealed into the dome with the scientists here, rather than frustratingly eccentric but indispensable like the character in Rocket Man. I can’t really picture a Baldwin brother being annoying, but that seems to be what’s about to happen.
I’m not sure how I feel about the premise of this movie. Parents get trapped in a locked room by their children so they won’t get divorced. Kids turning the tables on adults, family funtime hijinks, that sort of thing. I believe that divorce should be a last resort after attempts at saving what was once a happy, healthy relationship have failed, but forcing people to find a way to stay together really depends on how it’s handled.
There are a lot of good actors I’m looking forward to seeing, even if they’re presenting material I disagree with.
The poster shown here is overwhelmingly the image associated with this movie, but for the longest time I took it at face value, as if it was telling me Carrey’s character is really a sinister, murderous psycho. However, in light of the descriptions usually attached, I think this is a joke that’s lost its context. From the descriptions, I think I see a story about a needy character who has more of an exasperating effect than a worrying one. Less Fatal Attraction, more What About Bob? But then looking at IMDB just now I’m thinking I’ve underestimated the darkness again.
I expect good things from Matthew Broderick in a beleaguered straight man role, and Jim Carrey’s proved himself in pretty much any kind of role.