BEAN SUCKS you agree?
kr...@null.kreme.com
In article <347045...@mailhost.pd4.ford.com>, "Grygosinski R A
(Roman)" <rgry...@mailhost.pd4.ford.com> wrote:
> M.A.Yates wrote:
> >
> > In article <Pine.SUN.3.95.971116185151.10017A-100000@scfn>,
> > Ryan Laun <sfni...@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us> wrote:
> > >Im a teen and i will admit BEAN was the worest movie i have ever seen in
> > >my entire life. Tell me what u think of BEAN by emailing me
> > >
> >
> > I sent an email to this NG saying how crap this film was, how slow it
was, it
> > wasn't even good enough to be a 30 minute TV episode. One of the
worst films
> > I've seen.
> >
> > Mark
>
>
> As one who thinks Rowan Atkinson is a creative physical comedian, I
> was thoroughly disappointed in the film, but not completely
> unexpectedly. Some big mistakes they made: 1. They make him talk.
> 2. They take him out of the U.K. 3. They create an unnecesary lame
> plot.
>
> I don't know how others feel but they should have dispensed with any
> plot. Just run 90 minutes of his best bits. New stuff of course.
> And don't let him say anything more than his name. Where was his
> car and the padlock on the door? He was portrayed as a childlike
> figure which he is not in his show. I guess they're making money
> hand over fist anyway on this thing, but IMHO they blew it.
I think they decided to "Jim Carrey" the Bean character...
Adam Tyner
In article <347045...@mailhost.pd4.ford.com>,
rgry...@mailhost.pd4.ford.com says...
>
>As one who thinks Rowan Atkinson is a creative physical comedian, I
>was thoroughly disappointed in the film, but not completely
>unexpectedly. Some big mistakes they made: 1. They make him talk.
>2. They take him out of the U.K. 3. They create an unnecesary lame
>plot.
I agree on all counts. I find the TV show side-splitting-ly funny, but even
some of the "plots" on the show get old near the end.
>I don't know how others feel but they should have dispensed with any
>plot. Just run 90 minutes of his best bits. New stuff of course.
I agree. Rent the videos; don't watch the movie. :)
-Adam
--
/----=========================================================----\
http://www.awod.com/gallery/rwav/ctyner/
The home of He-Man, "Weird Al", Yoo-hoo, Killer Tomatoes, and more!
TMBG Fan O- MiSTie #67,326
ChadPolenz
Bean
** (out of 4 = fair)
1997, PG-13, 90 minutes [1 hour, 30 minutes]
[comedy]
starring: Rowan Atkinson (Mr. Bean), Peter MacNicol (David Langley),
Pamela Reed (Alison Langley), Harris Yulin (George Grierson); written by
Richard Curtis, Robin Driscoll; produced by Tim Bevan, Eric Fellner;
directed by Mel Smith.
Seen Monday, November 17, 1997 at 7:20 p.m. at The Glenwood Movieplex
Cinemas (Oneida, N.Y.), theater #4, by myself for free (press pass).
[Theater rating: **1/2: fuzzy, dark picture, slightly uncomfortable
seats, average sound.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The problem with making a motion picture related to some kind of cult
following is that it usually doesn't adapt well to the mainstream. And
it's not that "Bean" fails because of this principle (although that has
a lot to do with it), it's just not a very funny, nor entertaining film
to begin with.
Rowan Atkinson stars as Mr. Bean, the title character whose British
television series has been acclaimed by audiences around the world. The
premise to the show is simple: a slow-witted, almost mute man wanders
around, oblivious to world around him, and in the process creates for
zany comedy. What makes the show so good is the fact this simple concept
makes for some of the funniest comedy without becoming too lowbrow. It
was really just a matter of time before this was applied to a feature
film and this is the net result.
Unfortunately, where the TV series works, the film fails. Bean's antics
don't work here because, unlike the cartoony nature of the show, the
film establishes a relatively serious setting, therefore the character
doesn't keep with the atmosphere at all.
Bean is about to be fired from his job as a security guard at a London
art museum, but the head of the board of directors won't let him go (for
reasons not well explained). When a Los Angeles art museum buys their
most valued painting (an American impressionist portrait they've had for
years), they decide to send Bean as their representative as either some
kind of obscene gesture to the Americans, or to show the head of the
board what an idiot he is, or both.
What ensues is a cross between a generic fish-out-of-water comedy,
recycled gags from the show that don't work out of their context, and
ideas the show probably threw away. Example of the first: Bean seeing an
armed guard at the airport and pretending he has a gun. A wild chase
scene occurs and when they tell him to "take out the weapon and place it
on the floor," he does this using his hand in the shape of a gun and is
still arrested. Example of the second: Bean trying to cheer up a sick
kid on a plane and ends up popping a vomit-filled bag over someone's
head. Example of the third: Bean making silly faces and doing a Dirty
Harry impersonation for his passport photo. These might sound funny on
paper, but what actually shows up on the screen seems pretty lame.
There's just such a rigid contrast between Bean's eccentricity and the
realistic world around him, the jokes don't mesh will.
The film is virtually without plot, except a sub-plot involving the L.A.
museum's curator, David Langley (MacNicol), who invites Bean to stay
with him even though his wife Alison (Reed) decides to take the kids and
leave five minutes after Bean arrives. In fact, most of the film is
MacNicol's, as the story revolves around his character's attempt to make
sure the unveiling of the painting and the accompanying ceremony go
smoothly.
Of course Bean is a klutz and an idiot and ends up ruining the priceless
work of art. The scenes depicting this and showing his attempts to fix
it are set up through cliches and unbelievable plot devices. Bean's
appeal lies in his stupidity, therefore the scenes of him going to great
lengths to restore the painting seem all wrong. Some funny things do
happen in the process, but not nearly enough to make up for the mediocre
screenplay.
But it is the last act that really kills the film. It plays like one of
those "serious" episodes of a sit-com, and what's worse is it's done in
questionable taste. Once again, Bean is mistaken for a doctor and
somehow ends up in a few scenes that seem very serious, but look like
poor parodies of "ER." The ending itself should be a ripping satire, but
is just another fish-out-of-water gag.
It's disappointing "Bean" is the empty comedy it is. This is just
another case of a good premise ruined by commercialism.
-------
Please visit Chad'z Movie Page @ http://members.aol.com/ChadPolenz - over 170
new and old films reviewed in depth, not just blind ratings and capsules.
Also, check out
The FIRST Shay Astar Web Page @ http://members.aol.com/ChadPolenz/ShayAstar.html
SonySddS1
It didn't suck I just didn't see what was so special about it that it's made
over 100 mil overseas.
my movie site check it out http://members.aol.com/dtsdigital/start.html. Box
office grosses and predictions, reviews,100+ links, a list of movies in
widescreen, theater/dvd/video release dates, vote on the years best film, much
much more.
Roaring 20's
In article <19971119132...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
I saw this guy on PBS and he wasn't funny. i don't like the Brits
humor.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Rob Holzel
Ryan Laun (sfni...@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us) wrote:
: Im a teen and i will admit BEAN was the worest movie i have ever seen in
: my entire life. Tell me what u think of BEAN by emailing me
At some points it was slow going but the bit with the rotating fan and
the middle finger at the end had me laughing my ass off.
M.A.Yates
In article <8801241...@dejanews.com>,
Roaring 20's (big john) <year...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>In article <19971119132...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
> sony...@aol.com (SonySddS1) wrote:
>>
>> It didn't suck I just didn't see what was so special about it that it's
made
>> over 100 mil overseas.
>> my movie site check it out http://members.aol.com/dtsdigital/start.html.
Box
>> office grosses and predictions, reviews,100+ links, a list of movies in
>> widescreen, theater/dvd/video release dates, vote on the years best film,
>much
>> much more.
>
>
> I saw this guy on PBS and he wasn't funny. i don't like the Brits
>humor.
Some of our humour is very very good, for example:
Blackadder I, II, III and IV - are all brilliant and were done in the time
when Rowan Atkinson was funnier IMHO.
Fawlty Towers - hilarious !
Some mothers do have 'em.
Mark
FunnyBoy
It does suck dude
Caius Marcius
In <674l5u$3...@snews3.zippo.com> freaky...@yahoo.com (FunnyBoy)
writes:
>
>It does suck dude
Against the eloquence of Funnyboy, the Demosthenes of Usenet, I am
helpless - but I did enjoy the movie, especially Bean's deconstruction
of Whistler's Mother.
The final 10 minutes at the hospital were pretty much tacked on - but
OTOH what would Jim Carrey have done if he needed to fill in 10 minutes
of his latest opus?
- CMC