In today's world of varied philanthropic and environmental concerns, activists often take up various causes in attempts to remedy whatever particular malady or problem that's struck a nerve in them. Some are involved in funding charities, while others try to stop deforestation or make commercial fishing safer for non-targeted aquatic critters.
Movie critics, on the other hand, are concerned with the ruthless mining occurring in southern California, but not the kind that produces coal or diamonds. Instead, we're referring to the continual mining of old TV shows and movies and the attempts to extract commercial gain from them. While our cause doesn't exactly rank up there with other worldly efforts, such mining is usually detrimental to the movie-going experience and is the result and/or cause of the creative vacuum currently operating in much of today's filmmaking.
All of which leads to "Inspector Gadget," the third film in just two months to be adapted from a former program or film. Based on the TV cartoon of the same name that aired during the 1980s (and can currently be seen in syndication on cable TV's Nickelodeon channel), the question that naturally follows is whether this live action, big screen remake would be as vastly enjoyable as "Tarzan," or a vapid, special effects-laden dud like "Wild Wild West."
Unfortunately, we're sad to report that it's far more like the latter. Relying on special effects to carry it through a thankfully short eighty minute runtime, this painfully unfunny film might fleetingly entertain the youngest of kids, but older ones and adults will probably find the proceedings intolerable at best.
I must admit that I only have fleeting recollections of the original TV cartoon -- most notably the catchy tune and that Gadget was voiced by Don Adams of "Get Smart" fame (appropriate since that was also a gadget show) -- and as such can't state whether this film is true to the spirit of the show.
With its reliance on wild and outrageous gizmos and devices, however, one could easily conclude that this adaption would certainly seem to benefit from the capability of today's big screen special effects. Yet, despite a few decent ones and the work of Oscar winning wizard Stan Winston ("Jurassic Park," "Terminator 2: Judgement Day"), the film's overall visuals aren't anything special, and a few of them actually look quite fake.
The film's biggest problem, however, is in director David Kellogg's goofy, over-the-top approach in telling the story where everything, including the score and sound effects are intentionally over- the-top zany. Working from a script by screenwriters Kerry Ehrin ("Mr. Wrong") and Zak Penn ("Last Action Hero"), Kellogg delivers a picture void of any worthy humor, characterizations, or even an interesting story.
Of course, if one considers the screenwriters' previous work or the fact that Kellogg's only other picture was 1991's "Cool As Ice" (yes, with white bread rapper, Vanilla Ice -- a credit the press kit conveniently omitted), none of this should come as any surprise.
After the initial setup, the film darts and zips from one moment to the next with very little explanation of what's occurring and without any real dramatic or comedic buildup. As such, and acknowledging that it's anything but complicated, the story is neither interesting nor involving to any measurable degree.
To make matters worse, the characters are nothing more than cartoon caricatures -- a tactic that rarely, if ever, works in a live action film. Thus we don't care about them and their capacity to entertain is severely limited if even present at all. While it's possible for a purposefully zany approach to work -- but only if great care is taken to insure that the proceedings don't become so stupid as to be unbearable -- that doesn't happen here.
As such, the performers can't do much of anything with their characters to make them interesting or entertaining. While I've liked most everything Matthew Broderick ("Election," "Glory") has done during his career -- although he was horribly miscast in "Godzilla," a point he briefly spoofs here -- this role just doesn't work for him. It's not that he doesn't give it the old college try, it's just that the material is so weak that no one could have extracted anything worthwhile from it.
The biggest surprise is in seeing up and coming star Rupert Everett ("An Ideal Husband," "My Best Friend's Wedding") as the nefarious villain. Why he chose to appear in this film is a complete mystery (just as was the case with Shakespearean actor Kenneth Branagh showing up in "Wild Wild West"), although I'm sure some financial incentive was probably involved.
Other performances, from the likes of Joely Fisher (TV's "Ellen"), Michelle Trachtenberg ("Harriet the Spy"), Dabney Coleman ("You've Got Mail") and Michael G. Hagerty ("Overboard") and Andy Dick (TV's "NewsRadio") as the two minions, are either underwritten or overacted so far into caricature status that they're instantly forgettable. Either that or they're simply annoying as is the case with the jive-talking gadgetmobile.
In essence, that similarly holds true for the film as a whole. Of course, if you favor stupid scenes featuring characters wallowing in copious amounts of toothpaste blasted like a fire hose from Gadget's arm then perhaps you might find something redeemable here.
Yet the only time the kids at our screening really laughed was for a dog bobbing his head to a song's beat. Similarly, the best offered for adults is a brief end credits scene featuring a "minion" support group (with Sikes and various assistant villains from the James Bond films such as Richard "Jaws" Kiel).
When that's the best the film has to offer, it's a clear sign of how bad things were before it. To conclude with our mining analogy, some types of that activity can produce diamonds, but all this one digs up is a load of crud. We give "Inspector Gadget" a 1 out of 10.