WillSushyMedia
This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.
Tayloriona
Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.
Benas Mcloughlin
Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.
rjm-geo
I can't think of many movies I've seen that I'd only give one star to. I preemptively avoid things I'm not going to like, but this one slipped through as I watched it with friends in the theater when it came out 20 years ago. The interesting question to me 20 years later is not how bad it was, but why it was so bad.It's not the fault of the people in front of the camera, all more than talented enough to pull this off. I'm not inclined to blame the people behind the cameras either. The movie is competent enough at a technical level. Though the script, direction, and camerawork were all lackluster, that just makes a film dull, not terrible. No, I think the responsibility for this one is ultimately the Hollywood system as it existed in the 1990s. Studios imposed a lot of requirements on any film which was going to be marketed as an action blockbuster. Chase scenes, big special effects set-pieces, explosions, Sean Connery's name on the marquee, more chase scenes.The Avengers (TV series) is not action, the draw is the amiable, flirting but non-romantic interaction between the lead couple, the sixties glamour and charm, and lightheartedness mixed in with campy international intrigue.I'd say that The Avengers (movie) got Micheal Bay-ized except that's being unfair to Bay. He made Pain and Gain after all so we know even he can manage stylish humor, at least of the sardonic variety.Nope ... this movie is just dead. An assembly-line commercial product with no redeeming qualities. All the interesting and fun things cut out, nothing of value added in.
Simon Davies
Like a classic bond film. action & innuendo . Like a Gothamesk Batman super high tech , but on a 1950s background. I have no idea why people constantly feel disappoint by re-imagined versions of old classics. What did you think it is going to be like ? If you loved the originals and are hoping this will be exactly the same . Don't watch it. But, that would be a shame. Have an open mind and this is a brilliant film. I am hoping there is a squall just like this one !Many big mane actors placed cleverly in the film , congratulations to the casting director. (appart from steed , who was plainly a second choice)
stageneral
I'd never seen this before, but it's currently on HBO NOW, and caught my eye. I thought maybe the beginning was a spoof of some sort before the actual story started, but no, the whole thing was like this. It's so boring. I believe it was supposed to be campy, but it's just dry. There's no chemistry between Fiennes and Thurman. And why do they talk in that monotone drone?!? I stuck it out, but it's one of the few times when I really felt like the time spent watching a movie was a complete waste. Yikes. The story itself is pretty non-existent, too. It's like a string of cliché spy and action movie scenes strung together. It's actually hard to believe it's a major studio release with big name actors.
petra_ste
How do you make Sean Connery appear uncharismatic, Ralph Fiennes uninteresting and Uma Thurman unsexy? No small feat, but in 1998 Jeremiah S. Chechik performed this dark achievement with his version of the classic British TV series - the one older viewers remember mostly for Diana Rigg looking like a million bucks in it.A supremely ugly-looking movie, with terrible visual effects, a worthless script and no sense of fun, The Avengers is worth mentioning as a curiosity, since it's arguably the worst project in the careers of all three leads - and when you are defeated by stuff like The League of The Extraordinary Gentlemen, Maid in Manhattan and Percy Jackson, you know you are sinking in deep, murky waters.3,5/10
