Slashdot Mirror


Review: Kung Pow

Well, some of you warned me, and you were right. Kung Pow - Enter the Fist had a great premise and the trailers were tantalizing. Steve Oedekerk borrowed from Woody Allen's What's Up Tiger Lily? to make a Kung Fu spoof patched together from a little known 1976 karate film Tiger and Crane Fists. But the result is anything but funny. Spoilage warning: plot discussed, not ending.

This one should have worked. Oedekerk, writer and director of this mediocrity, is also the star. He uses digital film-editing techniques to insert himself into the older film as the new hero, a creative idea that in better hands could really have been funny.

The Chosen One saw his family killed by the evil Master Pain/Betty and was raised by rodents. He finds his way to Master Tang, then falls in love with Tang's daughter Ling, who speaks in a perpetual whine. The stop-action overdubs and hesitations are funny at first, but then are just headache-inducing. There are a few inspired moments -- I personally loved the karate brawl with the dairy cow -- but the movie derails as he comes closer and closer to his confrontation with Master Pain.

Don't be fooled by the trailers. Every funny scene is in them. There are few movies I can't sit through, but this one was a struggle. It really isn't worth much more discussion, and my best advice would be to skip it altogether.

211 comments

  1. he thought the trailers made it look good? by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 0, Troll

    This guy needs to watch more movies, he doesnt seem very experienced.

    --
    -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
    1. Re:he thought the trailers made it look good? by QuasEye · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I know I watched them, and thought that it could be one of two things:
      • Inspired stupidity. Think like the Airplane/early Naked Gun movies, where the gags are admittedly dumb, but dumb in such a creative, random way that there's a subversive intellectual quality underneath them.
      • Attempted inspired stupidity. They tried, but fell short. Problem is, falling short at all is death to this genre. I'm not sure why, but it seems to be an all or nothing thing.



      Unfortunately, the former comes along very rarely, and the latter comes around very often. Needless to say, I didn't hold much hope.

    2. Re:he thought the trailers made it look good? by grammar+nazi · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Inspired stupidity. Think like the Airplane/early Naked Gun movies, where the gags are admittedly dumb, but dumb in such a creative, random way that there's a subversive intellectual quality underneath them.
      Back in college, I would have agreed with you. I've heard this argument applied to anime, Monte Python, Simpsons, 3-stooges, Laurel and Hardy, and many other things.

      Now though, I realize that there's no subversive intellect. It's just that smart people and dumb people both find the same slapstick humor funny. It doesn't make me smarter than somebody else if I see furter into a dumb joke than they do, because it's still a dumb joke. Just think about it for a second and I'm sure that you will agree.

      --

      Keeping /. free of grammatical errors for ~5 years.
    3. Re:he thought the trailers made it look good? by CaseyB · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I think it's all about execution. Monty Python and the early Zucker Bros. films had incredible comedic talent and great direction. When you pull off slapstick with such style and with such subtle nuance, it's funny no matter how lowbrow the content.

      Perhaps when people that normally find slapstick humor boring catch themselves laughing at these movies, they just have to invent the "subversive intellectual quality" as an excuse.

    4. Re:he thought the trailers made it look good? by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 1
      Just think about it for a second and I'm sure that you will agree.

      Crap, is this a subversive intellectual joke that I'm not getting?

      Anyway, your claim (assuming the entire post wasn't a joke flying over my radar), is undermined by people NOT finding the same humor funny. There seems to be a subversive, abnormal humor (say abnormal instead of intelligent to avoid loaded value judgments clouding the water) that "regular" people don't get. The best example I know of would be Pokey the Penguin. Normal people look at it and wonder why I'm reading something that looks like it was drawn by a two year old. To fans it's the funniest thing ever made, and all other humor exists in imitation of Pokey the Penguin.

      There is certainly some humor that has an abnormal quality, a quality which we dare not say is intelligent but is likely to correllate with intelligence, and a quality which is at least as subversive as all abnormality must be.

      I also note that it is possible to see humor in a joke that the originator did not intend--in fact, I've seen humor where the originator intended to have humor in the work he/she would not be aware of! (Sometimes I'm the originator...)

      Replace "smarter" in your post with "abnormal" and "dumb" with "normal". Flip the bits of the negations in your second paragraph. (i.e. There IS [obviously] a subversive abnormality. Abnormal people and dumb people do not both find the same slapstick humor funny. It does make me more abnormal than somebody else if I see further into a normal joke then they do.)

      Then just think about it for a second and I'm sure that you will agree.

    5. Re:he thought the trailers made it look good? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with you 95%, but to say that The Simpsons is all slapstick and no subverisve intellect is to say you've never watched The Simpsons.

    6. Re:he thought the trailers made it look good? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is this (-1), these are the kinds of songs he watches.

    7. Re:he thought the trailers made it look good? by El+Panda+Grande · · Score: 1

      what makes slapstick funny is something a little bit more that that. The act of punching somebody just isn't funny, but some other, deeper thing, something that can't be put into words very easy. People who make films sometimes figure it out, and make monty python. Other, make home alone. Maybe later, after enough home alones, the hidden element to hitting somebody and making it funny will be found.

  2. I agree, skip it by frostgiant · · Score: 4, Funny

    I saw this movie and... yuck!
    I guess I should've known... The previews said "From the director of Ace Ventura 2". I don't know if you've ever seen Ace Ventura 2 or not, but let's just say it sucked.

    Go see "A Beautiful Mind" if you haven't already, it is much, much better.

    1. Re:I agree, skip it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, if you can't stomach Russell Crowe (blech), go see The Royal Tenenbaums or The Fellowship of the Ring.

    2. Re:I agree, skip it by Heywood+Yabuzof · · Score: 1

      When the best thing they can come up with for the director is that he is responsible for that atrocity known as "Ace Ventura 2" you know you are in serious trouble :-)

  3. Stupid! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Come on, really now... Does anyone believe this movie is worth nine bucks?!

    They lost me with the "Matrix effect" ripoff... It's been done to death in many movies, commercials and hell... Even the INTRO to movies in the theater use it now (witness the soda and popcorn fight).

    When Hollywood starts releasing some decent movies, I'll consider going to the theater again...

    In the meantime, I'll kick back with a beer and a DVD and enjoy the good stuff at home.

  4. Could you have... by The+Great+Wakka · · Score: 1, Insightful

    put one positive thing in there? Geez, this guy is blasting the movie without any resentment.

    Summary of Review:
    The movie sucks.

    --
    Everything is mainstream now.
    1. Re:Could you have... by Tantrum420 · · Score: 0

      Did the review need to be any longer than that?

    2. Re:Could you have... by americanFatCat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I admire that. If a critic thinks a movie sucks he or she ought to say that. I hate the critics who just go the moderate route to appease the movie makers and avoid confrontation with others who might not have agreed with their review. That's why i think the filthy critic is so great. He has his opinions, and he can back them up with insight and knowledge. He doesn't sugar coat his review with: "Superb moviemaking for the 20th century!" -- or other press bytes that tell you nothing except that the critic who wrote them was a whore.

    3. Re:Could you have... by Sabaki · · Score: 1


      Well, he *did* put some positive things in there -- he did love the cow scene. that's (positive thing > 0)

    4. Re:Could you have... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did the review need to be that long?

      I can sum it up in one word: crap-tacular.

      Submitted anonymously, so as to hide from the pre-pubescent moderators that loved this steaming pile of shit movie.

    5. Re:Could you have... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put one positive thing about his review here? Geez, you are blasting his story without any resentment [sic].
      Summary of Review:
      The review sucks.

  5. Those trailers were terrible by LatJoor · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the trailers were tantalizing

    No, the trailers were terrible. How anyone could want to see a movie based on those trailers is beyond me. Yet another spoof on The Matrix, this time with a cow? A guy being distracted by a woman with big breasts? And these are the highlights? This was just another me-too addition to the new genre of 'genre parodies' to come out in the last few years, and obviously not an inspired newcomer.

    1. Re:Those trailers were terrible by jafiwam · · Score: 3, Informative

      A guy being distracted by a woman with big breasts?

      A guy being distracted by a woman with one big breast.

    2. Re:Those trailers were terrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A guy being distracted by a woman with big breasts?
      You mean "one breast"

    3. Re:Those trailers were terrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean "one breast"
      Actually, that should be one big boob....kind of like the movie.

    4. Re:Those trailers were terrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The other one is probably on her back for balance :)

    5. Re:Those trailers were terrible by jmb-d · · Score: 1
      Yet another spoof on The Matrix, this time with a cow?


      It's not a spoof of The Matrix, it's a spoof of Kung Fu movies. There is a difference.

      --
      In walking, just walk. In sitting, just sit. Above all, don't wobble.
      -- Yun-Men
    6. Re:Those trailers were terrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it's also a spoof of the cow in the game black & white.

    7. Re:Those trailers were terrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he's referring to the "Falling back in slow motion at things fly at you" scene that twelve thousand movies have used since the Matrix came out.

    8. Re:Those trailers were terrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but extrapolating that the whole movie is a Matrix parody is silly as well. One scene a movie not maker.

    9. Re:Those trailers were terrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but extrapolating that he's talking about the whole movie when he's talking about one scene is silly as well.

    10. Re:Those trailers were terrible by Mofo_abc123 · · Score: 1

      I total agree, the matrix take off was funny the first time I saw it (scarry movie I believe) but after that it wasn't funny in the next 10000 films that did it.

    11. Re:Those trailers were terrible by MessiahXI · · Score: 1
      Yeah, but extrapolating that the whole movie is a Matrix parody is silly as well. One scene a movie not maker.

      But that's not what he said. I believe he was speaking of this one scene being a Matrix parody. Jesus christ, pay attentions ;)

    12. Re:Those trailers were terrible by MaxVlast · · Score: 1

      I agree. One of my friends was all excited upon seeing the trailer. It looked awful. Tantalized by the trailers? Geez.

      --
      There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
      Max V.
      NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
    13. Re:Those trailers were terrible by MLoff · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      How can one breast be "Redundant"?

    14. Re:Those trailers were terrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can it not?

  6. Its hard to imagine.... by nizo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...any movie I would want to see less, given the trailer. On the upside, I am guessing that if I did go see the movie, I wouldn't be disappointed; at least I KNOW it sucks, where these days often the trailer deceives me so......

    1. Re:Its hard to imagine.... by BLAG-blast · · Score: 1
      ...any movie I would want to see less, given the trailer. On the upside, I am guessing that if I did go see the movie, I wouldn't be disappointed; at least I KNOW it sucks, where these days often the trailer deceives me so......

      Most of the time the trailers are more enjoyable that the main features... Sometimes I just leave after watching the trailers and don't bother with the main title.

      --
      M0571y H@rml355.
    2. Re:Its hard to imagine.... by chuqui · · Score: 1

      > any movie I would want to see less, given the trailer

      Zardoz?

      --
      Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome = When his IQ reaches 50, he should sell
    3. Re:Its hard to imagine.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ZArdoz at least looked like it had camp value, try Jingle All the Way for worst trailer ever.

  7. Do we boycott the MPAA every other week or what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Let's boycott the MPAA... until there's some idiotic looking spoof movie I really want to see."

  8. Ummm.... by Doctor_D · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Ummmm...Kung Pow Chicken.... Now ya went and made me hungry...

    --
    "If you insist on using Windoze you're on your own."
  9. A real review by Papa+Legba · · Score: 5, Funny



    "Not worth stealing. Two cds better used to rip John Tesh MP3s and archiving them for eternity"

    ---Internet piracy council

    --
    Papa Legba come and open the gate
    1. Re:A real review by GreenHell · · Score: 3, Redundant

      More reviews (Not that many right now actually, more are added as more reviews are published)

      Right now, my favorite's the one that says "It could well end up being the worst movie of 2002. It's that bad."

      I'm still trying to figure out how anyone could have found the trailers interesting though...

      --
      "I won't mod you down - I feel the need to call you a twit explicitly, rather than by implication."
    2. Re:A real review by nomadic · · Score: 2

      One of my favorite activities is reading reviews of really bad movies. I don't actually see the movies themselves though, and I agree with you; how anyone could deduce from the trailers that this was anything other than an amazingly bad movie is beyond me.

  10. I thought it had one shot value by staticdragon · · Score: 3, Flamebait

    My Opinion of the movie: It was probably the worst movie I have ever sat through in a movie theater (never wasted money on Battlefield Earth) but despite how horrible it was I laughed my ass off the entire movie. Now, when a second group of friends invited me to go see it with them, I told them there weren't enough tea in China...

    1. Re:I thought it had one shot value by mizhi · · Score: 1, Funny

      Even worse than Battlefield Earth?

      --
      Humorless sig goes here.
    2. Re:I thought it had one shot value by RevAaron · · Score: 3, Funny

      Shut up, you filfthy man-animal!

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    3. Re:I thought it had one shot value by nick_burns · · Score: 2, Funny

      Was I the only one who saw Freddy Got Fingered in theaters?

    4. Re:I thought it had one shot value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Off topic but, yes I saw Freddy and bought the DVD. Something about watching that movie makes me think I am dirty to be human, and thats why I love it.

    5. Re:I thought it had one shot value by canadian+troll · · Score: 0

      i saw that, it was damn fucking funny... road trip was funny shit too, and was better with Tom not being the focus of the movie.

  11. ...I'm really disappointed by Hitch · · Score: 1

    this is the man who created Thumb Wars...
    I LOVED thumb wars. I bought the damn thing on DVD.
    Why!? WHY did kung pow have to suck??!

    --
    You see, without that little doohicky, the universe stops.
    http://propheteer.org
    1. Re:...I'm really disappointed by nyquil · · Score: 1

      not to mention High Strung, one of the funniest movies ever made. basically just one guy (oedekerk himself) ranting and raving about anything and evertyhing that bugs him, including watermelon popsicles, ("they actually put SEEDS in the popsicle, what marketing genious came up with this?? Watermelon popsicles, with all the annoyances of actual watermelon"), a character named Happy the Clam, and a breif cameo by jim carrey. if you can find this rent it (better yet buy it, but ive never found it for sale) you'll be glad you did.

  12. interesting pick this week by spacefem · · Score: 2, Flamebait

    So Kung Pow is bad, who'd have guessed?

    Was anyone actually considering seeing this movie? I didn't think it looked funny from the previews at all.

    1. Re:interesting pick this week by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

      Uh, until I saw this review _I_ was going to see it.

      Thought it looked like another action movie with lots of fighting and that I would just ignore the three or so lame jokes in it (since the trailers normaly do contain any and all funny parts of a movie.)

  13. Jeez Katz... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
    You know, I'd take your movie reviews more seriously (especially the negative ones), if you didn't spend so much time watching so much crap and then coming here to tell us how it's all crap and we could do better.

    Need to see what I mean? Your review list lately reads like a direct-to-DVD-bargain-box roll call.

    Good movies that have come out in that time span:
    • Lord of the Rings
    • A Beautiful Mind
    • Ocean's Eleven
    • Gosford Park
    • Ali

    What's up, Katz? Afraid of actually cutting your teeth on something substantial?
    1. Re:Jeez Katz... by cheinonen · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If he really wants to do reviews of films that people might acually use, why doesn't he go see some movies that aren't massive blockbusters? In the past two months, he could have gone to see In The Bedroom, The Royal Tenenbaums, Brotherhood of the Wolf (though I didn't like it), Amelie (best movie of last year, bar none), or Monsters Ball, which are smaller movies that people might acually go see if they read a good review of them. Kung Pow and Orange County have been showing me trailers for two months and they've looked stupid the whole time. Come on, do we really need Katz to do a review of Lord of the Rings? Was anyone NOT going to see it?

    2. Re:Jeez Katz... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't go see it. I downloaded it. I thought it sucked. Why don't you take your fucking opinionated ass back to your mother. No one wants to hear it fuck face.

      -Jacksoff Withpoop

    3. Re:Jeez Katz... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well as the one geek who actually sticks to boycotts of the mpaa I DIDN'T see LOTR. I almost downloaded the movie, but apparently it's a 3 VCD thing and i didn't want to hassle with 3 VCDs when it's hard enough to get one.

    4. Re:Jeez Katz... by alphaseven · · Score: 1
      Exactly. If you're going to be writing about computers and/or teen alienation, you missed a bunch of movies dealing with these subjects. Good movies you could be reviewing:
      • Avalon
      • Battle Royale
      • Bully
      • Startup.com
      • Waking Life
      C'mon Katz, you're the only internet critic that hasn't done a multi-page diatribe on Battle Royale.
    5. Re:Jeez Katz... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Actually, it's 4 SVCD's, not 3.

      And it still sucked. Fuck'n elves 'n shit.

    6. Re:Jeez Katz... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for saying what I was thinking.

      Seriously, if he's the only "serious journalistic talent" on staff then I think they could do better or hold him to a higher quality of work. As one other guy mentioned, he could at least have written a review and not 3 little paragraphs that equalled something like what I would tell a friend in passing. I really hope he isn't getting paid because his work is so absolutely unimpressive. I think they could pick up a couple of college-aged geek type writers if they pay him. Split his pay up between them. ROWR! KATZ! Show us you're a real writer! Stop being a lazy poof! You can do it!

    7. Re:Jeez Katz... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Katz is probably too dim to realize that there are 3rd-party films out there; they never get shown at his 36-theatre MegaPlex Plus Concrete Heaven (with futuristic Human Fattening Popcorn Sauce!). Yay for Hollywood. Yay for stupid people.

    8. Re:Jeez Katz... by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      Avalon is available in North America? Where? When? I've been waiting for this movie since 2000, maybe longer.

    9. Re:Jeez Katz... by Rat's_ass_donor · · Score: 1

      I agree with the sentiment, although honestly, Katz can go see whatever movies he wants. And if you want/don't want to comment on his reviews, that's fine.

      He's not a movie critic, and has no obligation to see everything.

      For what it's worth, I thought Amelie was great, but if you consider Memento a 2001 movie then Amelie wasn't the best film of 2001. And Mulholland Drive gets an honorable mention.

    10. Re:Jeez Katz... by Ioldanach · · Score: 1

      Personally, I just got back from Brotherhood of the Wolf, and found it to be outstanding. I don't expect it'll be to the taste of most american audiences, but definitely something of substance and worthy of review. Then again, maybe he only likes doing reviews where he can bitch about the movie...?

    11. Re:Jeez Katz... by TheGeneration · · Score: 1

      I have to agree with you Amelie was definately one of the best movies of last year. It's too bad Katz doesn't bother reviewing smaller, lesser known films like that. Instead he reviews films that everybody already knows is bad.

      --


      The Generation
      I'd say something witty here, but I'm not that bright.
  14. Oh lighten up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I went to see Kung Pow expecting a low budget spoof of cheezy Kung Fu movies, and that's exactly what I got. This movie obviously wasn't aimed at up-tight no-nothings like Katz, it was meant for Kung Fu fan boys.

    Katz's review reminds me of all the bad press Godzilla 2000 got when it came out. People whined about it's crappy plot and terrible special effects... That's the whole point!

    Of course a bad review from Katz can do nothing but help the movie out in the box office. Anything that idiot hates must be good.

    1. Re:Oh lighten up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kung Pow was not a movie intended for kung fu fanboys, it was intended for people whose only connection to the genre are the old chop saki films.
      Quite a few of the Hong Kong based martial arts movies manage to be just as much a parody, if not more, of their entire genre.
      Check out the Armour of God series.

    2. Re:Oh lighten up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen.

    3. Re:Oh lighten up... by jgerman · · Score: 2

      There's a huge difference between pulling off a movie with a crappy plot and special effects and failing miserably at it. It was obvious from the previews that the writers were a bunch of non-funny people attempting to be funny, trying to capitalize on other non-funny spoofs that have come out in the past several years (starting with Scary Movie, although IMHO I'd say Austin Powers sorry guys I know a lot of people liked it but I had to force myself to smile at all during it). If you want a good kung-fu fan boy movie spood, go watch "They Call Me Bruce", or it's sequels. Or even "The Last Dragon", although I think that one was semi-serious, but the kung-fu villian dressed in football pads was great.

      --
      I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    4. Re:Oh lighten up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or watch the Kentucky Fried Movie (Zucker, Abraham, Zucker's first) which contains an extended parody of Bruce Lee's Enter the Dragon, called Fistful of Yen. It's like Airplane and Naked Gun only cruder.

  15. Katz... by Dick+Veiney · · Score: 0, Troll

    I'm sorry but, you continue to piss me off.

    --


    Ascloun MacGregor at your service, since the year 19XX.
  16. Excellent! by analemma · · Score: 1

    Enter the Fist had a great premise and the trailers were tantalizing

    Hmmmmm, I don't know. Not exactly Cannonball Run.

  17. bustin' my cap. by 3-State+Bit · · Score: 2, Troll

    I personally loved the karate brawl with the dairy cow
    You would, Katz, you would...

  18. ya but.. by AA0 · · Score: 3, Funny

    this guys too hard a critic. I mean, he'd probably give Booty Call 2 a bad review.

  19. You know it not worth seeing when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Katz doesn't have much to say about it.

  20. A blessing in disguise... by Fnkmaster · · Score: 1, Redundant
    This is the best Sunday treat ever. This weeks's Jon Katz movie review is the shortest, most sane posting of all time.


    Thank you Katz, for sparing us the usual wordy outpouring of ranting pseudo-journalism.

  21. Review? by UberOogie · · Score: 5, Informative
    I'm sorry, that wasn't a review. That was barely a TV Guide summary of the movie.

    Amongst all all the other faults Katz has (*coughCommie64splayingmoviesinKabulcough*), his movie reviews tend to be nothing if he can't bring out one of his dead horses (Columbine, geek prejudice, globalism) to beat. And even then, it has no actual bearing on the movie review.

    And why is this even being reviewed here? Jesus, if Katz can't make at least a tenuous connection with some of his tropes, how does this fit "News For Nerds, Stuff That Matters"?

    And, granted that this was likely a horribly bad movie from everything I've seen on it and heard from others, Katz is still supposedly getting paid for this "work," so he can at least put some effort into it. I mean, hell, Mr. Cranky devoted more words to his review.

    --
    "Enough of this wretched, whining monkey life." -- Marcus Aurelius, _Meditations_, Book 9, 37
    1. Re: Review? by DrEldarion · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      People get pissed if the Katz reviews are too long.

      People get pissed if the Katz reviews are too short.

      He can't win, can he?

      -- Dr. Eldarion --

    2. Re:Review? by JabberWokky · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      *coughCommie64splayingmoviesinKabulcough*

      *cough* you're a moron *cough* Commodore made other machines than C64 *cough*

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    3. Re:Review? by UberOogie · · Score: 4
      Evan, honey, if you actually believe the "Message From Kabul" story, you're not one to be calling people a moron.

      I understand that Commodore made other machines besides the 64. I own two. Hell, I still play with the 128 from time to time, but the Amiga crapped out and I haven't had time to fix it. It was just funnier that way.

      And while I acknowledge that the scenario (movies onto Commodore machines) is technologically possible, there is no way that a week after the liberation of a city in one of the most war-damaged "cities" in the world, that there was some linox haxor downloading full Hollywood movies over non-existant 28.8 ISP connections.

      And that's just one part of the story that's credability-bending.

      Katz has had plenty of time and prompting to prove his outrageous fabrication, but has not done so. I know that I would publically apologise to him for everything bad I ever said about him if he could document it to my satisfaction. But he can't, because he made it up and is now trying to brush it under the rug.

      --
      "Enough of this wretched, whining monkey life." -- Marcus Aurelius, _Meditations_, Book 9, 37
    4. Re:Review? by JabberWokky · · Score: 2
      And that's just one part of the story that's credability-bending.

      Oh, I never said that the story was true, just that you can watch movies on machines made by Commodore. In fact, you can even go back to that story and find my messages where I picked apart the logical flaws in it. And also the logical flaws in the arguments against it. ;)

      I'm personally of the opninion that Katz was trolled, and as a self-professed "real journalist", fell flat on his face when it came to fact checking. I wouldn't have been upset had it been, say, Rob, but for good reason. I know my sources - if Hemos of CmdrTaco say it's so, I take it as I would from a friend telling me a cool thing... it might be rumor, it might be real. It's still fun. If it's roblimo on NewsForge, I'm significantly more accepting of the news - not blindly accepting, but NF tends to do more fact checking, and puts that checking into the news article ("So I called Mr. So-and-so") than most major news agencies. I'd rather have an attributed rumor than a "news fact".

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    5. Re:Review? by nomadic · · Score: 1

      I'm personally of the opninion that Katz was trolled, and as a self-professed "real journalist", fell flat on his face when it came to fact checking

      But Katz doesn't consider himself a journalist; that's the only problem I have with him. He's a talented writer, he picks interesting subjects, and he really does have a stronger technical understanding than most other mainstream reporters. But I've seen him protest on slashdot that he's a pundit, not a journalist, so doesn't have to follow the rules of journalism (if anyone can find a post I'd appreciate it if they posted the URL; I know I've seen it, but couldn't find that exact instance). Now pundits are obviously complete wastes of space, unless they ARE journalists and bring some measure of journalistic ethics to what they do. A pundit who just gives his opinions on something, and doesn't care about investigating what he or she is writing, isn't really contributing much.

    6. Re: Review? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I thought his last review was just right.

      --Goldie L.

    7. Re:Review? by JabberWokky · · Score: 3, Interesting
      A pundit who just gives his opinions on something, and doesn't care about investigating what he or she is writing, isn't really contributing much.

      That pretty much describes Slashdot.

      Okay, now that you've had your laugh, that's not actually a bad thing. A good pundit will toss out themes and concepts for the general population to chew on and discuss. I know that in most threads on Slashdot that I get involved in, one of three things happen (usually a small amount of all three): I am moved to change my position, I am exposed to a different position with at least some validity, or in stating my existing position and being questioned, I build up my own existing beliefs and strengthen them.

      Slashdot: A Million Pundits Arguing. Not all that bad a description, and not really that bad a thing. Of course, it's also nice to be in a forum where a Google search or peek into the online Brittanica or CIA World Fact Book can buttress your arguement. That eliminates all but the most pigheaded "But my uncle said Afgans are all rich" idiots.

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    8. Re:Review? by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 2

      Let's face it. Based on the movie trailer, it was obvious this was going to be a real cinemtic suppository (to quote Dr. Clayton Forrester). You always know the funnies gags are in the trailer for any low-budget parody, and none of these gags were funny.

      I think Katz did all he needed to do: state the movie wasn't worth watching, briefly explain why, and open the floor up for discussion of bad movies in general, how the MPAA causes cavities and impotence and how much almost everyone hates Katz.

      "stuff that Matters" is relative, and all of the typical /. audience should understand the concept of something mattering deeply to someone which no one else cares about... it's a common
      situation with "nerds". "Nerds" and obsession go hand-in-hand, so enough with the "Topic X doesn't matter." If the story is pointless, skip over it. If JonKatz and CmdrTaco and CowboyNeal, et al, notice a certain kind of topic not generating any discussion, they can keep it in mind for the next time.

      I also like the idea of 1,000,000 pundits. Almost everyone here is an expert in something, no matter how narrow. It's often just a BS session with thousands of participants. Anyone who takes it more seriously than that is looking at it wrong. But every BS session has the chance to teach someone something, or alter a point of view or even educate. Let's face it, assertions made on /. aren't really any less rigorously backed up than a lot of the news stories we are seeing (like that perpetual motion machine story that Yahoo! ran mentioned here last week). At least when someone on /. speaks about a technical subject, there's a decent chance he actually knows what he is talking about. When does that happen in the mainstream media.

      If you take /. the right way, for all its problems, stupidities, abuses and other garbage, it can be a valuable resource, or at least less of a waste of time than watching your harddrive defrag.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  22. The Very Definition of Hackneyed by Phanatic1a · · Score: 1

    I had no urge whatsoever to see this movie. Well, I might have, but the cow scenes in the trailer purged any of those urges from me.

    The Matrix came out in 1999. Bullet-time spoofs stopped being funny shortly thereafter. In 2002, they're actually anti-funny; if you're laughing at another funny joke, and you see one, you suddenly stop laughing.

    1. Re:The Very Definition of Hackneyed by seann · · Score: 1

      but it's a cow!
      come on!
      a cow!
      a bullet time spoof, with a cow shooting milk at him!
      original.

      --
      I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
  23. how in the world? by fluffypancakes · · Score: 1

    What I keep wondering is how some guy who's written crap like "Patch Adams" got a studio to give him the $$$ and the time to direct, produce and star in his own movie.

    Yeah dude, the cow milk Matrix thing, WAY funny. And the chick with one boob? HEEEELARIOUS.

    BTW, side note to Hollywood, putting the phrase, "From the director of Ace Ventura 2..." in the trailer isn't going to make people run out and see your crap ass movie.

    --
    Dear Policeman, I am God.
  24. ugh by Presto215 · · Score: 1

    I totally agree... the trailer sucked. The comedy seemed stupid, but it wasn't even that "good-stupid" comedy. And yes, the Matrix spoofs have to stop.

    --
    "... comdemned to repeat it."
  25. User-contributed movie reviews? by mr+qix · · Score: 1

    If /. users can contribute book reviews and get them posted, what's to stop us from asking for an equivalent sort of movie review system? I think it would work better than the current Katz monopoly...

    --

    sig me a sog
  26. This movie was bad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It had a few parts that were bust-a-gut funny, but the rest was pure crap.

  27. A REAL REVIEW! by batkiwi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think katz actually saw the movie, I think he got a friend's grumpy grandfather to see it and tell him what it was.

    This movie can be compared to one thing, and one thing only:
    An entire movie made off of the bruce lee spoof in kentucky fried movie.

    If you like naked gun/etc, you'll like this. If you don't, then what the fuck are you seeing a movie called "Kung Pow" for?

    Two people walked out in the middle of the movie.
    The other 60 of us in the theatre were falling on the floor we were laughing so much!

    This movie is about one thing, and one thing only:
    PHOTOSHOPPING.

    You know all those pictures of person X put into background Y? This is an entire movie of it.

    They took an old, REALLY BAD, 1970's kung fu film, and with a TON a greenscreen and computer wizardry, as well as some really bad dubbing, made their own movie out of it.

    Only the main character is "real." All of the other people/scenes/etc were from the cheezy old kung fu film. In the credits they show you some of the wizardry (before and after shots) and it's REALLY amazing.

    There is tons of changed faces, added people, time change bizzarement.

    You know when you and your friends are drunk, 2am, watching a kung fu movie and you start adding your own lines, and acting out parts? That's this movie.

    If you're into the photoshopping scene, you've GOT to check out this movie. Maybe wait for dvd if you're not into silly-stupid-drunken-funny humour, but check it out.

    I am eagerly awaiting the DVD... I hope they show more of the before/after/in progress stuff. It's amazing to see a scene of the original, then watch it again to see a completely new scene made out of it, with new people/etc added in.

    HERE'S MY SCALE OF 1-10 ratings:
    SOPHISTICATED WIT: 0
    JUST REALLY FUCKING FUNNY: 10
    PLOT: N/A
    TECHINCAL WIZARDRY: 10
    ACTING: N/A
    WACKYNESS: 10

    MY overall score: 9

    Like I said, if you like:
    -kentucky fried movie (bruce lee segment)
    -naked gun
    -crazy mad editing
    you'll love this movie.

    If you're not into at least 2 of the 3 above, you'll hate it.

    1. Re:A REAL REVIEW! by seann · · Score: 2

      Please sir, more?

      YOU should be doing the movie reviews around here, I was stagging at seeing this film reading the latest comments, but your comment put me back in my place. This is the type of movie I'd go see with my guy friends, "leave the chick at home cause she ain't gonna like it". It's an escape, a time to hold your gut because it's hurts so hard from laughing.

      Kick katz out!
      Yay for batkiwi!
      (even his name is halarious!, bat! kiwi! batkiwi!!!)

      --
      I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
    2. Re:A REAL REVIEW! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would have to agree. I was originally on my way to see "Black Hawk Down" and due to timeing, "Kung Pow" was the next one. My girlfriend saw the previews, I didn't have a clue what it was about because I never even knew about it. I wouldn't say i'm a huge fan of Kung-Fu movies, but I do enjoy them. This one is just for the stupidness. DO NOT GO TO THIS MOVIE IF YOU WANT A PLOT (what Katz wanted, obviously). I laughed my ass of throughout the movie.

      You know the movies that are real stupid (speaking of Ave Ventura), and they get old because of the same damn stunts and 'funnies'? This one has new shit throughout the movie!! Just when you think , "damn, this is getting old" something new pops up!

      My last comment: "This is the worst movie you will ever pay $6 for, but I laughed my ass off throughout the movie" (although, the chicks whine does get old....but that's my only complaint).

      batkiwi=cool. I'll have to read his posts everytime...

    3. Re:A REAL REVIEW! by n2dasun · · Score: 1

      People seem to have no clue why I can get such a kick out of completely stupid movies. As long as they're dumb enough, you can laugh your way through it(unlike Mystery Men, which lulled at times). I've rented Pootie Tang 3 times now, and I love forcing people to watch it!!!

      --
      I'm determined to reclaim my karma. Now, if I can only find a groundbreaking article and something witty to say....
    4. Re:A REAL REVIEW! by hiei · · Score: 1

      Finally, some people who can appreciate stupid humor. Steve Odekerk is really lucky, he's getting paid to go out and have FUN and (hopefully) make money at what he loves doing: making stupid jokes. And for the rest of you people that actually APPRECIATE this movie, go check out his THUMB WARS and other Thumb Cinema features.

      --
      Upgrade your grey matter, cause one day it may matter
    5. Re:A REAL REVIEW! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was laughing so hard that I was in constant fear of inhaling my gum/pocorn/mt dew.

    6. Re:A REAL REVIEW! by e54748s · · Score: 1

      I agree with batkiwi on this one. Katz review sort of made me feel bad because I really enjoyed this movie.

      I went to see it last week on a free preview pass. There were two things I noticed in this movie that I have never seen at a movie before. The theater was completely packed. About 10 people left midway through the movie. The other hundred and something of us laughed uncontrollably at the very original humor this movie brings. Personally I think that the trailers were some of the most unfunny things in the movie. Everything about the movie was good and just as the jokes started to get old the movie ended right on time. The other 15 people I saw this movie with all said about the same thing the plot sucked and I was one of the worst movies they had ever seen, but all laughed their a55es off. I hope katz review doesn't make anyone who likes to laugh not want to see this movie.

      --
      There's no "i" in team but there is a "u" in slum.
    7. Re:A REAL REVIEW! by ProfBooty · · Score: 1

      i went to see it on saturday, the majority of the audience was around the age of 9-12. They laughed non stop throughout the movie.

      now why do i bring up the age of the majority of the viewers? most of the previews shown before the film were for R rated movies. I guess the target audience for this film was much higher, but most of the people in the movie were not.

      I personally felt it was the second worst movie i ever saw(spy hard was the first). the gags were not funny(the tongue thing was totally annoying). the only part of the movie where i laughed out loud was when the women picked up the baby and rolled it back down the hill.

      my friend who went with me was quite drunk when he saw it and it didn't help one bit.

      The director did look like he had a good time making it. the most enjoyable part of the movie was when it ended and they showed how they mapped him onto the movie.

      --
      Bring back the old version of slashdot.
    8. Re:A REAL REVIEW! by Aexia · · Score: 1

      I went to see it last week on a free preview pass. There were two things I noticed in this movie that I have never seen at a movie before. The theater was completely packed. "free preview pass" "theater was completely packed" You don't suppose the two were connected?

  28. up side by Rubbersoul · · Score: 2, Informative

    Well look at it this way everyone:

    We only have wait until next year to start seeing Maxtix 2 ripoffs in every other movie. And then by this time in 2004 they wont be cool anymore either ...

    --
    man .sig
    No manual entry for .sig.
  29. Sounds more like by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

    Fist - Hit the Kung Pow.

    --

    Lars T.

    To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  30. Below my current threshhold by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
    I'm sorry, can anyone tell me what Katz said in his review? I got one of those
    This review is beneath your current threshhold...
    messages when I tried to read it.
    1. Re:Below my current threshhold by fafaforza · · Score: 1

      buahaha

  31. Re:Do we boycott the MPAA every other week or what by parliboy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Er... no, you only go see the movies that are worth your time, or at least wait til they hit the dollar theatre. In the last months, I've only seen a limited number of first-run movies: Shrek, Final Fantasy (which I know kinda sucked, but I still wanted to support the cause an view it for its aesthetics), Crouching Tiger (my second viewing), Monsters Inc. (I didn't pay, so I can't argue), and LOTR.

    Point to that waste of bandwidth is, I paid for movies that were truly worth it or that I had to see, and I just found something else to do with the rest of my time (as another thread points out, sacrificing one movie pretty much pays for one month of a MMO game). Don't boycott, just be judicious in what you see, and be willing to defend yourself when others try to convince you. Were my friend so strong, I wouldn't have convinced him to see Scary Movie. I still don't think he's fully forgiven me for that night...

    --
    "You're never ready, just less unprepared."
  32. OT: Maybe by Paradoxish · · Score: 2, Informative

    I agree. Slapstick comedy, when it's alone, no matter how well executed... has no hidden intellectual quality. A guy falling down on his ass, no matter how funny it may be to some is still just a guy falling down on his ass. The difference is when the idiocy of the plot is used to convey some message that is worth talking about. When that message is "Most Kung Foo movies are really bad!" then there's nothing deeper. That should have been obvious from the trailers and from the press around the movie.

    I'd say The Simpsons is a whole different monster, though. The Simpsons is satire wrapped in (mostly) funny, over the top comedy. It's not worth teaching a philosophy class over, but for people who can understand the messages behind the shows they are there.

    --
    If you need to interpret my post, then you don't get it.
    1. Re:OT: Maybe by Grandpa+Jive · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Lets see... Barney's film is full of touching emotion... but man getting hit in the groin by a football has a a man getting hit in the groin by a football."

      -Homer Simpson

    2. Re:OT: Maybe by jim3e8 · · Score: 1

      "It works on so many levels!"

    3. Re:OT: Maybe by Pinky · · Score: 1

      more like

      Barney's film had heart but "football in the groin" had a football in the groin.

    4. Re:OT: Maybe by El+Panda+Grande · · Score: 1

      right. thats why america's funniest home videos just are not funny. If I can figure out a way to get myself kicked and in the crotch and not have it look fake, I'd win a bunch of money!

  33. Oh come on, I laughed myself silly. by Brad_Silva · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sure, this movie is not a contender for a Comedy Oscar, but I thought it delivered on what it advertised....
    I mean, if you watched the adds, you should have known it wasn't going to be a high dollar flick.

    I thought it was one of the best silly films made in a long time. The silly film genre is one of the most overlooked in the history of Hollywood. When have they ever had a "Best Silly Film" award? When has the silly film ever gotten listed as a valid subcategory of Comedy? Granted that most people do not appreciate the wonderful humor in a silly film, but not being one of those people is no reason to criticize.

    Shame on you Jon, you should have simply said "the movie is not for me" and gone on with your life.

    This is a movie for those of us that are fans of things like MontyPython, The Hitchhikers Guide (the videos), Some of Mel Brooks more offbeat stuff, etc.
    If you fit in that group, go see it, If you want to see a spoiler for my favorite gag, scroll down. When you see the spoiler, you'll understand why some people simply can't handle this movie.

    Brad

    .
    .
    .
    We've all poked fun at the old dubbed japanese movies, where the sound is out of sync with the mouth movements, and this movies pokes fun at that. My favorite gag is a part where the dog barks, but the bark is obviously dubbed and is out of sync.

    Not everyone would find that funny, and far too many people would let themselves be put off by its obvious and simple nature. Their loss.

    1. Re:Oh come on, I laughed myself silly. by jgerman · · Score: 2

      Speak for yourself, I tend to differentiate between stupid shit like Kung Pow and quality comedy like Hitchhikers, Monty Python, and Mel Brooks. There are people who can do offbeat and those who cannot, the poepl who did Kung Pow cannot. People are actually stupider for having watched this movie.

      --
      I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    2. Re:Oh come on, I laughed myself silly. by The+Ape+With+No+Name · · Score: 2
      Sure, this movie is not a contender for a Comedy Oscar, but I thought it delivered on what it advertised....


      There is no Academy Award for Comedy and I think it that "My Cousin Vinny" was the first Oscar for a comedy (Mira Sorvino) in a long time.

      --
      Comparing it to Windows will be a moot point, since El Dorado is going to have a 40% larger code base than XP.
    3. Re:Oh come on, I laughed myself silly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "My Cousin Vinny" was the first Oscar for a comedy (Mira Sorvino) in a long time

      Marisa Tomei

    4. Re:Oh come on, I laughed myself silly. by jimand · · Score: 1

      Actually, Marisa Tomei won Best Supporting Actress in 1993 for "My Cousin Vinnie". Mira Sorvino won the same award in 1996 for "Mighty Aphrodite".

    5. Re:Oh come on, I laughed myself silly. by The+Ape+With+No+Name · · Score: 2

      Excellent. Thanks. I guess the point is that comedies rarely win Academy Awards. Thanks again.

      --
      Comparing it to Windows will be a moot point, since El Dorado is going to have a 40% larger code base than XP.
  34. Hey.... by wedg · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well, some of you warned me, and you were right.

    So... you're saying that before you went to do this impartial review of the movie, you went and listened to how everyone else said it was really bad? Don't you think that might have clouded*cough* your judgement? I mean, people see what they expect to see, and if you were expecting crap, perhaps that's all you saw.

    Personally, I haven't seen the movie. But what's the point of having the review at all if the first line of it simply says: I was very prejudiced against this movie before I even saw it, now here's my unbiased review. (Although, most of us recognise that Katz is rarely, if ever, approaching unbiased... but that's a small point).

    --
    Jake
    Dating: while( 1 ){ call_girl(); get_rejected(); drink_40(); } return 0;
    1. Re:Hey.... by BJH · · Score: 1

      Hey, people don't read movie reviews to find out what the movie was actually like - they read them to find out what the reviewer *thought* of them.

      So what if some people told him it was bad before he went? Just seeing the trailers should have told him that much. Give the guy a break... sheesh.

    2. Re:Hey.... by wedg · · Score: 1

      Except he said the trailers looked pretty good - so the trailers didn't tell him that. The real question is why would anyone listen to Jon Katz instead of their buddy who saw it opening night?

      But why would anyone listen to Jon Katz at all?

      --
      Jake
      Dating: while( 1 ){ call_girl(); get_rejected(); drink_40(); } return 0;
  35. It was funny by jheinen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was expecting to see an utterly stupid spoof of 70's kung-fu movies and that's exactly what I got. It was so stupid it was hilarious. That was the whole point. I laughed my ass off. Was it a great example of cinema? No. Was there any redeeming features of the film? No. Is any of that relevant? No. It was a stupid, funny, enjoyable movie that made no pretense at being meaningful, serious, or containing a "message." It's sheer stupidity was a delight, and it is nice to see something come out of Hollywood that doesn't try to be anything other than silly. Sometimes I don't want to go to a movie to be informed or enlightened. I don't want a wry commentary on this American life. I just want to turn my brain off and be entertained, and this movie delivers. Go see it with a bunch of friends. Your soda will be coming out your nose.

    --
    -Vercingetorix
    "Necessitas non habet legem." -St. Augustine
    1. Re:It was funny by ProfBooty · · Score: 1

      I think the last dragon did a better job than kung pow.

      first our hero "bruce leroy"

      he is looking for his master (turns out to be a fortune cookie machine)

      the villian is sho'nuff the shogun of harlem

      Leroy masters kung fu and gets the glow which he uses to defeat sho'nuff.

      it was a lot more funny than Kung pow, it was much more along the lines of i'm going to get ya sucka though.

      --
      Bring back the old version of slashdot.
  36. Yes, there ARE people who won't see it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was anyone NOT going to see it?

    Yes, I have not seen lord of the rings, and WILL NOT go see lord of the rings. Why?

    Laws like DMCA get passed because AOHell Time Wanker , s0ny, and their ilk get thier money from things like Lord of the Rings. What can *I* do? buy tickets for local plays, rather than go see LoR.

    How many of *YOU* jump up and down about the 'evil system', then keep supporting it? Thought so.

    1. Re:Yes, there ARE people who won't see it. by cheinonen · · Score: 2

      My point was that people that weren't going to see Lord of the Rings aren't going to want to see it because of a review on Slashdot. Some other movies that people haven't seen a million ads for or heard about as much, those are movies where reviews play more influence in the decision to see them. I'd rather see reviews of movies like that then the 400th review of Lord of the Rings, or Star Wars: Episode 2.

  37. Best Matrix Parody Is: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MTv's "Sex and the Matrix", starring Sarah Jessica Parker.

    1. Re:Best Matrix Parody Is: by KaB0b0 · · Score: 1
      Best Matrix parody? None of the Matrix parodies are (at ALL) humorous. Even the first one (which one was it, Scary Movie?) seemed old and contrived. Now, we've had the token Matrix parody shots in: Shrek, Kung Pow, TV shows, cartoons, lotsa more movies... it's pathetic.

      Formula for new "comedy" movie is as follows:

      Take overused idea and write part of a script (ad-libbing the rest of it)

      Throw in a Matrix parody

      Throw in teen sex

      Toss in some more random and pointless nudity

      Make 3 funny parts, advertise the hell out of them in any previews/promotions (NOTE: You don't have to actually put them in the movie!)

      $script =~ s/$content//gi;

      Well, you get my point, Little Giants was funnier.

      --

      rm -rf /bin/rm
    2. Re:Best Matrix Parody Is: by Grahf · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the Deuce Bigalow Matrix parody, which I believe was the first. Which I not only saw but distinctly remember. I feel my personal value ebbing away.

  38. It's interesting.... by FriscoJohn · · Score: 1

    that most of the comments so far are from people who have NOT seen the movie. I did, last night. It won't win any Academy nominations, and it's not another
    Airplane...but it had a theatre full of people of all ages laughing their ass off...I mean, damn near ROTFL. Yes, bullet ducking time warp tricks have been overdone...and yes, I'm a Matrix loyalist, too....but I think Jon was a little too tough on this one. There is wizardry in the production techinques, and enough funny gags to make it worth the 8 bucks. For a different take on the movie (one which I agree with) go to Moviefone and read the Variety review. To read the whole thing, you'll have to do a free 30 day trial of their site.

    And Jon....all the funny gags were NOT in the trailers...eg when the peasant woman picks up the baby...and that's in the first 2 minutes.

    --
    Ah....but who will Moderate the Meta Moderators?
  39. What, you were expecting MacBeth? by NeuroManson · · Score: 2

    Next there'll be complaints about realism and plot in Godzilla movies...

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
    1. Re:What, you were expecting MacBeth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The worse Godzilla film that was ever made was far better than this film.

  40. Wrong title in America by _ganja_ · · Score: 4, Funny

    Apprently Donald Rumsfeld wants the name of the movie changed to "Kung illegal combatants".

    --

    A journey of a thousand miles starts with a brutal anal raping at airport security

  41. Why is this even reviewed? by corrosiv · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We're all supposedly intelligent people here. It is OBVIOUS from the ads that the film is sheer crap (and in fact the studio should be held accountable for the 30 seconds of my life lost to that ad). Why is Katz reviewing such SHEER AND UTTER CRAP? I guess he thinks he looks intelligent by methodically picking apart a bad film. Instead of pointing out the painfully obvious in the hopes of looking insightful, try coming up with some REAL insight on a REAL film.

    I saw the Orange County review and wondered why it was posted - this one is a step further in solidifying my theory.

    My $0.02 (Canadian)

    Steve

  42. Mod Up! by Robber+Baron · · Score: 2

    Dude, if I haden't wasted all my mod points sending Linux-WINErs to oblivion yesterday, you'd be getting 'em!

    --

    You're using her as bait, Master!

  43. I think this review had value... by JMZero · · Score: 2

    I enjoy a stupid funny movie now and again, and I'm guessing Katz does too (he's gone to see this and Orange County in the last while). While I'm not much of a Katz fan, he gives enough information for me to know that this wasn't another "Dumb and Dumber" kind of movie - and that's all we needed to know.

    Better than an article on the evils of McDonalds.

    --
    Let's not stir that bag of worms...
  44. Why support the MPAA, Katz? by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 2

    Hey, I totally agree with you, I'm not reading /. to be force fed with MORE industrially-produced blockbusters.

    What's puzzling is that most mainstream medias do cover (favorably!) blockbusters because they are funded by the MPAA through advertising.

    It's odd, I didn't see any MPAA ads on /., so why suck 'dem balls and provide them with the free coverage they don't really need?

    Hmm, and yeah, go see Amelie.

    1. Re:Why support the MPAA, Katz? by TheGeneration · · Score: 1

      The MPAA doesn't place ads for movies. The MPAA is basically an entertainment industry created association to keep the US Government from stepping in and cesoring films. Through self governance (which can be worse than government intervention at times) the movie industry is able to keep the law makers from telling them what is acceptable. I would much prefer the MPAA than a FOMPC (Federal Office of Motion Picture Censors).

      The studios (Paramount, Disney) and distributors (Miramax, Sony Pictures) place the adverts.

      --


      The Generation
      I'd say something witty here, but I'm not that bright.
  45. Shaolin Soccer by Cybrex · · Score: 1

    On Friday a coworker of mine brought in a DVD he got from Hong Kong called "Shaolin Soccer". We used it to "test" a defective laptop, and got no real work done for the next hour or so because we couldn't stop laughing.

    In a nutshell, the movie is about a group of Shaolin monks who become a soccer (or football, if you prefer) team. Now, I pretty much hate anything sports-related, but that didn't deter my enjoyment of the movie at all. It manages to successfully spoof just about every martial arts cliche in the book, with some direct pokes at Bruce Lee and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.

    There's nothing deep in this flick- it's pure light-hearted fun. They make great use of special effects and the acting is perfect for a movie of this type. It's in Chinese (with English subtitles available), but most of the comedy is visual.

    It's going to be released in the US as "Kung-Fu Soccer".

    Oh, as far as Godzilla 2000 goes, I agree with the parent post- if you went in expecting to see a cheesy, campy giant monster movie on the big screen it was a lot of fun.

    -Cybrex

    --
    Boundless Expansion, Self-Transformation, Dynamic Optimism, Intelligent Technology, Spontaneous Order- BEST DO IT SO!
    1. Re:Shaolin Soccer by HKTiger · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Oh, it truly warms the cockles of my heart to read this...Shaolin Soccer is the latest from the comic genius of Hong Kong, Stephen Chiau Sing Chi. I'd have to say that Shaolin Soccer is not his funniest film, but it's very well done. I'm only concerned that the imminent US release will trash it in some way: there's talk of cutting, new soundtracks, and, most ominously, dubbing.

      This brings up an interesting issue for me: as a fan of HK cinema, things like Kung Pow only do huge harm to a film industry that, while it does churn out a lot of dross (but can anyone tell me that Hollywood *doesn't*?), also creates some true works of genius (and I'm *not* talking about Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon here). HK films get a bad rap from things like Kung Pow, leading to the stereotype that all HK films have ultra-cheap effects, and are chockfull of stylised fight scenes. Remember that the chop socky films he's supposedly satirising were made in the *60s*, for gods' sakes. That's 40 years ago. Does anyone believe that HK films are *still* like that? And does anyone believe that the world's third largest film industry (Bollywood is second) makes *only* kung fu films, and cheap ones at that?

      Whereas in fact, the HK film industry is moving in a lot of directions simultaneously: HK is home to the aforementioned Chiau Sing Chi, master of comedy (director and writer as well as actor, I might add), and Johnnie To, director of slick romantic comedies, dark futuristic fantasy, and rivetting drama/thriller. If you like odd horror-comedy, there's plenty make in HK. Ghost stories, exploitation flicks, human drama, comedies by the bucketload, triad and crime, quirky surprising indie films, anything you want.

      Then, of course, there's Wong Kar Wai, arthouse director extraordinaire. Anyone daring to suggest that his films are simply cheap chop socky action would be on the receiving end of some not very nice words from Director Wong.

      Honestly, who needs another unfunny satire that's at least 40 years out of date? Watch the real thing, and maybe get a surprise...

    2. Re:Shaolin Soccer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course you're not talking about Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon - since it's not a Hong Kong movie. :-)

      Most recent word on Shaolin Soccer is that Miramax will be adding a new soundtrack (hip-hop) and cutting it to ribbons, possibly eliminating as much as a half-hour from the movie (according to a French movie news site). I haven't heard whether or not it will be dubbed. Miramax insists that they need to take these steps for the movie to appeal to the demographic they're targeting - young males, including African-Americans.

      I don't think it's out of line to be outraged by Miramax's refusal to show us a major blockbuster foreign film without "popularizing" it for the American audience. I also don't think it's out of line to lament the fact that most Americans simply wouldn't give a damn one way or the other.

    3. Re:Shaolin Soccer by HKTiger · · Score: 1
      CTHD not a HK movie? What, with the 4 leads coming from Beijing, Taiwan, Malaysia, and (I think) Cheung Chau, and the director from Taiwan, how can it *not* be a HK movie? ;-)

      As for the Miramax butchery of SS: yes, I've read those rumours too, but at this stage that's all they are: unsubstantiated rumours. I agree with you, however, that it's not out of line to be outraged at Miramax's treatment of Chiau Sing Chi's latest: they're behaving as if any Hollywood exec automatically possesses superior genius to Sing Jai. And as a correspondent of mine has said, it's better that they butcher it and it goes down in a screaming heap, so they don't get the chance to do so again...

  46. EXACTLY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is exactly the way I felt about it. It's nice to go to a movie and get what you expect. This movie didn't aim to be anything but stupid funny. I had been looking forward to this movie since I first saw the preview. The same way I looked forward to seeing Godzilla 2000.. I wanted to see cheezy humor and have a good time. I had a good time at Kung Pow, and from what I could tell, so did everybody else in the theatre. I have never heard so much laughter in a theatre before... That's including the Beavis & Butthead and the South Park opening nights.

    Hell... At least Kung Pow didn't promise to be meaningful and only deliver 90 million dollars worth of Hollywood special effect masturbation like Black Hawk Down did.

    Oh well.. Not like anybody takes Katz's opinions seriously anyways.. (Except for CmdrTaco for some unknown reason??)

  47. Tiger and Crane Fists by dbug78 · · Score: 1
    ...1976 karate film Tiger and Crane Fists.
    I've never seen nor heard of this movie, but it should be blatantly obvious from the title that it's a Kung Fu movie, not Karate. Tiger and Crane are two of the most well known Kung Fu styles. Don't believe everything you saw in The Karate Kid, they're not even from the same country (Kung Fu: China, Karate: Japan). This may have nothing to do with Kung Pow, but it certainly doesn't add to your already low credibility.
    1. Re:Tiger and Crane Fists by nitemayr · · Score: 1

      Ah, Danielsan,Mr. Miagi told us why the Miagi Karate was animal inspired, old Miagi anscestor leave okinawa, get lost while fisihing. wind up in china. Come back with Chinese wife, chinese kids and chinese style karate. What you would call Kung-fu!!

      Mod me up, I have a winner

      Karate Kid Two!!!

      --
      Hello Kettle,
      You, my friend are as black as pitch.
      With love, Pot.
    2. Re:Tiger and Crane Fists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Karate is the evolved form of te, a martial art brought from China to Okinawa in around the 16th century. Te drew from Chinese styles, and as such, there are still elements of kung fu in karate - these can most obviously be seen in some of the kata.

      J. Random Anonymous Grasshopper

    3. Re:Tiger and Crane Fists by Pootenheimer · · Score: 1

      Actually, Tiger and Crane together form a very well-known style of kung fu, called Hung-Gar. Here's a story on how the style was developed:

      ---

      According to legend, a Shaolin Master of the Tiger Claw style was out in his garden. Spotting a Crane pecking away at his newly planted vegetables, the priest grabbed a stick and tried to chase the intruder away. The bird, however, eluded each swing of the stick. At one point, the Crane leaped up into the air, and the surprised monk found himself the victim of a furious counterattack. Using its sharply pointed beak as a weapon, the Crane became a formidable foe. The priest made a complete study of the Crane's behavior and learned how this frail-looking creature would respond to various types of attack. By imitating these movements, a series of new fighting techniques based on fluidity, gracefulness, and sharp pecking attacks, were developed. Combining these unusual Crane tactics with his dynamic Tiger Claw techniques, the Shaolin monk devised a new and highly effective method combat.

      In the 18th century, Hung Hee Goon acquired this unique system based on the Tiger and Crane. Boxer Hung had been schooled in the teachings of Chee Sin, a Master of the "Long-Hand Art", and Fong Wing Chuen, an expert of the "Short-Hand Art". With the knowledge that he acquired from these two Shaolin priests, Boxer Hung added the Tiger & Crane techniques, creating the Hung-Gar (Hung's Family) school of Kung Fu.

      ---

      I've not actually seen the 1976 film, but there's some background to educate the uneducated about Hung-Gar Kung Fu. It is based on the original, traditional Shaolin Kung Fu, and it's still taught today (I'm learning it).

      --
      Move sig. For great justice.
  48. Eh... by Scoria · · Score: 2

    It doesn't seem as though many movie critics are acknowledging this as a "true" film. Whereas the majority of recent theatrical releases have already been reviewed at least 40 to 70 times, the Movie Review Query Engine lists only 14 reviews for Kung Pow.

    Roger Ebert hasn't released a review for the movie, either. Oh, and all 14 of the reviews are negative. It appears that everything remotely amusing was included in the trailer.

    Katz is, for once, correct. Skip the movie; read James Berardinelli's review instead. It's probably more humorous than the actual film.

    --
    Do you like German cars?
  49. waste of bandwidth by marktwain · · Score: 1

    What a terrible shame to waste the bandwidth with a review, of any kind, about yet another bash 'em in the face and kick 'em in the groin movie. These things were a genre that was past their prime in about 1979. Grow up kiddies and see the light. Try reading a book, ANY book, as obviously the prospects of finding something of iterest, no matter WHAT it is, will be better than a time waster like this. (Alas and alack, now I've contributed to the waste of bandwidth myself!)

    1. Re:waste of bandwidth by Kewlhand`tek · · Score: 0

      WOT! THere's a book of this? WOW!

      --
      The Arkie Libertarian
  50. Consept had potential by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    I thought the concept had a lot of potential, but from the trailers, it looked way over the top cheezy and stupid. I was kinda tempted to see it, hoping the people who made the trailer were just dumb, but after katz's revew... I dunno.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  51. getting paid? by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    Actualy, I don't think katz is getting paid for posting stuff on here.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  52. The reason there aren't many reviews by Savatte · · Score: 1

    Is because it was not screened for critics in the weeks before it opened. Studios usually do this when they know they have a bomb (quality wise) on their hands, and that all the negative reviews that come out before the movie opens will hurt its box office take. If a studio doesn't prescreen a movie, it is usually a sign to stay away, because the studio that fronted the money doesn't have confidence in the movie.

    1. Re:The reason there aren't many reviews by Scoria · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but even when they aren't prescreened there are usually more reviews than there are presently...

      --
      Do you like German cars?
  53. Re:Do we boycott the MPAA every other week or what by Rayonic · · Score: 1

    I thought we already went over this.

  54. Offtopic by n2dasun · · Score: 1

    All us cool people know the matrix got that bullet slo-mo scene from a Dragonball Z episode.

    --
    I'm determined to reclaim my karma. Now, if I can only find a groundbreaking article and something witty to say....
  55. I agree.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If your goal would be to find out some 'esotric' good off-the-beaten track movies that have 'nerd' appeal, yes, having Katz review stuff like PI or Ameile.

    I'd like to think the /. drones who dislike what Time Warner, sony etc la have done with the DMCA would have the balls to not go see things that benefit Time wanker, etc la. But, you get the system you have bought into, now don't ya?

  56. A very funny movie. . . by Cyberllama · · Score: 2

    I really don't know what Jon Katz was expecting as he walked into the theatre. Personally, I thought this was one of the funniest movies I've seen in a long time. Some of the gags are just painfully stupid and make you wonder how the ended up in the final cut, but almost all of it was just funny. By taking scenes from older Kung Fu movies and redubbing them with completely different words, the net effect is that of a Mystery Science Theatre 3000 on crack. For instance in one scene, two people walking along clearly not talking, are dubbed to be singing a song "We are ventriloquists". This sort of humor isn't for everyone, but nearly everyone who walked out of the movie when it was over seemed to have enjoyed it as much as I did.

  57. what mrcranky says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    mrcranky gives better reviews than Jon Katz.

    To wit:

    Director Steve Oedekerk bought the rights to a little-known 1976 martial arts film called "Savage Killers" and has since spent his time splicing himself into the footage, reworking it, and dubbing in new dialogue to create a film that serves no purpose other than to remind us that "Saturday Night Live" isn't the only place where skits run too long.
    Then again, this is the guy who also spent a lot of his time making little thumb people by putting his eyes and mouth digitally onto thumbs and creating movies like "Thumb Wars: The Phantom Cuticle," "Thumbtanic," and "The Blair Thumb." It's pretty safe to say that one thumb movie is enough, but Oedekerk doesn't think so and apparently will keep making them until somebody does something unpleasant with his thumbs.

    In "Kung Pow: Enter the Fist," Oedekerk is "The Chosen One," a martial artist out to avenge his family's murder. The movie is filled with bad dialogue and low-rent computer effects. There's a fight between "The Chosen One" and a cow. There's a woman with one huge breast. The "love interest" whines like a gopher getting a cold thermometer shoved up its ass.

    The film's relatively high amusement factor lasts about 15 minutes, after which any normal person starts wondering whether or not Oedekerk realizes that a 90-minute movie needs more material than he's got. Ironically, the most fun I had in the movie was watching the confused old people walk out after about five minutes, when they realized what they had gotten themselves into. It was kind of like watching nuns walking out of a porn film, not that I'd ever advocate slipping a reel of "Forrest Hump" into the training tapes over at the convent or anything.

  58. Any left to share? by TheMightyZog · · Score: 1

    Kung Pow - Enter the Fist had a great premise and the trailers were tantalizing

    First question: What were you smoking?
    Second question: Do you have any left?

  59. POS movies. by buzzbomb · · Score: 1

    This movie is a piece of shit. This surprises you, how? It's just another turd that Hollywood has tried to shove down our throats instead of making a truly intellectual movie that's worth watching.

    Fuck them.

  60. Kung Pow - Enter the Fist by glwtta · · Score: 2

    I haven't seen the previews, but I just assumed it was gay pr0n...

    --
    sic transit gloria mundi
  61. fa! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I feel sorry for anyone who saw anything in this film. I usually could care less about what Jon Katz thinks, but if I had had read his brief review before buying a ticket and enduring the first 30 minutes of this insult of a film, I would have had a Sunday afternoon to look forward to. I'm pleading with all of you: don't waste your time and your money on anything Hollywood puts out anymore. You owe it to yourselves and your decendents.

  62. fa! (cont'd) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Honestly, I haven't been so p.o.'d by a movie on the big screen since "The 13th Warrior". What more can I say? I'm cured. If I ever go back to the theaters, it'll be too soon.

  63. Re:OPENBSD IS NOT SECURE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tell me Bobby, have you ever been in a Turkish prison?

  64. Re:Those boob were terrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No...I don't think the word describes the scene. Look at it:

    boob

    could you get any titter? This is visual onomatopoeia (I think there is a word for words that look like what they mean...or maybe I dreamed it. Never mind. Just give me a six pack of Duffs...and a package of Skittles.)

    Anyway, in that regard

    pOp

    actually matches the scene...if you take the 'p's to represent shoulders and arms...

    fuck. never mind.

  65. Okay, I give up... by Anthony+Boyd · · Score: 1

    ...how does a reader/fan of Slashdot configure it so that Katz's stuff doesn't show up on the home page? I've heard that it's possible, but I don't see anything in the preferences on my page.

    1. Re:Okay, I give up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Open up your info, click on 'Homepage', look down a bit for the section entitled 'Exclude Stories from Homepage' (right below the willing to moderate box). The first column is called authors, the fourth author is JonKatz, click the box by his name, save the changes, and stories by Katz no longer show up on the main page.

    2. Re:Okay, I give up... by demon · · Score: 1

      Click "preferences" on the left side. Then, under "Exclude Stories from Homepage", "Authors", put a check by "JonKatz". Scroll to the bottom, then click "Save".

      --

      Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
      Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
  66. Re:Stephen King, author, amok at 54 by dr.g · · Score: 1

    Wait, I just heard a bulletin on CNN that after being resurrected, King butchered the mortuary attendants and then did the same to the police who came to investigate...early reports indicate that King has removed the pineal gland of his victims, for reasons that will not become clear until the end of the book.

    King has fled into nearby woods, and search efforts have been hampered by an oppressive mist which cloaks an eldritch and unthinkable horror.*

    *-King is thought to have been joined by Dead Author H.P.Lovecraft.

    --
    "To be fair, I was left completely unsupervised." ~Anon
  67. No, only fools boycott the MPAA by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    I'm sorry, you must be mistaken - I wasn't aware that even as much as a small minority actually engaged in such a futile effort as an MPAA boycott. I happen to like a number of artists and movie producers that would be hurt by such an action, and also realize the pointlessness of such a boycott (even if every single slashdot reader actually did boycott and got thirty friends to boycott as well, there would be NO NOTICABLE IMPACT on sales).

    Instead, why not engage in productive activities? Dontate to the EFF. Write congressmen about laws you hate. Make sure you explain to everyone you can what the MPAA and cronies are trying to put past everyone. They can be stopped but not by a boycott.

    BTW, nice troll.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  68. I Changed Steve Oedekerk Show's Name by waldoj · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sometime back in '96 (if memory serves), Steve Odekerk had a one-shot show on NBC, some kind of cyber-stand-up kind of a thing. (I'm a little sketchy on the details.) The name of the show was "steveodekerk.com." Being a mischevious young 2600-writing dork, I looked it up, and found that the domain wasn't registered. Naturally, I registered it. (This was in the heady days of no-cash-down-required domain name registrations.)

    A week passed. Nothing happened. Then something minor, but interesting, happened: they changed the name of the show. Now it was "steve.odekerk.com." They'd registered odekerk.com, lacking their own domain name.

    That was one of the greatest achievements of my 18-year-old life: getting NBC to change the name of a show. I'm not saying that was a worthwhile endeavor, nor that it was a good or useful thing to do in retrospect, but it sure thrilled me at the time. :)

    -Waldo Jaquith

  69. Fools and Southern Baptists. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    technically they boycotted Disney but it's the same thing in practice.

  70. Bad Movies = Quality cheese by bolix · · Score: 1

    Horrendously bad movies are as American as Apple Pie and should be enshrined as national treasures.

    Does any1 really think the Farrelly, Zucker, Abrams, Lampoon, Martin+Lewis, Stooges, Arbuckle etc movies are that worthy of intellectual discourse within their own period and context? No/Low-brow comedy significantly matures with age partly in tandem with the target audience (which these days is comprised of early teens) and the revealing snapshot of the gutter humour prevalent/tolerated at that time.

    Everyone should take a trip to morontown. I highly recommend National Lampoons Vacation.

  71. drink more! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't believe that movie (kung pow) was intended for the sober mind.

  72. cursRe:Those trailers were terrible by top+romulan · · Score: 1

    heh, couldn't resist to make fun of the poster
    of that blurb

    the commercial makes it pretty clear

    the commercial is fugin embarassing to watch
    it's so bad

    what sucker sees this shitty movie is the only
    one deserves to wither under the shitty rain
    big business dumping on our civil rights

    i curse you

    1. Re:cursRe:Those trailers were terrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      was that a poem? something about \n before the end of the page.

  73. Original Film.... has anyone seen it? by Gouda68 · · Score: 1

    I haven't seen Kung Pow, nor will I most likely... I am curious about the original film though.

    I tuned (quite accidentally) into a Kung Fu film on a Sat. afternoon 15 years ago or so and watched a great film about a son studying tattered texts to learn a kung fu style (I think it was crane) to avenge his father. His father's killer used tiger style. The part I thought was great was the practice dummy... When started, marbles would fall through channels in the dummy and the studend would strike in the fashion described in the text. If the form was done correctly, only marbles of a particular color would be collected by the student. In the end, the son defeated the tiger style master only because he had had to improvise the portions of the crane style text that had been damaged. The tiger style master could not predict these new moves.

    Anyone who's seen Kung Pow... is this the movie that was used? Thanks!

  74. Kung pow is funny, but matrix spoof bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In my oppinion the Matrix spoof is the worst part, but the rest of movie had me laughing my ass off. My mom and girlfrind even snorted. Although my mom didn't like it as much as I. But my brother, me, and my girlfriend all laughed our asses off.

    This movies is the same catagory as the naked gun. It's not going to win any awards, but you should go see the early show if you want to be cheap.

    It is certainly better than Orange County, which is like an even worse Road Trip.

    Don't even get me started on Moulin Rogue.

    Ignore spelling errors.

  75. Right on! by supergumby · · Score: 1
    I totally agree. What's the point of reviewing a movie you know will be a complete waste of your time? I really wanted to just walk out of it. I stayed because my friends were with me, and they were the ones who wanted to see it.

    1. Abusing babies is not funny
    2. Abusing cows is not funny
    3. The "I will explain in the sequel" joke is old
    Above all, Oedekerk should assume that his viewers will get the joke the first time
  76. What trailers did you see? by ethereal · · Score: 1

    All the trailers that were on the air here in IL looked uniformly awful. There was nothing to make you want to watch the movie at all. Jon, you must've been nuts to go see that one.

    You have to remember: people on /. may be young, but they're generally not stupid. So youth movies may be a good choice for a review, but stupid movies (or at least ones that you can tell from the trailers are stupid) probably aren't. Then again, why do we even have movie reviews on /. anyway?

    --

    Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

    1. Re:What trailers did you see? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Why do we have anime articles on /. either?

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  77. karate != kung fu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tiger and crane fist in kung fu, not karate. Karate is a Japanese fighting art about 300 years old. Kung fu is a Chinese fighting art over a 1000 years old.

    The two are *very* different (having studied both).

    Check your facts. I know all those asian things look the same, but there not!

  78. Surprise Surprise by Ogerman · · Score: 2

    Does Katz watch every single movie that comes out?! No wonder he doesn't have time to write good editorials. (-:

    Rules of Movie Previews:

    If it looks dumb, it's sickeningly stupid.
    If it sounds great, it'll put you to sleep.
    If it looks hilarious, it's definitely not.
    If it looks exciting, it has no plot.

    If you can't quite figure out the preview, it might be a good movie.

  79. Trailers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The trailers were tantalizing"? Is your head completely full of shit, or is there a little bit of air in there, too? Christ, obvious and stupid sight gags, bad acting, and CGI special effects courtesy of Nintendo 64 were all painfully apparent from the 15-second spots they were running on TV. Sorry, but if you managed to be disappointed by this steaming chunk of pig shit, then you must be shy a chromosome or two.

  80. Once again Katz, you speak from a dark orifice by Kickstart70 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sure, the movie was no LOTR. It was childish, pretty dumb, and had a number of cliches.

    However, the cliches were obviously intentional, there were a few jokes that really were quite funny and original, and there even was a (very rare) bit of brilliance there.

    They did one hell of a job melding two old martial arts movies together with a fair bit of greenscreen and CGI to make it a reasonably cohesive whole. The thing is, if you are going to go see this, don't expect a standard movie with typical cut scenes, soundtracks and characterisations. Take it as it is and you'll probably enjoy it.

    However, take it seriously and expect to come out of it with some sort of sense of purpose and you'll be disappointed. Go see it with Katz' typical pap of a review in mind and you'll be annoyed at the movie and at Katz.

    TheGeek

  81. If you dont laugh when watching this movie, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...ask yourself, "What's wrong with me?"

    For anyone who is old enough to remember 70's Kung Fu films, it's hillarious.

    Plus, Katz gave him a bad review! so the flick can't be that bad. I was rolling on the floor laughing.

  82. Good Christ, it sucked. by Niet3sche · · Score: 1

    I didn't want to believe it. I mean, hell, Hong Kong Cinema is typically great in its nuances. But this ... this was crap. Cooked, soaked with gasoline, smeared in your face with ants poured on top. My girlfriend and I ended up walking out of the theatre - quite a feat, considering we're poor. :/ This gets five angry yawns down.

  83. Can we change our critic? by DrColossus · · Score: 1

    Hey, since there's a link to the filthy critic on the main page, why not ask him to feature his weekly reviews on here? He's funny as hell and critically smart. Eh?

    --
    eh...
  84. Jon, you suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your movie reviews always include spoilers. They are not interesting.
    Go away or something.

  85. fighter's destiny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anyone played a game called Fighter's destiny? aparently the makers of Kung pow did because that cow is a blatant rip off.

  86. Mod up, insightful! by Lottaguns · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Who cares if it's off topic?

  87. Kung Pow: Enter the Fist by sfjohnson · · Score: 1

    My 14-year-old son and 11-year-old daughter insisted that we see this movie. I thought it would play well to the adolescent / pre-adolescent sense of humor, but even they were disappointed. This was indeed an extremely crude attempt at satirizing a genre.

    The evening before, I saw "Tampopo," another genre satire (spaghetti western / samauri movie in this case), but subtle and sophisticated instead. Highly recommended.

    --
    Live in the Future; It's Just Starting Now!
  88. Understanding Steve Oedekerk = High Strung by tfurrows · · Score: 1

    I would recommend seeing "High Strung" and maybe "Thumb Wars" or the "Ace Ventura" movies, then making a judgment on "Kung Pow". Put the movie in the context it should be in and maybe you won't think it's that bad...

    But if you do nothing else, see "High Strung"... it's worth it.

  89. Re:Do we boycott the MPAA every other week or what by Myrcurial · · Score: 1
    Heck, I've gotten to the point where I not only wait till the movie has left the first run theatre, but until it's out on DVD for purchase.

    Before anyone jumps all over me for buying DVDs in light of CSS et al, consider that it costs less to license a copy of the movie for repeated perusal than it costs to license a single non-interuptable view of the movie in a venue that is not comfortable, not private and has poor technical quality. I'd rather watch a movie on my own home theatre setup than on the gargantuan screens at the local multiplex. It's just that simple. The only time I consider paying to view a movie in a theatre is either
    • at a local small (under 100 seats) theatre where the projectionist is a friend of mine who actually understands that focus is important and every couple of runs through the projector, it might be a good idea to clean the film,
    • or at a non-local multiplex that has "VIP" theatres (seating 30 patrons who pay a premium for the comfortable clean environment, waitress service and an actual human projectionist watching for errors in focus and sound quality)Varsity VIP


    I know that it makes me an old grump, but you know, in this age of $12++ tickets, the least I deserve is a clean theatre and a film that is not dusty, has been spliced with something other than Red Green's Duct Tape and a projectionist who knows what the "focus" knob is for.

    End Rant.
  90. Sequel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kung Pow 2: Return to the Chicken ? Uh oh...