About LS.n


 
 

Review: Mystery Men
by Kerry Douglas Dye

published 8/2/99

REVIEWS HOME



Kerry Douglas Dye is LeisureSuit.net's Manhattan-based Senior Editor.



MOST RECENT YAK ABOUT THIS ARTICLE:

Subj: for the record
Guess i'll have to see the movie ("Mystery Men") after all. Who knows? It may be soooo bad, it will become a classic. Sort of like "Ishtar."
Keep up the good work!

-- Don
Sep 7, 1999 at 1:26PM

Read more or post your own





Be cool like us!
Are you getting our weekly update?





It's GOOD to share!
E-mail this article to a buddy

All those critics who jumped to declare Wild Wild West this year's Hudson Hawk jumped to soon. The last word in brainless, overpriced super-bombs belongs to Mystery Men, a staggeringly disappointing bore featuring an achingly talented cadre of actors.

Recipe for a bad movie: take some of the most exciting comedic talents working today, cook up a passably witty script, then, oh, I don't know . . . piss in it or something. You couldn't end up with a worse result than Mystery Men. The first-time director, Kinka Usher, like many first time directors who came from the world of commercials or music videos (David Fincher and Michael Bay are two other fine examples) hasn't a clue how to shoot a feature film. Usher's camera has no idea where to position itself, the editing feels like schlepping camping gear through a crowded disco, and ninety percent of the shots use a wide wide angle lens, which is particularly annoying in the many close-ups, often with characters talking pointlessly into the camera (a la Jonathon Demme, by way of some gangsta rap video). Making this all the worse is that many of the characters have grotesque facial features. And many of the characters have annoying speech impediments or accents, which makes this a movie that's as difficult to listen to as it is to watch.

The premise is that the superhero of Champion City, which is a Blade Runner-ish Batman-ish futuristic-feeling parallel universe in the modern day (with contemporary product plugs), has cleaned up so much crime that he doesn't have much to do and is losing his cushy corporate endorsements. His name is Captain Amazing (played by Greg Kinnear), and in order to provide himself a raison d'être, he orchestrates the release of supervillain Casanova Frankenstein (Geoffrey Rush) from a mental hospital.

Frankenstein quickly captures Captain Amazing, and three wannabe superheroes, The Shoveler (William H. Macy), Mr. Furious (Ben Stiller), and The Blue Raja (Hank Azaria) try to recruit some fellow superheroes to help rescue him. They end up with The Invisible Boy (Kel Mitchell), The Bowler (Janeane Garofalo) and The Spleen (Paul Reubens), whose talent is farting. Eventually they are assisted by The Sphinx (Wes Studi) who teaches them how to be class superheroes and work as a team. The scenes where he trains them are the best in the film, and provide a few laughs.

In fact, many scenes where these fantastic talents are allowed to interact and trade barbs are funny enough. But those scenes are few and far between, and the bulk of the film is just a lot of pointless mayhem with humor supplied by surprise doses of Yiddish (and some Hebrew letters, but don't blink), and fart jokes. There's also a pointless romantic subplot. Some audiences may be charmed by the charisma of the leads, but to them I ask: can you imagine, with all this great talent, what could (and should) have been?

There are a few amusing spoofs of the conventions of the superhero genre (The Shoveler is convinced that Captain Amazing can't be the alter ego of billionaire Lance Hunt because one man wears glasses and the other doesn't), but why would a film seeking to satirize chaotic, over-produced superhero films be so chaotic and over-produced itself? Mystery Men is as bad as the worst Batman films, and being as bad as Joel Schumacher is something of an accomplishment.

The most distressing thing about Mystery Men is how boring the film is. It has virtually no momentum. As disheartening as big-budget Hollywood product like Wild Wild West is, at least those filmmakers know how to make it move. I'm not sure which is worse: soulless professionalism or mindless incompetence.

But I do know they haven't invented the superhero strong enough to make me sit through Mystery Men again. It's the year's biggest disappointment.


Your name:

Subject:


Comments:

Forward a copy of this yak to the LS.n Editors

Forward a copy of this yak to this article's author

If you want to get an e-mail if someone responds to your yak, give us your address below. It won't be made public.

THE YAK SHACK


Name: Don
Subject: for the record
-- Sep 7, 1999 at 1:26PM
Guess i'll have to see the movie ("Mystery Men") after all. Who knows? It may be soooo bad, it will become a classic. Sort of like "Ishtar."
Keep up the good work!

Name: Kerry Douglas Dye Responds
Subject: Re: Hebrew letters
-- Sep 7, 1999 at 12:05PM
> Just for the record,
> Kerry, Yiddish is
> written with Hebrew
> letters. Strange, but
> true.

I have no idea why you're telling me this, but still I'd reckon it depends on who's doing the writing, dontcha think?

Anyway, if you're referring to my line about "humor supplied by surprise doses of Yiddish (and some Hebrew letters . . .)", I was referring to spoken Yiddish and written Hebrew.

So if you're like, correcting me or something, there's no need.

Name: Don Wolochow
Subject: Hebrew letters
-- Sep 7, 1999 at 5:00AM
Just for the record, Kerry, Yiddish is written with Hebrew letters. Strange, but true.

dawolochow@aol.com

Name: Kerry Douglas Dye Responds
Subject: Re: Mystery Men
-- Aug 9, 1999 at 12:06PM
Sorry, sport, but you've got me wrong. Now that the movie's already flopped at the boxoffice, I'm comfortable saying I'm glad you enjoyed it, but . . .

Some of the few things I liked were the eye-pokes at genre conventions. I'm not as ignorant of them as you may think. My review acknowledges that the script is "witty". My complaint, as you read, is that the film is ugly, badly shot, hard to listen to, and torturously paced.

The same script and actors with a capable director may have turned out . . . well, somewhat better, anyway.

I haven't read any Bob Burden, but maybe preserving his "bulldada" was yet another mistake. There's a thin line between bulldada and bullshit . . . a superhero who farts? That's the sort of thing my 8-year-old cousin would have come up with. Maybe it's the point that a superhero who throws forks is stupid, but after that initial "ha! That's pretty stupid!" it doesn't make it any more fun to watch.

But hell, hardly anyone went to see it this weekend. The movie is this summer's Avengers. The audience has spoken, and hopefully, this time around, the studios will listen.

Name: Kenneth Huey
Subject: Mystery Men
-- Aug 9, 1999 at 5:09AM
Maybe MYSTERY MEN is too much of an in-joke for K.D.Dye--although my non-fan friends enjoyed it, much of its humor depends on a deep familiarity with the conventions of superhero comics. Moreover, it tries to preserve the deadpan bulldada of Burden's work, which is often funny precisely because it intentionally flubs genre conventions, and their simple but effective dramatic devices. I was prepared for something lame, and came away surprisingly pleased.


This page is best viewed with the latest version of the Netscape or Microsoft Internet Explorer browser.

© Copyright 1998-2001 LeisureSuit Media, LLC, All Rights Reserved.
Some content is copyrighted by the author and is used with permission. No portion of this page or its content may be reproduced, in part or in whole, electronically, in print, or in any other form or by any other means, without the written consent of the LeisureSuit.net editors. Contact us at webmaster@leisuresuit.net.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]