 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||
| Austin
Powers in Goldmember
Directed By: Jay
Roach Plot
Summary - Review 1 - Review
2 - CURRENT REVIEWS
|
|
| It's been three years since Austin Powers, that swinging international man of mystery, has faced his arch-nemesis, Dr. Evil. But after Dr. Evil and his accomplice Mini Me escape from a maximum-security prison, Austin is called to action once more in this third installment of the highly successful "Austin Powers" movie franchise. Teaming up with the mysterious Goldmember, Dr. Evil hatches a time-traveling scheme to take over the world, one that involves the kidnapping of Nigel Powers, Austin's beloved father and England's most renowned spy. As he chases the villains through time, Austin visits 1975 and joins forces with his old flame, Foxxy Cleopatra, a streetwbse and stylish detective. Together Austin and Foxxy must find a way to save Nigel and stop Dr. Evil and Goldmember from their mischievous mayhem. [TRAILER] Honestly, who cannot like an "Austin Powers" film? They are fun, goofy rides, made with the express purpose of entertaining. They want to make you smile, and more often than not accomplish their mission. Even critics like Roger Ebert, while admitting the third Powers film, "Goldmember," is quite dumb, admits that it made him snicker. Why then downgrade it for its lack of intelligence? I understand the argument that some critics would offer. Some films, like "Not Another Teen Movie" or "Scary Movie" are funny in an idiotic kind of way. We are not laughing with the film, at well- crafted jokes, but often at bodily fluids and offensive language. But that is not what occurs with the majority of "Austin Powers." It is somewhat dumb, occasionally resorting to cheap potty humor, but more often than not constructs a scene, plays out a skit, and earns its laughs. That's exactly what Mel Brooks did with "Spaceballs" and "Blazing Saddles," that's what made "Dumb and Dumber" an all-out laugh riot. Yet people look at "Austin Powers" a little differently. Critics seem to thumb their noses at it. Why? Mike Meyers, now playing four characters, merely does what Brooks always managed to accomplish, hitting the audience over the head until we crack a smile. I vividly remember one scene of a Brooks film, "Silent Movie." In it, the main characters are dressed as medieval knights and attempt to sit down to have lunch at a cafeteria. The armor of their suits, however, makes it impossible for them to sit, and they flounder around for the next two minutes, falling this way and that. At first I rolled my eyes, but Brooks made it work. I could almost feel him behind the camera, saying, "I will MAKE you laugh!" as he pushed the scene to a ludicrously humorous extent. That, in a nutshell, is "Austin Powers: Goldmember." It has a few new jokes, many others stolen from earlier in the franchise, but Meyers has the ability to make you laugh against your better judgement. This is a funny, funny film and when any film makes me laugh to such a degree, it deserves praise. For those concerned with the "plot," it is a loosely-told story about Dr. Evil (Meyers), who has returned with Mini-Me (Verne Troyer) to take over the world. Austin Powers (Meyers) and his father (Michael Caine) team up to stop them. Yep, pretty much the same plot as every other "Austin Powers" film. "Goldmember," to its credit does have a few surprises up its sleeves. The opening title sequence is a hilarious spoof of recent action films, filled with enough cameos to impress even the most occasional visitors to a movie theater. Meyers adds the Dutch Goldmember to his long list of "Goldmember" personalities. Caine, as Austin's father, has a few beautiful lines. My inner critic notices the movie's shortcomings. Some of the gags are a little too familiar, some of the skits a little too disconnected from the remainder of the film. But, honestly, who cares? It's not a mosaic of intellectual repartee, but did anyone think it would be? It comes down to this: "Austin Powers: Goldmember" is sure to please. It is funny, sometimes funnier than I was expecting, and deserves better than it's receiving from many of the nation's critics. Comedies operate under different rules than drama. As a comedy, "Austin Powers" delivers the goods. If you go back to criticize "Monty Python and the Holy Grail," you'll find a treasure trove of material to support your case. But "Grail," just like "Goldmember" made me laugh my heart out. Given that, how can I call either a failure?  Check out Reviews, Commentary, and More at Zertinet.com |
LINKS
TO REVIEWS |
| [DAVE'S SECTION] | |
| Movies
@ Zertinet | Oscars @ Zertinet
| Main Site Best Viewed
at 800 X 600 or greater |
|
