guys, Kelsey Grammer is playing Dr. Hank McCoy in X3 [SPOILERS ETC]

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

The film will be directed by Brett Ratner (Rush Hour), and will also star Vinnie Jones (Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels, Snatch) as Juggernaut and Maggie Grace (Lost) as Kitty Pride.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 6 June 2005 14:04 (twenty years ago)

I read this in some magazine in the office kitchen like 6 minutes ago.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 6 June 2005 14:05 (twenty years ago)

it's going to be shit, let's face it. ratner is the ultimate hack.

― N_Rq, Monday, 6 June 2005 14:07 (twenty years ago)

Frasier Crane, meet Hank McCoy, Hank McCoy, Frasier Crane

― jocelyn (Jocelyn), Monday, 6 June 2005 14:07 (twenty years ago)

Wasn't there some other guy gonna direct it, that backed out for "personal issues"?

I really hope this doesn't suck, Sideshow Beast is like maybe the most inspired bit of casting of all time.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 6 June 2005 14:11 (twenty years ago)

BRETT RATNER???

― IT'S OVER. GO HOME, FOLKS!, Monday, 6 June 2005 14:12 (twenty years ago)

it was gonna be matthew vaughn of 'layer cake' (hence vinnie fkn jones).

― N_RQ, Monday, 6 June 2005 14:13 (twenty years ago)

this will be terrible.

― kyle (akmonday), Monday, 6 June 2005 18:52 (twenty years ago)

Original director backed out so because it was interfering with him having sex with Claudia Schiffer.

― Huk-L, Monday, 6 June 2005 18:56 (twenty years ago)

Godd..DAMMIT!! Why can't they get this franchise right?! I'm still reeling from that horrible teenage Rogue and Iceman crap. Where the hell is Gambit?! And now Brett Ratner to to direct X-3? This is like that Batman crap all over again.

― kevin says relax (daddy warbuxx), Monday, 6 June 2005 19:36 (twenty years ago)

the first two movies are really good, I think. but this third has disaster all over it. Bryan Singer worked so hard to do the first two right, I'm surprised he bailed on this one.

Is Layer Cake any good? The pedigree (lock stock, snatch) is bad.

― kyle (akmonday), Monday, 6 June 2005 19:39 (twenty years ago)

I liked everything about the first two but the actual stories. Although, the sequel was much better than the first.

― kevin says relax (daddy warbuxx), Monday, 6 June 2005 19:54 (twenty years ago)

Ratner to be replaced in shock change by Joel Schumacher!

I'm sorry, I said that wrong. I meant Michael Bay.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 6 June 2005 19:56 (twenty years ago)

this summer's Michael Bay movie actually looks good tho, in an extremely unoriginal way

― kyle (akmonday), Monday, 6 June 2005 20:23 (twenty years ago)

I'm too tired to repeat my ILC about the subject comments here, so I'll just paste them here wholesale:

I've seen only Rush Hour, but that was pretty good. No one's expecting X-Men 3 to be more than good popcorn entertainment with some allusions to racism/homophobia thrown in for good measure, right? Singer (who was an "intellectual" pick to direct the first two movies) certainly didn't manage to do more with the franchise, so why's everyone so disappointment with this Ratner dude?
Having said that, I'd love to see Joel Schumacher direct this film. He's done some fine queer-themed flicks (anyone seen Flawless?), and it would be cool if he'd expand on the "they may look like us but are different"/"mutants coming out of the closet" themes hinted in X-Men 2.

-- Tuomas (tuomas.alh...) (webmail), June 6th, 2005. (Tuomas) (later)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How would you rate Xmen compared with Daredevil, Tuomas?
-- Andrew Farrell (afarrel...) (webmail), June 6th, 2005. (afarrell) (later)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First of all, Tuomas, you might be one of the only folks in the world that dares pairs the word "Schumacher" with the word "fine" in terms of his filmic ouevre. Also, my kneejerk fanboy instinct when you conflate Rush Hour w/ either X-flick is to find you and spoon your eyes out, which I'll refrain from acting on.
Maybe I'm too close to the source material to really be fair, but both X-flicks (especially the 2nd one) were exemplary popcorn flicks, in terms of bif-bang-powitude, and in terms of doing some of the things that popcorn flicks tend to not do (like, um, offer characters you give a crap about). The X-flicks ably established at least 8 or 9 specific personalities, and even gave small bit-players brief moments on-screen to do their thing. Credit to the screenwriters, for sure (and the source material), but a less-skilled director probably screws the farm animal trying to ably juggle all these folks.

Meanwhile, Rush Hour has two main protagonists that aren't anything more than Hollywood Cop Stereotypes running around doing Hollywood Cop Stereotype things for nearly two hours. Freakin' ICEMAN (a guy that's on screen for maybe 15 minutes total between both X-flicks) has more substance to his character than either of those Rush Hour dipwits. Maybe The Rat can step up when the material's more substantial - I haven't seen any Ratner flicks aside from either Rush Hour - but, knowing what little I know, I don't see that happening.

As for Mr. Joel - given his campy ensemble work on the Batman franchise, I'd rather be subjected to Battlefield Earth II than think about him coming within spitting distance of another funny book franchise.

-- David R. (quoteidio...) (webmail), June 6th, 2005. (popshots75`) (later)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I thought the protagonists of Rush Hour were sympathetic and nicely fleshed out, admittedly within the stereotypical confines of a buddy/action flick. Still, I don't think Rattner can influence the screenplay and the pre-established characters that much, and at least he can do the action bits well.
Am I the only one who actually liked Batman Forever (haven't seen Batman & Robin)? Sure it was campy, but decidedly so. Batman doesn't always have to be dark and brooding - in my book there's room for a less serious interpretations of him. The whole idea of a multi-millionaire playboy dressing up in a tight bat costume to fight crime with the help of various gadgets is innately camp, no? Anyway, whatever you feel about his Batman films, you shouldn't judge Schumacher by them only. His careet is quite uneven, but he has made some good and interesting films.

-- Tuomas (tuomas.alh...) (webmail), June 7th, 2005. (Tuomas) (later)

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 09:04 (twenty years ago)

Ratner directed Red "Better Than Hannibal" Dragon, didn't he?

― Negativa, True Believer (You know you love it when I'm dressed in drag) (Barima), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 09:24 (twenty years ago)

yes he did. but it still wasnt as good as Manhunter!

― latebloomer: Pain Don't Hurt (latebloomer), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 09:26 (twenty years ago)

yeah. 'better than hannibal' isn't very high praise, now. tuomas, i think you're being cynical about the x-men films. i don't think the race/sexuality stuff is ephemeral to them at all.

― N_RQ, Tuesday, 7 June 2005 09:29 (twenty years ago)

'better than hannibal' isn't very high praise

Well, duh! It's still watchable entertainment, now.

i don't think the race/sexuality stuff is ephemeral to them at all.

In theory, maybe. At the end of the day, there's still the bashing of a man in a funny helmet to be done.

― Negativa, True Believer (You know you love it when I'm dressed in drag) (Barima), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 09:36 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, the gay themes are there for a few isolated scenes, like the one in X-Men 2 where the teenage mutant comes out of the closet to his family. That was a good scene though; the mom saying "Is there some way you could not be a mutant anymore?", the kid brother flipping when he hears his brother's "different"; the other mutant making the joke about how it's in the dad's genes... But that's one scene, and in the end of the day it's still an action film. This is why I liked the Spider-Man movies more, in them the action mixed better with the serious themes. And the Spider-Man comics were already more action-oriented than X-Men to begin with.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 09:45 (twenty years ago)

well, yes it is an action film... which treats serious themes. it's not almodovar. thank fucking god. it's allegorical, fantastical, and dramatic situations tend to come down to life or death. i think they're two of the best mainstream films of the decade.

― N_RQ, Tuesday, 7 June 2005 09:51 (twenty years ago)

But my point exactly was that they shouldn't have been so action-oriented in the first place. The X-Men comics were more sci-fi/fantasy than action, and the serious themes were given lots of space there... That's what I expected of the films, not some stupid kung-fu fights.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 09:58 (twenty years ago)

I'll admit though that the sequel was better than the first one, which was rather disappointing.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 09:59 (twenty years ago)

oh, i've never read the comix!! i had this argument with an alan moore fan yesterday re. 'from hell'. i liked the film; she had read the book.

― N_RQ, Tuesday, 7 June 2005 10:05 (twenty years ago)

Tuomas, the X-Men have been in a fight at least once a month for 40 years. How are they not action-oriented?

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 10:17 (twenty years ago)

I like From Hell the film too, though obviously the comic was quite a different thing. It's not that I think the original is always better than the adaptation, the first X-Men flick would've been mediocre even if I hadn't read the comics.

(x-post)

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 10:22 (twenty years ago)

I meant less action-oriented... Sure there were constant fights in the comic, but they were rarely the main appeal of it.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 10:26 (twenty years ago)

Actually, that depends on who's writing. Plus, with Wolverine in the books for 30 years now, the violence is kind of a given!

― Negativa, True Believer (You know you love it when I'm dressed in drag) (Barima), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 12:18 (twenty years ago)

Though I must say, that T is right in a major regard - there's a reason the X-Books get tagged with a big, honking "soap opera" notice/slur.

― Negativa, True Believer (You know you love it when I'm dressed in drag) (Barima), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 12:19 (twenty years ago)

Brett Ratner + Vinnie Jones = suckage beyond belief

― Leon hearts Crazy Frog (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 12:20 (twenty years ago)

considering X2 was written and directed by gay men . . .

― anders, Tuesday, 7 June 2005 13:50 (twenty years ago)

Perhaps it can be saved if all of the xmen wear new costumes like this:

http://www.smh.com.au/text/ffximage/2005/03/20/jackman_narrowweb__200x359.jpg

― Leon hearts Crazy Frog (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 13:55 (twenty years ago)

I remain optimistic that Patrick Stewart as Professor X, Ian McKellen as Magneto, Famke Jannsen as Jean Grey/Phoenix and Huge Ackman as Wolverine will continue to be totally fucking awesome casting choices. The rest of the movie can be Jar Jar Binks making out with Winona Rider in a tub full of sauteed onions for all I care.

― TOMBOT, Tuesday, 7 June 2005 13:56 (twenty years ago)

We like the way you think, TOMBOT. Fly out to Hollywood to meet with us in re: your Winona idea.

― Hollywood Execs (Haikunym), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 14:03 (twenty years ago)

Nora Ephron to TOMBOT meeting!

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 14:07 (twenty years ago)

brett ratner is a WAY better director than bryan singer!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:08 (twenty years ago)

i mean he makes movies that shoulld be totally terrible yet somehow end up being bizarrely, immensely watchable (see: "the family man"), while singer makes movies that should be totally great yet end up sucking way more than they should (see both x-men movies).

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:10 (twenty years ago)

you're trippin', dude.

― miccio (miccio), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:19 (twenty years ago)

bizarrely, immensely watchable (see: "the family man")

this is like, asylumworthy

― miccio (miccio), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:20 (twenty years ago)

(to.the.sounds @ of.muslimgauze)

You seem bitter, sir.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:21 (twenty years ago)

Which is more watchable, The Family Man or Revenge of the Sith?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:22 (twenty years ago)

you gotta admit the x-men movies are much worse in practice than they are in theory!

(xp: family man! revenge of the sith don't got tea leoni in the shower yo! sorry but i said it!)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:24 (twenty years ago)

Oh, s1ocki.

― Leon C. (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:24 (twenty years ago)

The Achilles heel has been found.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:26 (twenty years ago)

seriously, i don't see how bryan singer is so much better than ratner. both x-movies are total studies in frustration! i mean they have really nice stuff in them, sure, but... i'll take fun sizzle over boring steak in a hollywood event movie any day!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:28 (twenty years ago)

I kinda agree with Slocki, especially regarding the first X-film.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:29 (twenty years ago)

Whoops, X-post. In my opinion the movies should rather have more meat and less candy. But if you're making action films, at least you can do thst honestly and with a soul (like with Rush Hour).

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:31 (twenty years ago)

!!!!

― Leon C. (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:32 (twenty years ago)

Okay, reading this thread is becoming the equivalent of falling down the rabbit hole.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:33 (twenty years ago)

tuomas is my man!

by steak i mean, "interesting gay subtext!"

by sizzle i mean, "x-men in action doing their stuff!"

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:33 (twenty years ago)

Skipping 648 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

Ratner is very good at doing easily watchable, disposable fun movies. I could watch either "Rush Hour" movie practically at any time,

Oh Dan, you hurt me. I would like the second Rush Hour more if it instead of showing cars mowing down corrugated shacks and hapless Cubans we saw cars mowing down humans, and Magneto hovering in the sky, cackling.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Monday, 5 June 2006 12:25 (nineteen years ago)

wow definitely feeling the b-movie vibe slocki alluded to, aside from a scene or two (and the sub-AH-noldisms) the dialogue is boring and boilerplate and the plot is needlessly silly and has but the barest, crudest grasp of any of the psuedo-serious issues it brings up. Ratner doesn't seem to know the difference between the speeches that cut the meat of the story and the speeches that are supposed to get you from point A to point B, he handles the former ok but gives equal time to the latter, making the movie feel needlessly drawn out given its length. Dumb characters with really dumb, underwhelming machinations(the central casting punk cannon fodder, magneto's...plan? how does it occur to you to reroute a fucking bridge and not maybe use it as a weapon and be done with it?) might seem par for the course for anyone still repping the 'just a comic book movie' angle but it's an insult to the intelligence of everyone else, especially coming on the heels of a smart, well-built entry from the same goddamn franchise. I never dug the dark phoenix saga, truth be told(too young for it maybe? I never got the love) but what I remember of it was better than...this. This was hackwork. Just do a death right, dude. You got three chances, even.
Ok anyway comic book nerd says it was kind of entertaining. Kelsey Grammer was the Beast, Patrick Stewart got to shed the benevolence for a minute, which threatened to become interesting. LOLZ at the gravestones! At least it kept me waiting for something(I hate when disappointment sets in before the movie is over and it didn't, I'll give them that)

― tremendoid (tremendoid), Monday, 5 June 2006 12:45 (nineteen years ago)

I would like the second Rush Hour more if it instead of showing cars mowing down corrugated shacks and hapless Cubans we saw cars mowing down humans, and Magneto hovering in the sky, cackling.

Well, duhhhhh.

― Allyzay Rofflesbot (allyzay), Monday, 5 June 2006 13:01 (nineteen years ago)

Scientists now believe that some Cubans maybe be a type of human!

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 5 June 2006 13:06 (nineteen years ago)

Rush Hour 2 is actually not the same film as Bad Boys 2, Alfred. Come on, what kind of bigot do you have to be to not tell the difference between Jackie Lawrence and Chris Smith?

― TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Monday, 5 June 2006 13:09 (nineteen years ago)

Oh my bad, I meant Will Tucker. Or Kevin Kline. Whatever.

― TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Monday, 5 June 2006 13:09 (nineteen years ago)

I would've enjoyed Henry V a lot more if instead of showing a giant spider-mech threatening to kill the president we saw a giant spider-mech mowing down Laertes, and Magneto hovering in the sky, being a big queer.

― TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Monday, 5 June 2006 13:14 (nineteen years ago)

WELL DUHHHH

― Allyzay Rofflesbot (allyzay), Monday, 5 June 2006 13:19 (nineteen years ago)

I love this, I don't even have to give Alfred shit because others are doing it for me.

― Dan (Hahaha) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 June 2006 13:21 (nineteen years ago)

(Do I want to get into the "did you not remember that the hapless Cubans were actually fronting/participating in a massively corrupt cocaine smuggling ring in your commendably faux-liberal determination to feel sorry for imaginary brown people?" thing or not?)

― Dan (Avoiding Work) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 June 2006 13:23 (nineteen years ago)

He meant cigars. Not people.

― Allyzay Rofflesbot (allyzay), Monday, 5 June 2006 13:32 (nineteen years ago)

Or indeed mutants, not people. Cos they get mown down in the last stand loads.

Interesting talk on future sequels. Clearly Wolverine is easy money (though careful on how they do it.) Talk about the Kids From X-Men getting a film (as they are cheap), and now Doug Liman talking about Emma Frost. Clearly the franchise is a mint, and a mint which Sony consistently underestimate too. Now may well be the point when they overestimate and blow the whole joint up.

Get interesting directors again though plz. Thx.

― Pete (Pete), Monday, 5 June 2006 13:43 (nineteen years ago)

Rush Hour 2 is actually not the same film as Bad Boys 2, Alfred. Come on, what kind of bigot do you have to be to not tell the difference between Jackie Lawrence and Chris Smith

Haha. Both movies have merged in my mind. I'll just call it Bad Hours, which comes close to describing what watching Bad Boys 2 was like.

I don't give a damn where they were from (hell, my parents are Cuban), it just wasn't much fun; that's why it would have been a much better film had Will Smith been given some mutant power that didn't involve making wise cracks smugly. (And no liberal sensibilities were invoked since I ain't liberal!)

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Monday, 5 June 2006 13:58 (nineteen years ago)

I don't give a damn where they were from (hell, my parents are Cuban), it just wasn't much fun

Er, yes it was!

― Dan (Best Onscreen Usage Of An H2) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:05 (nineteen years ago)

Not AS MUCH fun as the alternate scenario though, you must admit.

― Allyzay Rofflesbot (allyzay), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:12 (nineteen years ago)

Best Onscreen Usage Of An H2

Ha! This I will concede.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:13 (nineteen years ago)

Not AS MUCH fun as the alternate scenario though, you must admit.

Well yeah.

― Dan (My Point Was More "I Like Stupid Action Films" Than Anything Else) Perry (D, Monday, 5 June 2006 14:14 (nineteen years ago)

Rupert Murdoch made this movie, not goddamn Sony.
Magneto & Wolverine look to be confirmed spinoffs, cf. IMDb.
I would really like to see a Rogue/Kitty/Iceman/Colossus movie, possibly involving college and hijinx.

― TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:18 (nineteen years ago)

X-Jinx!

― Dan (How Do I Shot Me) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:20 (nineteen years ago)

They could use Colossus just as much as they did in this movie, helping them all move in. He TOTALLY carried that tv!

― kingfish doesn't live here anymore (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:20 (nineteen years ago)

Marvel Production Company's page on IMDb reveals a bit of fun in the works. THOR. and a Hulk sequel.
http://www.imdb.com/company/co0113567/

― TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:21 (nineteen years ago)

oh god they've always fucked up thor

― tremendoid (tremendoid), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:24 (nineteen years ago)

If there's one thing the world has been demanding, it's an ANT-MAN MOVIE.

― Dan (WTF) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:26 (nineteen years ago)

the ghost rider preview looks especially ridiculous

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:26 (nineteen years ago)

Ridiculously awesome, yes.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:42 (nineteen years ago)

I'm just sayin, Patrick Warburton would revive the Punisher "franchise"

― tremendoid (tremendoid), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:45 (nineteen years ago)

BROTHER VOODOO

STARRING ICE CUBE

DIRECTED BY JOSEPH KHAN

― David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:51 (nineteen years ago)

I'm totally torn on Ghost Rider

1) Nicholas Cage :(
2) Nicholas Cage will be replaced by a CGI flame skeletor on a bike for 88% of the film :D

― Allyzay Rofflesbot (allyzay), Monday, 5 June 2006 14:55 (nineteen years ago)

Just wait for the DVD and skip through the Cage bits.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 5 June 2006 15:06 (nineteen years ago)

gahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh i meant to put that on the right

― Courtney Gidts (ex machina), Monday, 5 June 2006 15:16 (nineteen years ago)

JON YOU ARE TOTALLY FAILING HTML RECENTLY.

― Allyzay Rofflesbot (allyzay), Monday, 5 June 2006 15:17 (nineteen years ago)

goddammit jon right-align that shit

― kingfish doesn't live here anymore (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 5 June 2006 15:19 (nineteen years ago)

O RLY

― Courtney Gidts (ex machina), Monday, 5 June 2006 15:19 (nineteen years ago)

― Courtney Gidts (ex machina), Monday, 5 June 2006 15:21 (nineteen years ago)

YOU ARE FAILING AT LIFE

― David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 5 June 2006 15:22 (nineteen years ago)

YA RLY

― Dan (My Spirit Lives On In Our Youth) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 June 2006 15:22 (nineteen years ago)

Unless you were not aware Dan: the Ant-Man movie is in the works
Directed by Edgar Wright (Shaun Of The Dead) and written by Joe from Adam and Joe.

― Pete (Pete), Monday, 5 June 2006 15:22 (nineteen years ago)

You'll believe a man can boss around picnic bugs!

― Keywords: revenge, knife, granddaughter, demonic-possession, rock-star, eel (Aus, Monday, 5 June 2006 15:52 (nineteen years ago)

Er, Pete, did you not look at TOMBOT's IMDB link...?

― Dan (I'm Guessing No) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 June 2006 16:27 (nineteen years ago)

SOMEONE GET THIS NICHOLAS CAGE OFF OF MY INTERNETS

― Allyzay Rofflesbot (allyzay), Monday, 5 June 2006 16:33 (nineteen years ago)

Yes, but i thought it needed to be emphasised even more because it is such a great id-

OK. NO.
But as you know anything I can do to get Edgar Wright or Simon (Chloe) Pegg into a thread I will, for the feeble reason that they might be down the pub tonight.

I feel small and worthless. A bit like Ant Man! (The Wasp better make the cut too).

Come on Ally, surely a film where Nicholas Cage's face burns off appeals to you?

― Pete (Pete), Monday, 5 June 2006 16:35 (nineteen years ago)

Definitely, that is the main appeal of the movie, flaming burnt-face Nick Cage. Non-burning, with-a-face Nick Cage isn't a highlight of the prospect, though. :(

― Allyzay Rofflesbot (allyzay), Monday, 5 June 2006 16:37 (nineteen years ago)

http://garnet.acns.fsu.edu/~sih03/listology/ca.jpg

― Courtney Gidts (ex machina), Monday, 5 June 2006 16:39 (nineteen years ago)

OMG

― Dan (How Did I Miss This???) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 June 2006 16:41 (nineteen years ago)

I think I can answer that.

"This was originally intended for a direct-to-video release, but later there was plans for a small release to theaters. However those plans were scrapped, and the movie's fate became unknown, until it was later announced as a Sci Fi Channel original movie for Spring 2005. The DVD and VHS became available in Summer 2005."

It was buried like a damn cat-turd is how you missed it.

― Keywords: revenge, knife, granddaughter, demonic-possession, rock-star, eel (Aus, Monday, 5 June 2006 16:43 (nineteen years ago)

If it had been GIANT SIZED MAN THING it would have hit the cinemas.

― Pete (Pete), Monday, 5 June 2006 17:09 (nineteen years ago)

No Barbeau, no credibility.

― David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 5 June 2006 17:33 (nineteen years ago)

six years pass...

i finally watched this, on tv, and it was bad. peace

― Hamburger Hitler (Hungry4Ass), Wednesday, 13 June 2012 23:51 (thirteen years ago)

Wow there was a Man-Thing movie? AND it had actors portraying Steve Gerber, Mike Ploog & Val Mayerick?

― WARS OF ARMAGEDDON (Karaoke Version) (Sparkle Motion), Thursday, 14 June 2012 00:24 (thirteen years ago)

ten months pass...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvHW1oIKUxI&feature=youtu.be&t=36s

― polyphonic, Monday, 15 April 2013 17:57 (twelve years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.