Sorry, this movie sucks

Amateur movie with Big budget

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

Good movie. I've watched it since it came out, when I was 3. I think the movie is better than the tv series.

Based on the animated TV-series of the same name, the origins of how Inspector Gadget came to be is depicted in this live-action film as he befriends the scientist who created him and goes after the bad guy, Sanford Scolex, who was responsible for his unfortunate accident.It's hard not to compare a film with something it was based off of, like a remake compared to an original or a movie compared to a TV-series. But, even as a stand-alone film, this movie was awful.There were no suspense or captivating moments in this movie, not even during the scenes where John Brown (Matthew Broderick) first realized he became a bionic being, nor during any of the investigative scenes. There were too many corny, childish and overzealous-acting characters like the excruciatingly annoying mayor and Scolex's dumb-founded minions. Even Scolex (Rupert Everett) himself is not menacing or evil-bent, but a vain, smug, and a clown of a villain.Inspector Gadget wasn't portrayed as much of a hero, but a clueless, bumbling idiot who couldn't even control his gadgets (at least in the cartoon, the inspector had this always-on-a-mission mentality and had control over his gadgets most of the time). Penny and Chief Quimby didn't contribute to the plot at all (and Quimby despises Inspector Gadget as opposed to the cartoon).The script was weak and the plot was rushed-through - it's just basically Gadget trying to capture Scolex (shouldn't he be called Dr. Claw at least?), with the Gadget Mobile doing most of the work. There were no intriguing subplots, no character development and no character chemistry. The special effects were OK to say the most, but this movie bombed big time. A very lame and unfunny movie which I wouldn't even recommend to children.Grade F

easy comedy, adaptation of cartoons but very far by original, a too long joke. so, nothing special. the only problem is the ambition to be nice. because too many scenes are unrealistic at whole, absurd and fake. because the humor is to easy to define it as comedy. but, sure, for fun, only for fun without complications , it is a not bad choice.the second problem is the cast. Rupert Everett and Matthew Broderick are not the ideal option for a film about...nothing. so, only the conscience of chaotic work by director, the money and the need to give few drops of sense are excuses for this version. not the last,it remains the disappointment than it could be a decent movie. for entire family. but , maybe, it was not the team intention.

When you want to see a horrid bastardization of a TV series, you should look no further than Inspector Gadget. It's so bad and disheartening to its fanbase that I can't recall the last time I've seen a children's film so wretched and unpleasant. It's the kind of picture that is so flamboyantly bad that, after a while, you begin to cringe at the material and begin to drum up ideas on how you could've repaired its broken nature and saved thousands of people from enduring such unspeakable madness.For starters, let's get this plot out of the way. Matthew Broderick is John Brown, a rent-a-cop security guard who patrols outside the building where two scientists, Brenda (Joely Fisher) and her father (René Auberjonois) are working to construct artificial limbs than can be operated through mind control. The possibilities of such technology catch the attention of Sandford Scolex (also known as "Dr. Claw" and played by Rupert Everett), who steals the functioning limb with plans to replicate it and use it to evil's advantage. Brown, who gets in a horrific car accident while trying to catch Claw, has irreparable tissue damage that can only be fixed by having alternate, technological gizmos put into his body effectively making him "Inspector Gadget." It's now up to him and his sly daughter Penny (a young Michele Trachtenberg) to stop him, allow justice to prevail, etc.The first problem is the pacing itself; the film moves so fast and so quickly that it could be the direct blame for young children with lower attention spans. The action is manic, the overall material choppy and inconsistent, and with situations happening too abruptly to be taken seriously and ending too quickly with no payoff. Poor Broderick is at the center of this absolute madness, thrown into so many messy, incoherent instances with no rhyme or reason, I can see him going home from the set, everyday, a disgruntled mess that would slave over a bottle of hard liquor.The second major issue here is the writing, which is worst I've seen in a children's film in a while. For once, it's not for its immaturity, as most films targeted at the youth demographic succeed in, but just for the stench of desperation this film has no problem letting loose. It tries every possible thing, even resorting to disjointed, second-long credit cookies at the end of the picture trying to leave the audience giggling at something. I laughed not a single time during the course of this film; desperation is almost never funny and that alone should be the encompassing message of Inspector Gadget.There's a term I use when describing unsubstantial movie affairs for children and that term is "fast food filmmaking." It's films that seem to only exist as a cash-grab for a kids-movie-deprived season, often raking in cash from parents who are looking for a quick little babysitter for their youngsters, and in return, they get a film that does nothing but that. Instead of giving them lovable characters, entertaining and memorable fun, and a keenly wrapped moral, they are given nothing but uncreative, unfunny drudgery.This is a painful exercise to say the least. The imagination that could've spawned a wonderful adaptation of Inspector Gadget is halted by desperately unfunny writing, bland acting, awkward and frantic pacing, and to add one more nail into one more coffin, the transfer from animation to live-action. With the limited the knowledge of the Inspector Gadget TV series that I have, I can say the charm seemed to stem from the limitless possibilities that could be done thanks to the likes of 2D animation. Nudging that eclectic and visually-visceral world into the live-action world simply doesn't translate well. The dizzying sound effects, exhausting use of computer-generated gags, and tiresome slapstick instances never amount to anything aside from frustration and true tedium. With that in mind, and the fact that they completely skewed the villain of the series and provided everything with a shamelessly half-baked treatment goes to show that this particular cinematic gadget needs more than a few tweaks; it needs reprogramming.Starring: Matthew Broderick, Rupert Everett, Joely Fisher, Michelle Trachtenberg, Dabney Coleman, and D. L. Hughley. Directed by: Dave Kellogg.