Around the same time… Lots of people hated Mystery Men too.
Those people are incorrect.
10 Likes
Two words: Casanova Frankenstein! 
And I just love the idea of a lot of people with minor powers just hanging around in the general population. Why would everyone get something really useful for fighting crime?
9 Likes
I enjoyed Mars Attacks and Mystery Men for the same reason: they are equal parts homage and parody. Both are chuckle worthy
6 Likes
I enjoyed them both as well. Good solid entertainment for me!
5 Likes
I fracking love Mystery Men.
Based on the concept it could have really sucked, but it’s just a fun watch.
7 Likes
The concept- or rather the comic book it’s based on- is amazing.
Actually, the movie is nowhere near as good.
But I still love the movie.
6 Likes
I think Mystery Men had the advantage of being tonally consistent, in that it was focused mainly on the concept of B-level superheroes throughout. On the other hand, Mars Attacks wasn’t only a parody/homage of B-movie science fiction movies, but also science fiction major motion pictures. There just wasn’t as direct line between Blade and Mystery Men as there was between Independence Day and Mars Attacks.
9I’m legitimately jealous of everyone that gets to watch Mars Attacks without the Independence Day parallels popping right into your head.)
4 Likes
As a twelve year old who was one the six or seven total people who saw it in theaters, I loved Mystery Men, and today I still can readily enjoy it. I think it was just a bit ahead of its time. I can imagine that, if it had come out after the first X-Men movie instead of a year before, it could’ve been quite the hit.
To this day I can’t decide if William H. Macy is deadpanning like that in Mystery Men because it was a deliberate creative choice ala Ed Asner as Cosgrove in Freakazoid!, or if it was a case of him really not being happy to be doing the project so he’s just honestly not even trying, ala Graham Greene in Atlantic Rim. Either way, I love it, it makes the movie so much funnier than if he ever emoted.
6 Likes
William H. Macy strikes me as the sort of guy who will put in the effort no matter what the project.
Edit: That said, from the IMDB: “According to Hank Azaria, the cast argued constantly with each other over the comedic tone of the film.” That could be the issue.
3 Likes
Mars Attacks is definitely a high budget B movie, I can readily agree with that. I have a hard time figuring out where I land with that one, it’s basically achieving what it’s setting out to do, yet like other Tim Burton outings I find it’s all aesthetics and as a result not satisfying as a movie to me. Most of the Burton movies I’m familiar with feel like cotton candy being passed off as a steak dinner. They can be interesting in the moment yet there’s always something ultimately dissatisfying about them for me in a way that I can never really manage to articulate.
2 Likes
I will always defend most of his early ones- Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure, Beetlejuice, Batman, Edward Scissorhands and Ed Wood. (I was not a fan of Batman Returns.)
Others have risen to the level of “I don’t regret watching that” to me at best.
Also, his original animated short Vincent is very good.
4 Likes
It was soulless. Nothing felt sincere. It was a rehash absent anything new to say. Ed Wood was deluded but he had heart. This is covering an old song and forgetting the appeal. I watch films more than once. This is a one and done. I have no reason to return to it. None whatsoever. Independence Day (1996) at least had people I care about. This? Check please.
1 Like
Maybe they are. Maybe they aren’t. Treasure what you treasure Squid. The movie is a cult film and it hasn’t risen past that. It works for half the audience. I’m not sure that’s changed. Comedy is so subjective. And this is where it lives and dies.
Homage and parody? Yes. Tangible feeling or connection to any of it? That’s the question. I as an audience want more than curiosity. I want to care. The great movies make you.care. Even the good ones step past your defenses. These two? Stay projects or social experiments. You run into a novelty that enthralls some not others. Most movies are the same. Cult Films push it more. Accessibility matters. Not to your enjoyment. But it limits others. It’s why they’re cult films.
I take it Mystery Men didn’t do it for you?
3 Likes
Some people think it’s dead as disco.
9 Likes
Someone has their grumpy pants on. 
5 Likes
May you love anything as much as Tony P loves Disco.
7 Likes
Well obviously. It commands a following I respect that. For some, it is utterly awesome. The unique clash of elements and casting stand out. There are instants where it shines. What stops me is the continuum. Story, character, arc, fluidity of scenes, writing, direction. Consistency in other words. Many of these Cult Films are like Stand-Up. A number of people love the shtick or routine. An aspect of the movie that cracks them up. A film is a current of countless things that compile into one. Even good entertainment coalesces into a collection of feelings and impressions and not one emotion. Anything that is one trick repeated absent contrast or relief grows old. Particularly if novelty is your biggest sell.
Movies saved my life. The symphony of what’s possible is what I fell in love with. One instrument or one section of the orchestra seldom works as a whole. Variety, a beating involvement in events, an actual purpose, and depth even in popcorn separates the good and less. We each prize varying things and that alters the math for each of us. For me, the movies of the 50s taught me plausibility, captivation, and flow. A film that adheres to one of these or less flirts with going through the motions. We as MSTies like work most won’t. We like it because it tries and fails. It doesn’t know it’s bad. Mars Attacks (1996)? Mystery Men (1999)? These films are celebrated by a certain crowd. To another they could be a MST experiment. Their weirdness and draw can’t conceal style without substance or failure masquerading as something else.
The premise might be cool, a casting choice or two memorable, a scene or two unforgettable, but is it more than those things? Or less? The surface is one factor. What’s beneath it? When I discover nothing deep down? That’s when I walk away. Not everything is Shakespeare. Yet more under the skin is what most of us want. Thanks.
2 Likes
I don’t think any of us love anything as much as either Tony loves Disco.
7 Likes