Good commentary, if a little drunker than usual.

I was too old for the cartoon show or the toys, so the movie was of no interest. I found it to be kind of fun, but Teague got it when he said that the movie's main problem is that the stakes are not well defined. Without a good understanding of who wants what and why, the movie really is just a circus, as Trey said.

However, I'm guessing hardly anyone involved imagined that they could make a genuinely interesting story out of cartoon toy car robots. I think people forget how Batman started in 1940; it was way closer to the TV show than to The Dark Knight.

I think it takes a long time and a couple of really creative, genre-loving story-tellers (like Frank Miller) to demonstrate how a silly genre character actually has something interesting to reveal about the human condition. Once someone has done that (and maybe the kids who first embraced the character have grown up to make movies), then you can have your Dark Knight.

And if you try to skip the step of having it embraced by kids who grow up to appreciate a more mature version, I think you get Underworld and Blade, hollow and overly serious story-telling.

I live in South Bend, where I'm a traveling corporate training consultant.

I didn't mean to take anyone to school or anything, but Gregory asked for specifics. It was fascinating to listen as you first played along with the film makers' game (these aren't humans but they are totally equal to humans) and then tore it apart (maybe they're caste-bound creatures; we don't know). You'll notice that in my comments, I was always playing along with the film makers, but I recognize that it's perfectly valid not to.

A particularly good commentary, guys. I agree with nearly all your points about the film's greatness and weaknesses. However, I find myself in stark disagreement on your broader political positions.

By the end, you very nearly conclude that apartheid is not a bad way of dealing with people you can't get along with. Good luck on the coin flip that puts you in the oppressor tribe vs the oppressed tribe.

Thruout history, the primary reason two groups who cohabitate don't get along is that one of them conquered the other and social stigmas of race or religion keep them from integrating. That's the source of the problem in Israel and was the source of the problem in South Africa, Northern Ireland, and the New World.... That puts the blame on the oppressors. You don't get a pass just by saying, "Well that was kind of a long time ago that we conquered you, stole your land, and forced you into ghettos. Why can't you be civil and stop setting off bombs? This is why we still actively discriminate against you, you know."

And apartheid wasn't established in South Africa until the 1950s, just when the entire rest of the world had collectively come to the realization that we all needed to try to enfranchise disenfranchised groups. So, yes, South Africa was just like America... only 300 years later when they should have known better.

However, for the record, I'm against trying to negotiate with komodo dragons. Those lying fuckers can't be trusted.

Right. I guess I just never took that remark literally. It just seems like any other discussion of girls by military men; they always seem to claim that the other guy's date was a dude.

Iron Man comes to mind, and I think there was a similar thing in Top Gun.

Terrific commentary. I enjoyed this on first viewing up to the end, which I felt just didn't make any sense.

I'm with Brian that the theme of the movie is what these characters will do for their art, which is fake magic. Introducing real magic undercuts that badly.

Ending on 75 water tanks full of dead Wolverines is just ridiculous. Even if you buy the unspoken premise that he'd never want a surviving copy (because of the problems with Root), he'd still just empty the one tank and reuse it.

Great work, guys. This movie has a lot going for it, but the fact that it basically retraces the steps of the first one is an insurmountable problem. Vigo works for me (altho there does need to be more villainy) but the walking Liberty doesn't, for some reason. Logically speaking, doesn't Vigo just want *a* baby? What a terrible idea it is to decide to steal the baby of a woman who is personal friends with the Ghostbusters. Crack babies practically littered the streets in 1989!

I'm *not* looking forward to GB3. Has *any* 25-years-later sequel worked? Maybe Rocky Balboa, I guess.

Good work and fun, altho certainly a love-fest that is a bit light on analysis of why the film works until very close to the end. No one should fault you, Teague, for loving this movie.

Re: Fifth-DIFer William Goldman. Does this mean we can expect Down in Front to tackle "Magic" and "Memoirs of an Invisible Man"?

Can't post a comment on the blog because the preview pops up a Captcha in a non-scrolling box that's too small for it, so I can't see the Captcha text entry field or Submit button.

This is great, but are you going to eventually put the direct links in the front page listings themselves?

Imagine the Star Trek fan who wants to tell others about your Star Trek 6 commentary:

"Go to downinfront.net and click on Archive and then scroll thru the thumbnails in the little box until you find the one that looks like the poster for Star Trek 6, and click on that."
"Is that the one with the Enterprise coming out of Kirk and Spock's heads?"
"No, no, no. You're thinking of the poster for Star Trek 5. The Star Trek 6 poster has the Enterprise about to teabag a Klingon."
"I thought that was Star Trek 7."
"NO! Star Trek 7 was Generations! That had the Enterprise coming out of Kirk and Picard's heads!"
"Found it. Oh, crap. The link's broken."

Aaaaaaaand scene.

By the way, the download link actually IS broken on the Star Trek 6 listing. The file name is missing the 3 at the end.