Inspector Gadget (1999)

I never watched the Inspector Gadget cartoon as a kid, and I didn't see this film until it came out on VHS. I liked it when I saw it, but a few months ago, I watched the Nostalgia Critic's review of it, and, let me tell you, this movie is awful! I do enjoy Matthew Broderick in a few movies but, this isn't one of them, he just comes off as too smart to play the role of a bumbling detective. I don't know what Disney was thinking! I also enjoyed Rupert Everett in Shrek 2, but here, he too is completely miscast as Dr. Claw and in the original cartoon, his face was never shown. Why couldn't Disney keep that in the movie? I think Christopher Lloyd or Tim Curry would have been much better in the role.Another thing that this movie screws up is making the Gadget Mobile talk. Since when did this turn into Knight Rider? The car never talked in the cartoon. Also, I can't understand why Brain and Penny are hardly in this film at all. In the cartoon, they're the ones who always solve the crimes, but that isn't the case in this film.The humor is also bad. It seems like the film makers try to squeeze too many fourth wall jokes in, especially at the end.On the positive side, the visual effects do look pretty nice, but otherwise, it's just an unfunny, poorly acted, and messy film with no respect for the cartoon.This is definitely one of the worst live-action adaptations of a cartoon I've ever seen. If you have little kids, go and see this, but if you're a fan of the cartoon, then this will be a major disappointment.

It is truly unfortunate that the rating for this movie on the IMDb website is so low. And the low reviews are by whom? Adults, of course! And that is precisely the problem. This movie was made for (shock, but yet a non-spoiler): kids! Here is the context in which you may perhaps best comprehend why this movie deserves a higher rating than that reflect at the IMDb site: I, as an adult, first saw this film with 2 other adults accompanying 2 kids, ages 13 and 8, in a theater loaded with kids (and many parents). All 3 of we adults found it entertaining, but that's not the true test...not only our 2 kids, ages 5 years apart, but the majority of all the other kids (and parents) in the theater wanted to, and did, stay to watch it again! Unless from another planet, mentally disengaged from real life, or otherwise impervious to observable fact, anyone should readily recognize that a bad movie cannot and does not captivate to the point that kids (AGAIN: the target audience) want to watch it again. And again. And again. So please don't let the IMDb overall vote, or negative reviews on this site by so-called adults, mislead. It is a terrific kids and family flick.

I never knew of the original Inspector Gadget cartoon until I watched this movie. In that case, once I saw the original I can understand why fans were disappointed with the outcome. This movie is very sloppy and some of its characters don't even follow the original screenplay. But with a little help with the special effects and some funny characters, it doesn't turn out to be so bad as its claimed to be. As the old saying goes, if you leave your brain at the door and take it as it is, it's a fun ride.Playing as the dim-witted inspector is Matthew Broderick, who I'll say is an interesting choice because he does his job well. But for an actor who has played other characters with more intelligence, seems like the clumsy Inspector Gadget is not the right choice for him. Especially if ten years before, Broderick starred in Glory (1989), one of the most influential movies in cinema history. Another flaw in this film is sticking Dr. Claw in the light; so he is finally visible to the viewer. Who thought of that idea? If he was a concealed mastermind in the cartoon, why would he want to come out a decade later? Dr. Claw is played by Rupert Everett who I think does a good job although his voice sounds nothing like the original. But he does have his funny moments. Dr. Claw's henchmen are funny too, and they help add to the goofiness in the screenplay.One thing I'm curious is to why director David Kellogg decided to have a love interest in this film. In the cartoon, Inspector Gadget had no time for a woman. Why does he need one now? Is it because it's a Disney movie and all Disney movies have to have romance in them? Love is not always needed to make a film successful. There were points in the movie that felt so cheesy when Inspector Gadget was talking to Brenda (played Joely Fisher). To me, that was one of the lower points in the film. I felt that it was unnecessary. The film already had enough female power in it, which was Penny, Gadget's niece.As for the effects, it is fun to watch all the utilities that Broderick tries to call upon. I don't even know what half of them would be used for and how they pertain to being a detective but that's what makes the movie fun to watch. For example when Gadget is at a ball and decides to listen on Brenda and Dr. Claw's conversation he places his ear on statue and starts walking as the cord stretches. And no one notices? How much more ridiculous could that get? Well it does but at least the public does not surround him too often. Another cool effect is the Gadgetmobile. Voiced by D.L. Hughley, the Gadgetmobile has a good number of wisecracks that'll keep the viewer laughing. This was one of the stronger points of the film. It was fun to see Broderick converse with the car. That car probably had the same amount of gizmos as did Inspector Gadget. As for everything else, the music was alright, there was nothing really special about it and the sound effects helped the film sound like it still was a cartoon (in a sense). For the most part I was satisfied with the end result. I didn't think it was a total waste, but there were some things that could've been left out and added in to make it better.The live action version of Inspector Gadget has eye-popping special effects and is quite goofy; perhaps too goofy. Though overall, it works as a kiddy film, nothing will bring it up to par with its origin of roots.

This was one of my fav movies in my childhold it was the first time I have seen inspector gadget I did not see the cartoon later on when I was about 6 or 7. inspector gadget's real name is john brown I like it better when he was called john so people could know what he's real name was but in the 2nd one he was called gadget which is what he was called in the cartoon. The 2nd one was not really good it ruined a good show and I was very shocked with the 2nd one they changed the actors like what they did in son of the mask oh yeah that was bad that was really bad. But I like this one its better then chicken little I like the part when robogadget pulls dawn john's pants on the bridge that was really funny and I love that talking car in this movie he had very nice coular which suited his character very nice before they changed it in the 2nd one I would really like to get this movie out on DVD if any one knows if it is still out on DVD please tell me thank for that. Great movie maybe not the best Disney film ever but still great 7.6 out of 10