المفتش جادجيت

Inspector Gadget

Disney made many finest pictures indeed, in this particular comics hero Inspector Gadget the idea was full range of possibilities to explore and should became a great comics adaptation to start, but even have a great support from ultimate generation of special effects by computer all things didn't work properly, if all this wasn't to celebrate neither to throw in the trash can, watchable droven to kids and families audiences, a bit childish's taste for me, but in someway everyone has a child inside anyway!!! Resume: First watch: 2007 / How many: 2 / Source: DVD / Rating: 5.5

If your looking for a film to entertain the kids for a while, then Inspector Gadget is OK. If your looking for something deeply engrossing and interesting then OK it is not. On the plus side there are some good SFX, but that is about all that it has going for it. Try 'The Iron Giant' instead.

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.

Awful Movie. The plot stinks and the acting stinks and the whole movie movie stinks. I didn't like it when I was a kid and I don't like it now. Matthew Broderick should not have taken the role of inspector gadget, at least he didn't in the second one. This is a definite bottom 100 movie. It is almost as bad as Catwoman, and believe me, that was reallyyyyyyyyyyy bad! That was the first movie I've ever fallen asleep in, besides this and inspector gadget 2. I don't see what the 5 year - old's see in this piece of sh*t. I do not recommend this to anyone, but if you gotta catch up on your sleep then I would suggest either watching this, the second or Catwoman. Once again it is awful. very bad.

One of my biggest problems with the movie was the fact that Matthew Broderick had never even SEEN the cartoon before he was signed to play the part. Sure, it wouldn't have helped the movie any, but there's just something wrong with that! I think they spent too much time explaining where Gadget came from, a common problem with 'superhero' movies. Not to mention that they repeatedly called him John instead of Gadget. The movie was entertaining, but apparantly the writer/director thought that they could improve upon the original. And obviously, they were wrong.

This latest cartoon-turned-motion-picture had me really excited. I used to love the animated adventures of Gadget. The movie was unfortunately a bit lacking, substance-wise. The beginning of the film seemed very rushed, as the script tried to hurry into the main plot of the movie. After the plot was well established, there seemed to be no character development at all, as Joe Brown instantly became Inspector Gadget. The movie was also replete with plot holes, as the audience is left wondering "When did THAT happen???" on several occasions. If you're looking for a cute remake of the TV show, bring your kids and let them enjoy it. If you're looking for a great movie, you'll probably want to skip it. Oh, and when the credits start, don't leave just yet. Wait for a couple funny segments during the credits (including a great cameo).

to adapted a cartoon in film with real actors is always a challenge. and the success is surprising.but this film has not as ambition to be a successful one. in this case the great problem is to discover the purpose of story. an improvisation ? a joke ? a parody ? the only important thing, for me, is the presence of Rupert Everett and Matthew Broderick . the hard try to save a film about nothing or only a collection of clichés and gags in chaotic style. and this is not a real bad thing. but a sort of consolation. because you hopes to be a decent choice for the little children.

Ok, I loved the Inspector Gadget cartoons, and they beat this dissapointment. First off with the good points. It's a Inspector Gadget movie. Also the special effects are a positive. Now to the weaknesses. Hmm..where to start? I went into the movies expecting much. Only 78 minutes long! So I didn't get my moneys worth. Also, the plot was hollow and Dr.Claw(Rupert Everett) couldn't act. 44%

This movie is something of an annoyance because its not really a movie. It's really a chance to see what special effects filmmakers can stuff into a short eighty minutes. The film is more like a colorful novelty item used to keep kids quiet for a while. That car that's in it is possibly the most annoying thing in movie history. I don't know wether to say that because this isn't a movie. It's a total waste of time were Rupert Everett and Mathew Broderick make total idiots out of them selfs. I would like to take this opportunity to tell filmmakers to come up with their own ideas instead of using TV shows to make them into big screen productions. Let's face it they make pathetic movies(with the exception of The Rugrats)and don't go down well with fans of the original most of the time(i.e"The Avengers") I give this movie a 1 out of five.