107 reviews
As a part time comic geek and a full time movie geek I was surprised that anyone would green-light a film based on the old Marvel comic "Man Thing." Obviously I had no expectations for this straight to DVD release when I saw it last week but all in all I was pleasantly surprised. Now don't get me wrong, "Man Thing" is by no definition the best comic book film ever made but it is at least true to it's origins unlike "Batman Forever" and "Batman & Robin." The basic story is pretty much a product of the "plot wheel" and you won't see any big name actors but if you treat it for what it is, a solid B-movie, there are worse ways to spend an hour and a half. The title creature looks as if the special effects and costume designers did their best to capture this little known character's appearance and movement. Not to say that this film doesn't have it's problems, bad annoying camera gimmicks and cartoonish supporting actors among them, however I don't believe that a reviewers job is to turn into a whinny nitpicker. If you really love the medium there aren't that many films that you can't find at least one good element in. "Man Thing" never stood a chance to be much more than a guilty pleasure but honestly you can't expect a first rate film adaptation of a third rate comic book. This is a film for B movie night and that's not necessarily a bad thing. Cut. Print.
- KolchaktheNightstalker
- Jun 7, 2005
- Permalink
In case you ever find yourself in that position, or you hear someone else, thinking that the Marvel Cinematic Universe films are weak or under-par or just simply *bad*, I encourage you to check out Man-Thing. Actually I don't because this would almost come across as a recommendation, and it's not that. It's about perspective: you can watch things like Thor 2 or one of the Amazing Spider-Man movies (and yes, Spider-Man 3 if you don't care for it), and realize 'yeah, well, at least it's not Man-Thing.' This is such a waste of time, and more than that a waste of potential - yes, potential - that it's barely on-par for the sludge that passes for Syfy channel movies of the week.
Everything is stock here, everything. Stock opening with the horny teens having sex in the swamp and one of them getting killed (lots of blood, to be sure, but not a single f*** given to suspense); stock villain with his 'you Yankee Sheriff don't understand get outta my way' twang; stock lead who barely makes a different facial expression except constipated consternation; stock friend deputy who we know may not last long; stock backwoods "good ol' boy" yokels where the closest thing to a joke involves taking a s*** in the swamp at night (and then, ::GASP:: one of them falls in to what looks like other s***); laughably stock Indian guide who patiently exclaims over a montage about how the "Man Thing" came to be due to corporate man's interference with oil rigs and who knows what; and stock love interest who really becomes a love interest because it's about that time for the hero man to kiss the hero girl and for them to almost have sex at an importune time.
Did I mention this movie is quite poor, because it is. And I think that it could have had potential as a) if it embraced it's dumbass B-movie roots and went for broader, or at least were more sincere in some other way, like with a script that went for crazier ideas or stakes, or b) if, I assume, they stuck closer to what Man-Thing actually is in the comics (I'd assume from what I've read from others reactions, I haven't yet read it though it comes from Steve Gerber who created Howard the Duck, that it's not close at all). Or maybe a stronger director with a better grasp on horror or comedy or horror-comedy. The best that Brett Leonard is able to muster for anything 'creative' or out of the box comes in super-fastly-whiplash-style editing to transition from, uh, one scene to another whenever it's time to get EDGY in that way that is terribly dated a decade on (though it was likely dated in 2005).
The acting is equally stock as the actors, though as one thing to give the movie credit the actor playing the bat-s*** photographer who keeps popping up in the 'Dark Water' of the swamp was fairly entertaining. But aside from that no one is memorable, certainly no one who can inject some madness or life into the thing. It's trying to play it too straight and be too serious-minded, but it the director and crew don't have the skills (or budget) to give anything close to some actual terror or properly mounting suspense. It's all a lot of people wandering in dark swamps and then BOOM then comes the CGI 'Man-Thing'. Indeed the best thing about the movie is the title, which I'm sure at the time Marvel patted itself on the back and handed out giant cigars for the whole staff for the fact that they got a comic called Man-Thing.
And it's not like I went into this wanting to hate it, at least not to this point (I suspected, given it was never released to theaters, to lower my expectations, but not to the point of bottom of the barrel). I want more raw, hard-R rated flicks from the likes of Marvel - the first two Blades and Punisher: War Zone embraced their B-movie roots and had good-to-decent directors behind them - but there needs to be a strong vision or something new to the table. Practically everything in Man-Thing, from the Indian environmental "messages" that feel somewhat coopted from *Swamp Thing* (and I'm sure with the comic that was intentional) to the small-town folk who are given the blandest, most generic 'Southern-good-ol'-f***-yeah' dialog, is telegraphed, rote, like things picked up off the dirty, un-vacuumed-for-15-years floor of a hack screen writing pig-pen floor. Even when we see the Man-Thing itself it feels disappointing, with the only thrill coming when it does something especially gory but that too isn't unexpected.
Only for the most die-hard horror-gore-comic-book fans. Or if you want to get that perspective I mentioned earlier. Or if you like a villain with the last name "Schist". Get it? It sounded like it's called s***!
Everything is stock here, everything. Stock opening with the horny teens having sex in the swamp and one of them getting killed (lots of blood, to be sure, but not a single f*** given to suspense); stock villain with his 'you Yankee Sheriff don't understand get outta my way' twang; stock lead who barely makes a different facial expression except constipated consternation; stock friend deputy who we know may not last long; stock backwoods "good ol' boy" yokels where the closest thing to a joke involves taking a s*** in the swamp at night (and then, ::GASP:: one of them falls in to what looks like other s***); laughably stock Indian guide who patiently exclaims over a montage about how the "Man Thing" came to be due to corporate man's interference with oil rigs and who knows what; and stock love interest who really becomes a love interest because it's about that time for the hero man to kiss the hero girl and for them to almost have sex at an importune time.
Did I mention this movie is quite poor, because it is. And I think that it could have had potential as a) if it embraced it's dumbass B-movie roots and went for broader, or at least were more sincere in some other way, like with a script that went for crazier ideas or stakes, or b) if, I assume, they stuck closer to what Man-Thing actually is in the comics (I'd assume from what I've read from others reactions, I haven't yet read it though it comes from Steve Gerber who created Howard the Duck, that it's not close at all). Or maybe a stronger director with a better grasp on horror or comedy or horror-comedy. The best that Brett Leonard is able to muster for anything 'creative' or out of the box comes in super-fastly-whiplash-style editing to transition from, uh, one scene to another whenever it's time to get EDGY in that way that is terribly dated a decade on (though it was likely dated in 2005).
The acting is equally stock as the actors, though as one thing to give the movie credit the actor playing the bat-s*** photographer who keeps popping up in the 'Dark Water' of the swamp was fairly entertaining. But aside from that no one is memorable, certainly no one who can inject some madness or life into the thing. It's trying to play it too straight and be too serious-minded, but it the director and crew don't have the skills (or budget) to give anything close to some actual terror or properly mounting suspense. It's all a lot of people wandering in dark swamps and then BOOM then comes the CGI 'Man-Thing'. Indeed the best thing about the movie is the title, which I'm sure at the time Marvel patted itself on the back and handed out giant cigars for the whole staff for the fact that they got a comic called Man-Thing.
And it's not like I went into this wanting to hate it, at least not to this point (I suspected, given it was never released to theaters, to lower my expectations, but not to the point of bottom of the barrel). I want more raw, hard-R rated flicks from the likes of Marvel - the first two Blades and Punisher: War Zone embraced their B-movie roots and had good-to-decent directors behind them - but there needs to be a strong vision or something new to the table. Practically everything in Man-Thing, from the Indian environmental "messages" that feel somewhat coopted from *Swamp Thing* (and I'm sure with the comic that was intentional) to the small-town folk who are given the blandest, most generic 'Southern-good-ol'-f***-yeah' dialog, is telegraphed, rote, like things picked up off the dirty, un-vacuumed-for-15-years floor of a hack screen writing pig-pen floor. Even when we see the Man-Thing itself it feels disappointing, with the only thrill coming when it does something especially gory but that too isn't unexpected.
Only for the most die-hard horror-gore-comic-book fans. Or if you want to get that perspective I mentioned earlier. Or if you like a villain with the last name "Schist". Get it? It sounded like it's called s***!
- Quinoa1984
- May 25, 2016
- Permalink
The Man-thing is your average monster movie, which is likely to appeal to the die hard fans of the genre, leaving all others wondering just what was the point of making it in the first place.
Yet, a few things stand out, mainly the scenery and the monster itself. The swamp was captured on film in a very ambiguous way, it that it is both realistic and somewhat nightmarish and disturbing. We owe that to the excellent cinematography, responsible for delivering an uncanny goldish light and the impressive shots of oozing green vegetation.
Now, the monster. Apparently, it was based on some Marvel creature I have never heard of. Either way, for a B movie, it was a very competent display of half man, half plant beast, something that could have easily become ridiculous, especially since I doubt the FX team had a large budget to work with. Still, I believe we get to see a bit too much of the Man Thing, the more footage there is on the creature the less impact it usually manages to create on the viewer.
Another thing that surprised me about this flick were the deaths. They are gruesome and convincing, with roots and barks impaling people throughout the movie. Not extremely gory but still very graphic in terms of sheer violence.
What kills this movie is the usual...a terrible cast, abhorred acting and a plot that is too shallow to hold. Everything is highly predictable and we all know who will die and who will make it. All that is part of the genre's conventions, and since the Man-thing aims to be a monster flick, and clearly is mostly concerned with the most dedicated of fans, I can say it achieved all of its goals.
Yet, a few things stand out, mainly the scenery and the monster itself. The swamp was captured on film in a very ambiguous way, it that it is both realistic and somewhat nightmarish and disturbing. We owe that to the excellent cinematography, responsible for delivering an uncanny goldish light and the impressive shots of oozing green vegetation.
Now, the monster. Apparently, it was based on some Marvel creature I have never heard of. Either way, for a B movie, it was a very competent display of half man, half plant beast, something that could have easily become ridiculous, especially since I doubt the FX team had a large budget to work with. Still, I believe we get to see a bit too much of the Man Thing, the more footage there is on the creature the less impact it usually manages to create on the viewer.
Another thing that surprised me about this flick were the deaths. They are gruesome and convincing, with roots and barks impaling people throughout the movie. Not extremely gory but still very graphic in terms of sheer violence.
What kills this movie is the usual...a terrible cast, abhorred acting and a plot that is too shallow to hold. Everything is highly predictable and we all know who will die and who will make it. All that is part of the genre's conventions, and since the Man-thing aims to be a monster flick, and clearly is mostly concerned with the most dedicated of fans, I can say it achieved all of its goals.
- gothic_a666
- Nov 4, 2005
- Permalink
Well this is excrement. It's supposedly about the Marvel Comics character Man-Thing but, in reality, it's a cheap little TV-quality grade-Z horror movie that has very little in common with the comics. Even then, there could be some value in this if it had even the slightest bit of talent behind it. But it doesn't and it sucks. The writing, acting, directing, special effects, music, and pretty much every single other thing you could think of is generic and cheap. The basic plot is that there's a creature in the swamp killing horny teenagers so the town's new sheriff investigates. This guy's the clichéd "big city cop turned country sheriff" character that has appeared in about ten thousand movies. He looks like a cross between Ed Westwick and a young Peter Deluise, so you can imagine what a commanding presence he has. He shows up in the bayou wearing a leather jacket and shades while toothless yokels say things like "You city boys shore are funny." Please. Honestly, just don't with this. It's garbage in every way. If you enjoy shitty made-for-TV/DVD horror movies then go right ahead and poison yourself with this stuff. I'd rather find something more productive to do with my time, like staring at the sun. Oh and Rachael Taylor's in this. Because it was made in Australia. Because that looks just like Louisiana. Because we're all idiots.
This movie should have just been burned out in the swamp it was filmed in. Marvel and Lion Gate Films need to brace themselves for the truckload of letters the Native American Community is going to write to complain about this sewage sludge.
I and a few friends tried to watch it all the way through. Tee left after 30 minutes. Dan left after an hour. Out of give only one of us lasted the full two hours of trash. The camera work is beyond pitiful. The budget obviously did not include extras, site locations, or something that would have passed as a plot. Again Hollywood takes a D-Character and tries to make a major motion picture. As a 25 year comic book collector, I can count on one hand how many of my friends even knew who Man-Thing even is. This movie trashed the entire premise of the Man-Thing story.
For the record, I am surprised that they even released this crap at all.
I and a few friends tried to watch it all the way through. Tee left after 30 minutes. Dan left after an hour. Out of give only one of us lasted the full two hours of trash. The camera work is beyond pitiful. The budget obviously did not include extras, site locations, or something that would have passed as a plot. Again Hollywood takes a D-Character and tries to make a major motion picture. As a 25 year comic book collector, I can count on one hand how many of my friends even knew who Man-Thing even is. This movie trashed the entire premise of the Man-Thing story.
For the record, I am surprised that they even released this crap at all.
- JimRaynor55
- Apr 30, 2005
- Permalink
I have seen this movie and it's not so bad but it's not a movie that will give you a real sense of horror.the first thing is that the monster is not very scary at all...it's more like a big tree with red eyes,i have been more scared by the dogs in the movie and you will see what i mean if you watch it.The plot and the effects are good but the actors are not really trying.Overall it is a good movie to watch when you don't have anything better to do and you will not be very disappointed after but do not expect any masterpiece.If you ask yourself why that sheriff goes in the swamp only at night...it's a good question.my vote 5.5/10
An Oil Company whose owner is an ambitious villain(Jack Thompson)is polluting the Bywater lands and the villagers are up in arms and a swamp thing is committing horrible murders. A new sheriff named Kyle(Matthew Le Nevez) arrives the little town. He is sent to the Bayou to investigate , helped by a deputy (Alex O'Loughlin) . There finds a beast, a plant with an animal's aggression power for survival and fury. Meanwhile the sheriff falls in love with a gorgeous elementary school teacher named Teri ( Rachael Taylor).
This exciting picture is packed by thrills, chills, gory killings and brief nudism in charge of Imogen Bailey. It's an unusual mix of monster movie and intrigue but definitely an enjoyable movie. From the producers- Avi Arad and Stan Lee- of Spiderman, Daredevil, X men, Blade and several others. Director Brett Leonard made this campy swamp romp adapted from the Marvel comic books of the same name. Director deliberately use comic-book style to keep us from taking anything too seriously. It's a co-production USA-Australia filmed in Sydney , New South Wales with good cinematography by Steve Arnold. Fans horror will love this movie about a monster part vegetable, part man . In similar style adapted from D.C. Comics were made in 1982 ¨The Swamp Thing¨ by Wes Craven with Louis Jourdan, Adrienne Barbeau and Ray Wise in which a chemical installation turns into walking vegetation monster. And its following : ¨Return of Swamp Thing¨(1989) by Jim Wynorski with Heather Lockleaar, Lous Jourdan and Sarah Douglas.
This exciting picture is packed by thrills, chills, gory killings and brief nudism in charge of Imogen Bailey. It's an unusual mix of monster movie and intrigue but definitely an enjoyable movie. From the producers- Avi Arad and Stan Lee- of Spiderman, Daredevil, X men, Blade and several others. Director Brett Leonard made this campy swamp romp adapted from the Marvel comic books of the same name. Director deliberately use comic-book style to keep us from taking anything too seriously. It's a co-production USA-Australia filmed in Sydney , New South Wales with good cinematography by Steve Arnold. Fans horror will love this movie about a monster part vegetable, part man . In similar style adapted from D.C. Comics were made in 1982 ¨The Swamp Thing¨ by Wes Craven with Louis Jourdan, Adrienne Barbeau and Ray Wise in which a chemical installation turns into walking vegetation monster. And its following : ¨Return of Swamp Thing¨(1989) by Jim Wynorski with Heather Lockleaar, Lous Jourdan and Sarah Douglas.
- JediToreador
- Apr 29, 2005
- Permalink
An interesting choice for Marvel to adapt to the big screen (or in most cases, the small screen), but don't go expecting "X-Men", "X-2" or "Spider-Man". What we have here is a fairly good horror movie, with a great location and likable cast who all look like they are having fun. Matthew Le Nevez and Alex O'Lachlan (the Sheriff and the Deputy) are two hotties who make the film even more worthwhile, and Rachael Taylor was pretty good too. The special effects were decent, and the swamp looked real (but then again, I'm no swamp expert), it was creepy and looked just right to have a serious case of missing-persons. I applaud Marvel for an interesting take on the villain also - not Man-Thing, but the concept of the destruction of the environment. This environmental destruction takes a human form in Jake Schist, played by Pat Thompson, and his cronies. The horror aspect of the film wasn't over-played, nor under-played, but subtle, and the cinematography used when Le Nevez and Taylor enter the "Dark Water" is excellent. My only major complaint with the film was that it was a little slow-paced in some places, and it would have been nice to see a little more romance between Le Nevez and Taylor's characters. Otherwise, a decent watch.
- boyinflares
- Sep 23, 2005
- Permalink
The Schist oil company is polluting the Bywater swamp and the locals are up in arms about it but that is nothing compared to how the guardian of the swamp, Man-Thing, feels. Man-thing will not rest until the drilling platform has gone, and until then he will kill anyone he can get his branches on.
New sheriff in the town, Kyle Williams, and sexy third grade school teacher, Teri, embark on a quest to put an end to the death and destruction.
Brett Leonard's adaptation of the Marvel comic books is an enjoyable and schlocky monster flick that never gets ideas above its station and is savvy enough to give its core audience exactly what they want; we get moderate gore, a smattering of nudity, a pretty decent monster and a plot that doesn't exactly tax the old grey matter.
The swamp locations are a sufficiently creepy setting for the tale. Swimming in mist and bathed in a spooky green glow, they allow Leonard to use shadows and light for maximum effect - at times concealing the horror and at others, revealing it in its full gory glory.
The effects both the gore and the creature are also pretty impressive. When Man-Thing gets busy on his victims, he doesn't hold back and we get a range of gruesome body parts splashed across the screen during its 105 minute running time.
In fact, the only thing that really lets this film down is its pacing. The film is too long (by about 20 minutes) and too much time is spent with characters either chatting or wandering aimlessly through the swamp. If there had been a little less talk and a little more action, I'd have rated it higher.
New sheriff in the town, Kyle Williams, and sexy third grade school teacher, Teri, embark on a quest to put an end to the death and destruction.
Brett Leonard's adaptation of the Marvel comic books is an enjoyable and schlocky monster flick that never gets ideas above its station and is savvy enough to give its core audience exactly what they want; we get moderate gore, a smattering of nudity, a pretty decent monster and a plot that doesn't exactly tax the old grey matter.
The swamp locations are a sufficiently creepy setting for the tale. Swimming in mist and bathed in a spooky green glow, they allow Leonard to use shadows and light for maximum effect - at times concealing the horror and at others, revealing it in its full gory glory.
The effects both the gore and the creature are also pretty impressive. When Man-Thing gets busy on his victims, he doesn't hold back and we get a range of gruesome body parts splashed across the screen during its 105 minute running time.
In fact, the only thing that really lets this film down is its pacing. The film is too long (by about 20 minutes) and too much time is spent with characters either chatting or wandering aimlessly through the swamp. If there had been a little less talk and a little more action, I'd have rated it higher.
- BA_Harrison
- Mar 14, 2006
- Permalink
It is a bad movie. Badly written and directed, not to mention the acting. And to make matters worse, it misses completely the point in depicting the Man Thing character. There's no origin story, no empathy with the creature and you do not understand its purpose. Steve Gerber's stories were so thematical and the Man Thing, despite being almost brainless, worked as a cathartic catalyst. He could discern good from evil and was a strange kind of antihero. Waste of time.
- macchiedinchiostro
- Jul 7, 2019
- Permalink
Marvel Comics' Man-Thing is a mindless, empathic swamp creature that lives in the Everglades. This 2005 film is loosely based on the story "Cry of the Native" from the 1973 comic (Adventure Into) Fear #16, which featured the Man-Thing, by writer Steve Gerber and Howland, Ohio's Val Mayerik (artist).
The plot's great: The Seminoles and environmentalists are upset over a developer taking over their precious swamp. A new police chief comes into town and has to deal with the situation, as well as investigate an increasing number of horrifying deaths in the swamp and reports of a "man-thing" creature living there.
The swamp sets, cinematography, music, locations (Sydney, Australia, of all places) and cast are all quite good. This is not a Grade-Z movie. As a matter of fact, it was originally intended for theatrical release.
The film has a good mysterious feel to it, in particular the first 30 minutes and final 20 minutes. The vibe, to be expected, is very comic booky, but the material is respected and generally taken seriously, avoiding the rut of camp.
What works best is the "Man-Thing" itself; imagine Val Mayerik's rendition of the creature with a bunch of creepy branches & roots sticking out of its back & head and you'd have a pretty good idea of what ol' Manny looks like in this film: He's an 8-foot tall, hulking, and utterly horrifying piece of man-like swamp mass.
Now for what doesn't work. Although the Man-Thing looks great, which is a cinematic triumph in and of itself, he doesn't appear fully until the last 20 minutes. This would be fine if the story were captivating, like say "Jaws," but it's not. Although the plot's great, the story itself barely holds your attention after the first half hour and is unnecessarily convoluted with pointless characters. The middle-hour is wasted on various people hanging out in the swamp for one dubious reason or another, half of them getting picked off by the creature. I'm sure they did this to show-off the superb swamp sets and lighting, etc., but they forgot the most important part, an interesting story and characters. This makes no sense since Gerber's run on the comic contains a wealth of great material to use for compelling scripts.
Also, the film deviates too far from Man-Thing's original concept. Some new ideas introduced are great, like the way the creature looks and horrifically attacks people, but where's Manny's empathic nature? Where's the "whatever knows fear burns at the Man-Thing's touch" element? And why does Manny kill people indistinguishably? For instance, the creature kills a noble native at one point and later threatens the two protagonists of the story. The Man-Thing never did this in the comics even though he was a mindless creature. In other words, he was a force for good, figuratively representing nature and, more specifically, the swamp. However, this CAN be related to the movie as well, if you think about it.
Some things are sort of faithful to the comics. For instance, Ted Sallis is linked to the creature and I actually like the change in the movie compared to the eye-rolling "super soldier" serum angle of the comics.
For those not in the know, the first Marvel comic featuring the Man-thing beat out DC's Swamp Thing by two months in 1971. To complicate matters, the cover of The Phantom Stranger #14 features a creature that looks suspiciously like Man-Thing (albeit NOT the corresponding story inside the comic) and this issue was released the same month that Man-Thing debuted in Savage Tales #1. In any case, Theodore Sturgeon's similar swamp creature "It" appeared in one of his short stories 31 years earlier! The first comic book bog beast, The Heap, appeared two years later in 1942, obviously inspired by Sturgeon's creature.
Let's compare "Man-Thing" with the similar "Swamp-Thing" from 1982. To be expected, the creature from "Man-Thing" absolutely blows away the guy-in-a-rubber-suit in "Swamp-Thing." The sets, atmosphere and cinematography of "Man-Thing" are also better than "Swamp-Thing," not to mention the vibe's not as goofy. As for the story, I would say they're about equal.
FINAL ANALYSIS: The midsection of "Man-Thing" is lethargic and meandering, filled with uninteresting or undeveloped characters, but the film's attributes noted above make it worth checking out if you're into creature-on-the-loose flicks, particularly of the swamp monster variety. On that level it's a decent movie. The greatest part is the creature itself, which is a cinematic triumph, especially if you're a fan of the comic books. But these same fans will be disappointed because the film is a very loose interpretation with an utterly tedious midsection. It's too bad because the potential for greatness was there.
The film runs 1 hour, 37 minutes.
GRADE: C
The plot's great: The Seminoles and environmentalists are upset over a developer taking over their precious swamp. A new police chief comes into town and has to deal with the situation, as well as investigate an increasing number of horrifying deaths in the swamp and reports of a "man-thing" creature living there.
The swamp sets, cinematography, music, locations (Sydney, Australia, of all places) and cast are all quite good. This is not a Grade-Z movie. As a matter of fact, it was originally intended for theatrical release.
The film has a good mysterious feel to it, in particular the first 30 minutes and final 20 minutes. The vibe, to be expected, is very comic booky, but the material is respected and generally taken seriously, avoiding the rut of camp.
What works best is the "Man-Thing" itself; imagine Val Mayerik's rendition of the creature with a bunch of creepy branches & roots sticking out of its back & head and you'd have a pretty good idea of what ol' Manny looks like in this film: He's an 8-foot tall, hulking, and utterly horrifying piece of man-like swamp mass.
Now for what doesn't work. Although the Man-Thing looks great, which is a cinematic triumph in and of itself, he doesn't appear fully until the last 20 minutes. This would be fine if the story were captivating, like say "Jaws," but it's not. Although the plot's great, the story itself barely holds your attention after the first half hour and is unnecessarily convoluted with pointless characters. The middle-hour is wasted on various people hanging out in the swamp for one dubious reason or another, half of them getting picked off by the creature. I'm sure they did this to show-off the superb swamp sets and lighting, etc., but they forgot the most important part, an interesting story and characters. This makes no sense since Gerber's run on the comic contains a wealth of great material to use for compelling scripts.
Also, the film deviates too far from Man-Thing's original concept. Some new ideas introduced are great, like the way the creature looks and horrifically attacks people, but where's Manny's empathic nature? Where's the "whatever knows fear burns at the Man-Thing's touch" element? And why does Manny kill people indistinguishably? For instance, the creature kills a noble native at one point and later threatens the two protagonists of the story. The Man-Thing never did this in the comics even though he was a mindless creature. In other words, he was a force for good, figuratively representing nature and, more specifically, the swamp. However, this CAN be related to the movie as well, if you think about it.
Some things are sort of faithful to the comics. For instance, Ted Sallis is linked to the creature and I actually like the change in the movie compared to the eye-rolling "super soldier" serum angle of the comics.
For those not in the know, the first Marvel comic featuring the Man-thing beat out DC's Swamp Thing by two months in 1971. To complicate matters, the cover of The Phantom Stranger #14 features a creature that looks suspiciously like Man-Thing (albeit NOT the corresponding story inside the comic) and this issue was released the same month that Man-Thing debuted in Savage Tales #1. In any case, Theodore Sturgeon's similar swamp creature "It" appeared in one of his short stories 31 years earlier! The first comic book bog beast, The Heap, appeared two years later in 1942, obviously inspired by Sturgeon's creature.
Let's compare "Man-Thing" with the similar "Swamp-Thing" from 1982. To be expected, the creature from "Man-Thing" absolutely blows away the guy-in-a-rubber-suit in "Swamp-Thing." The sets, atmosphere and cinematography of "Man-Thing" are also better than "Swamp-Thing," not to mention the vibe's not as goofy. As for the story, I would say they're about equal.
FINAL ANALYSIS: The midsection of "Man-Thing" is lethargic and meandering, filled with uninteresting or undeveloped characters, but the film's attributes noted above make it worth checking out if you're into creature-on-the-loose flicks, particularly of the swamp monster variety. On that level it's a decent movie. The greatest part is the creature itself, which is a cinematic triumph, especially if you're a fan of the comic books. But these same fans will be disappointed because the film is a very loose interpretation with an utterly tedious midsection. It's too bad because the potential for greatness was there.
The film runs 1 hour, 37 minutes.
GRADE: C
- Virgil2127
- May 5, 2005
- Permalink
Something evil is living in a swamp, something that kills all that enter its territory, the "dark waters". As more people are killed, the local town sheriff learns that a swamp-monster of Indian legend is responsible. Can he stop the creature before it can continue killing? "Man-Thing" has gotten primarily bad reviews here on IMDb, but I thought it was
not terrible. Not great either, loaded with clichés, yes, but I've seen much worse films released courtesy of the Sci-fi channel. Any of you ever seen of "Boa Vs. Python"?!?!? There's plenty of stuff to like here. The swamp photography is beautiful. The shades of greens gave the film a very nice look, and the swamp is setting is effectively creepy. Director Brett Leonardwho you may remember as the guy behind 1992's "Lawn Mower Man"gives the film good atmosphere, and there were even a couple of creepy moments towards the finale. The monster was scary and looked very, very impressive, to say the least. There was some pretty weak CG used for its tentacles among other things but thankfully the creature itself is a good old-fashioned man-in-a-suit creation, and a darn good one at that. Kudos to the effects team on this memorable, nasty-looking beast. Oh, there's the abundant gore too, which is certainly a plus. I won't give away what happens in the film, but I will say gore fans will be very happy. I also liked Roger Mason's creepy, atmospheric score.
Problems begin with two things: The script and the actors. The screenplay offers lots of typical horror conventions: Throwaway monster victims, cheap pop scares, greedy and unrealistic bad guys, wise Indians who know about the monster, and so on. If you know the genre, you're probably familiar with this set-up by now, and it can be very tiring. The actors are mostly weak (Save for lead actor Matthew Le Nevez who wasn't bad), and those "southern" accents sure sound Australian if you ask me!
"Man Thing" is flawed and offers a familiar set-up, but if you can overlook that you'll be treated to a gory, creepy monster movie. Better than most made-for-TV horror films I've seen, and I've seen a lot.
6/10.
Problems begin with two things: The script and the actors. The screenplay offers lots of typical horror conventions: Throwaway monster victims, cheap pop scares, greedy and unrealistic bad guys, wise Indians who know about the monster, and so on. If you know the genre, you're probably familiar with this set-up by now, and it can be very tiring. The actors are mostly weak (Save for lead actor Matthew Le Nevez who wasn't bad), and those "southern" accents sure sound Australian if you ask me!
"Man Thing" is flawed and offers a familiar set-up, but if you can overlook that you'll be treated to a gory, creepy monster movie. Better than most made-for-TV horror films I've seen, and I've seen a lot.
6/10.
- willywants
- Jun 22, 2005
- Permalink
'Man-Thing, The' is a movie produced by the Marvel Productions and according to its credits is based on a Marvel comic book character. After this piece of information, you'll believe that the movie is an adaptation - like some other as 'Spider Man' or 'Daredevil' - of the stories concerning the big, green and mute (he only thinks, not talk)good monster called 'Swamp Monster, The'. Sorry, but you'll be completely wrong. This ludicrous, stupid movie is a unbelievable and far fetched story about a monster - and a bad one, not a good guy like the Marvel character - who is a product - if one can say so - of the Indian legends and beliefs about a 'spirit of the swamp' who lives in the 'Dark Waters'. This monster seeks revenge against some business men who owned a factory installed inside the swamp and responsible for environment damages. The rest is just garbage, shabby situations and boring development all around. Maybe this movie is the worst work made with the Marvel label as advertisement. Please, don't lose your time. Get away from this horrible swamp!
When I first saw "Man-Thing" on the shelf in the local video store, I was definitely intrigued by the cover; enough to read the back, anyway. After reading the case, I thought it sounded good, but the movie happened to be already checked out. The video store did, however, have a copy of the DVD to purchase for $4.95. I was a little hesitant at first, but after seeing that it was based on a Marvel comic book, I figured it couldn't be too bad.
I rented about six or seven other movies that night, and when I got back to my dorm room, I immediately looked them up on IMDb. I must say, I was a little disappointed to see that "Man-Thing" was only given an average rating of 4.0 out of 10.0. Thinking that I might just have blown five dollars, I put the movie on my shelf and forgot about it.
A few nights later, I was having trouble sleeping, and decided to throw the movie in. The opening scene was like that out of any typical horror film, but after the first few minutes, I was hooked. The plot was well thought out, the characters were both interesting and relatable, and it kept showing you just enough of the monster to keep you watching. In fact, you don't see very much of it until the last fifteen minutes of the movie.
I'm not saying that "Man-Thing" was the best movie I've ever seen, but for putting a movie in at 3:30am, I wasn't tempted to go to sleep once. All I can say is that I'm glad I didn't check the rating on here before I decided to rent/buy this DVD. I got lucky...which is more than I can say for a lot of the characters in this movie. "Man-Thing" was definitely enough of a scare to keep me away from swamps for a while.
This movie is a great addition to my collection. But unless you find a great deal like I did, I would rent this movie first...just to make sure you like it.
I rented about six or seven other movies that night, and when I got back to my dorm room, I immediately looked them up on IMDb. I must say, I was a little disappointed to see that "Man-Thing" was only given an average rating of 4.0 out of 10.0. Thinking that I might just have blown five dollars, I put the movie on my shelf and forgot about it.
A few nights later, I was having trouble sleeping, and decided to throw the movie in. The opening scene was like that out of any typical horror film, but after the first few minutes, I was hooked. The plot was well thought out, the characters were both interesting and relatable, and it kept showing you just enough of the monster to keep you watching. In fact, you don't see very much of it until the last fifteen minutes of the movie.
I'm not saying that "Man-Thing" was the best movie I've ever seen, but for putting a movie in at 3:30am, I wasn't tempted to go to sleep once. All I can say is that I'm glad I didn't check the rating on here before I decided to rent/buy this DVD. I got lucky...which is more than I can say for a lot of the characters in this movie. "Man-Thing" was definitely enough of a scare to keep me away from swamps for a while.
This movie is a great addition to my collection. But unless you find a great deal like I did, I would rent this movie first...just to make sure you like it.
- JTallman160
- Apr 4, 2007
- Permalink
- misbegotten
- Nov 8, 2005
- Permalink
I will not spend too long reviewing this turd as I am still very annoyed that I spend 90 minutes of my precious time watching it. Instead I will simply say that Man-Thing is not only the worst comic-book movie ever made, but it is also one of the worst films ever made ever. I cannot believe that utter trash like this comes to DVD but Howard the Duck does not.
Set in the Deep South but filmed in Austrailia with Ozzie soap actors (who are so expressionless and wooden you can almost see the sawdust flaking off them) the film is an hour and a half of the most mundane, generic blandness you could ever imagine. Almost nothing happens as characters sleepwalk from scene to scene, all being pointlessly killed by a pointless monster.
Brett (I've never directed a good film in my life) Leonard shoots the film like a TV movie with either a green filter or an orange filter over the lens (oooh...how atmospheric) as his only means of 'sophistication'. The man began life with The Lawnmower man, so he didn't really have so far to fall before making this pile of crap.
My God, it's just so bad. Never waste time or money on this. I beg you!
Set in the Deep South but filmed in Austrailia with Ozzie soap actors (who are so expressionless and wooden you can almost see the sawdust flaking off them) the film is an hour and a half of the most mundane, generic blandness you could ever imagine. Almost nothing happens as characters sleepwalk from scene to scene, all being pointlessly killed by a pointless monster.
Brett (I've never directed a good film in my life) Leonard shoots the film like a TV movie with either a green filter or an orange filter over the lens (oooh...how atmospheric) as his only means of 'sophistication'. The man began life with The Lawnmower man, so he didn't really have so far to fall before making this pile of crap.
My God, it's just so bad. Never waste time or money on this. I beg you!
- CuriosityKilledShawn
- Nov 23, 2006
- Permalink
I've only flipped through a few of the comics, so I can't make any statements about the relevance of the plot to the stories. I don't think the relevance is the biggest thing to be worried about.
Aside from the gratuitous (though nice) boobie shot and blood, this isn't even worthy to be called a horror flick. The script is atrocious, though not an excuse for the acting. One odd thing is that the random supporting characters did a better job than did the main ones. With Marvel's budgets for other movies, why couldn't they afford anybody that could act for this one? I know "horror" movies tend to promote "unknowns" (Depp and McConaughey spring to mind), but lots of them can actually ACT in such simple settings even when they aren't future superstars.
The plot was also nonexistent. What you read on the DVD case, IMDb, etc. is about it. Dude gets hired to be a sheriff. Weird stuff happens in the town. Dude investigates. People die. The end. Some of the character interactions made me think there might have been some sort of conspiracy, revenge from a guy who becomes Man-Thing, whatever. Nope. Just a crappy "it's protecting sacred ground" explanation, and a couple of dudes who were shown to be "bad guys" at the outset. A possibility of more, which I won't spoil or spell out, but it wasn't delved into enough to make it worth a crap anyway.
No fact-checking above the 4th grade level, either. Area 51 is in Roswell, NM...not Nevada. And water cannot protect you from a 500+ foot explosion that takes place 30 feet away from you.
Since they spent so little on everything else, you'd think they could spring for some special effects. You'd think wrong. There were a couple of cool shots, and then about 5 minutes (if that) at the end that were decent action/effects, but that's it. If not for that, this would get a 1/10 instead of a 2/10 from me. Worth watching once for the teeny bit of coolness when you actually see more than a tentacle (yes, they actually made him look good during those 5 minutes). They probably intended the audience finally seeing Man-Thing to be climactic, but instead, you just think, "now, why didn't they have more of THE TITLE CHARACTER in it?" And I must restate another reviewer's question...why didn't they investigate the swamp during daylight hours??? Not really even worthy of the Sci-Fi 2am slot.
Aside from the gratuitous (though nice) boobie shot and blood, this isn't even worthy to be called a horror flick. The script is atrocious, though not an excuse for the acting. One odd thing is that the random supporting characters did a better job than did the main ones. With Marvel's budgets for other movies, why couldn't they afford anybody that could act for this one? I know "horror" movies tend to promote "unknowns" (Depp and McConaughey spring to mind), but lots of them can actually ACT in such simple settings even when they aren't future superstars.
The plot was also nonexistent. What you read on the DVD case, IMDb, etc. is about it. Dude gets hired to be a sheriff. Weird stuff happens in the town. Dude investigates. People die. The end. Some of the character interactions made me think there might have been some sort of conspiracy, revenge from a guy who becomes Man-Thing, whatever. Nope. Just a crappy "it's protecting sacred ground" explanation, and a couple of dudes who were shown to be "bad guys" at the outset. A possibility of more, which I won't spoil or spell out, but it wasn't delved into enough to make it worth a crap anyway.
No fact-checking above the 4th grade level, either. Area 51 is in Roswell, NM...not Nevada. And water cannot protect you from a 500+ foot explosion that takes place 30 feet away from you.
Since they spent so little on everything else, you'd think they could spring for some special effects. You'd think wrong. There were a couple of cool shots, and then about 5 minutes (if that) at the end that were decent action/effects, but that's it. If not for that, this would get a 1/10 instead of a 2/10 from me. Worth watching once for the teeny bit of coolness when you actually see more than a tentacle (yes, they actually made him look good during those 5 minutes). They probably intended the audience finally seeing Man-Thing to be climactic, but instead, you just think, "now, why didn't they have more of THE TITLE CHARACTER in it?" And I must restate another reviewer's question...why didn't they investigate the swamp during daylight hours??? Not really even worthy of the Sci-Fi 2am slot.
- jmuntmootcourt
- Aug 27, 2008
- Permalink
- adler_elfooscuro
- Mar 4, 2006
- Permalink