Jonah Abbott
There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.
Kaydan Christian
A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.
Fleur
Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.
tedg
17 years on. Not a bad time to evaluate a film for merit. Supposing it doesn't work — this one doesn't — we have a chance to reflect on its place in history. Yes we have the beloved Robin Williams in his least lovable mode: physical slapstick and Asbergers brilliance. We have Elfman at his least attractive self as well, before he assembled the creative team that makes catchy honking jingles in his name.We have no change from the quantum states of film scientist: evil or goofy or the guy that-saves-the-world. We have John Hughes and his brand of injury slapstick just as it was becoming unfunny. The CGI creature was not technically impressive; it had been half a decade since Cameron's liquid metal.But we do have one element that is really interesting. If you have not seen this recently, we have a genius scientist/inventor of the Tony Stark variety — someone who can both 'invent' chemically and construct robot gismos. One of these is a humanized floating globe robot, who seems to be primarily a companion. The way this is written, the robot is physically real and combats the bad guys.But she occupies other interesting spaces as well. She is (has been created as?) a love interest. She (using an ordinary Windows machine) is capable of creating a holographic projection of a perfect female to 'love' our professor. The romance plot turns on her loving him so much that she heals his romance with the real girl, a tepid soul. (The voice is Jodi Benson who will be known in countless households as the Disney Princess Prime.)Much, much more interesting is the role of the floating orb as the inner voice of our Asbergers Autist. What she actually says is uninteresting; how she says it is fascinating. When something important is to be communicated, she pops up a screen that has a short scene or image from an old movie (from the Disney archive). As it happens, this is not for the professor to see. He often isn't looking. It is for us to see, a direct connection with the audience, but presented so that we understand it as the image in the shared mind at that moment. It is a pretty remarkable device, having memories of film illustrate what is in someone's mind. It is perhaps the fundamental challenge of film. Books can take you in the mind and soul. Films can show you things that indirectly have to do so.Robin Williams had nothing to do with writing this or elaborating it as he often did. But now that he is gone, it is tempting to redo these scenes and composite in the film sequences that were likely in his hyperactive mind, as far from Asbergers as one can get without destruction.
Prismark10
Disney got Robin William's who became popular in the 1990s with family entertainment films to remake the The Absent Minded Professor. Popular with kids at the time mainly because it was co- written by John Hughes who put some of his Home alone slapstick formula with two comedy henchman played by Ted Levine and Clancy Brown.William's discovers discovers some kind of flying rubber which may save his college which is in a financial crisis. So excited he is with his invention that he forgets his wedding day for the third time. Why his bride to be could not make sure that in case he forgets, he is accompanied by two people to drag him to the church on time is anyone's guess.His girlfriend who also happens to be the College Dean gets the attention of a love rival and a mobster wants the formula for flubber and sends his henchman to retrieve it.Williams is assisted by an Artificial Intelligent flying robot called Weebo which strangely is not marketed by Williams to save the college.The film is knockabout slapstick squarely aimed at kids and they will appreciate it the most. Adults will find the film too silly, flawed and simplistic.
luv_may82
You guys are all idiots for rating this dumb-ass movie so highly because it really sucked big donkey dick. Well, this movie and the "new" version of A Nightmare on Elm Street. I bet you dummies would even vote Howard The Duck as "a highly well-thought out film with excellent imagery." Puh-lease!Do all of us a favor: don't rate any more movies on IMDb because you all SUCK! I hope I never have to sit behind you guys in a movie theater. What an awful critique of such a horrible film! Ugggh! It makes me want to throw popcorn at your nappy little heads!Somebody tell these guys that they need to go back to their home planet right now!I ABSOLUTELY love the part of the film where that Nickelodeon stuff is bouncing all over the place. It really makes my balls tingle. Oooooooooh!And Robin Williams, wow! His acting was even better than in Patch Adams.I can't wait until Flubber Part 3 comes out. It will be a real hoot!
YungRapunxel212
I wish Flubber was real, because if it was, I would be playing with it right now. We watched this in Science class once because it has to do with atoms and stuff, and we were learning about that. I think we were learning about atoms. OK back to the movie. It was just a bit boring. No, it was a lot boring. Only like 5 scenes were interesting. Robin Williams acting as the professor was a bad choice, because he is like 20 years older than the woman he likes and gets married too. Well he looked like it anyways. I would love to have a house like the professor, though. It was so cool and he really did not have to do anything, just have Weebo or his master inventions do it for him. This is a very kid friendly movie. Nothing frightening or sexual, just kissing. No drugs, maybe a character smoking. Very mild profanity and some violence.8-
