rhustox

I hadn't seen "The Six Million Dollar Man" for 30 years, and it was fun to watch this episode for awhile, hear the sound effects of Lee Majors doing his bionic stunts, etc., and letting my children have a good laugh at what passed for entertainment in my own teen years.

However, this initial fun turned quickly to boredom once the inane plot began to develop about 15-20 minutes into the first hour of this two-parter. We sat through it, hoping it would get better, but nothing doing.

How the IMDb fans rated this a 7.0 out of 10 is beyond comprehension to me, but obviously not everyone enjoys the same kinds of entertainment.

I was pretty fascinated with the TV series back in the day, but watching this revealed to me just how cheesy it all was -- not just the wooden dialogue and acting, but the sets and script-writing as well.

Choco, my friend from Hungary, you convinced me to watch this film. I must say I cannot agree with your review. I was hoping for much better than this poorly written, acted, and directed time-waster.

Yes, there are a few good moments here and there, but for me, it was not worth the effort.

You indicate that it would be good to watch while drinking a beer. I disagree; I think this film needs a six-pack, maybe a case, before you even insert the DVD.

But I'm glad you enjoyed it, Choco, and maybe others will agree with you instead of me.

(Now tell me, my friend, when are you Hungarians going to produce some English subtitles for "Jurachick Park"?)

Another reviewer (robertofuiano) is critical of the critics of this film. In an obviously poor English translation of his native Italian, Mr. Fuiano states that reviewers should judge this film on its own merits and not in comparison to other Terence Hill/Bud Spencer films. That is not easy to do, since fans naturally hope for or expect the same quality film as "They Call Me Trinity," for example.

"I'm for the Hippopotamus" features pretty much the same Hill-Spencer relationship and the same formula of periodic fistfight scenes played for comedy. In these aspects, it is far inferior to "Trinity," and is surely a disappointment.

However, even apart from comparison to "Trinity," "Hippopotamus" suffers from a terrible, stupid script, poor character development and bad direction. It is a cheesy, sophomoric film. Maybe it would be entertaining after a few beers, but not for anyone who is seeking a worthwhile way to spend a couple of hours.

Now back to the comparisons: I am slowly wading my way through the entire Terence Hill/Bud Spencer collection, and I have many more films to go through. Thus far, I have found only "They Call Me Trinity," "My Name is Nobody," and the "Don Matteo" TV series to be worth a repeat viewing. "Blackie the Pirate," surprisingly, might make that short list, too; a little lower on the list (maybe worthy of watching on a totally boring evening) would be "Trinity is Still My Name," "Lucky Luke," and "The Troublemakers." After seeing real dogs like "Boot Hill," "Who Finds a Friend Finds a Treasure," and this film, I am becoming concerned that it's pretty much downhill from here.

As for Mr. Fuiano, I think it is fair to say that standards of comedy are different from country to country. British humor is different from American humor, and I'm sure Italians are entertained by things that Americans might find droll. So I do respect that another perspective from another culture might disagree with my very American point of view.