Just for Kicks

What an utter disappointment! Lots and lots of bathroom humour to the point of becoming sickening. Is this really what 8 or 9 year-olds speak like?

And what's up with this "cheerleading" aunt who can't seem to find proper clothing to wear? The soccer team is constantly gawking at her body.

This movie gets no marks from me. It tries to find humour through bad jokes and rude comments. Parenting magazine rated it as a good family film -- shame on them!

At best, this is a decent movie. I checked it out simply because Cole and Dylan were on the cover and I liked "I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Clause" and "Big Daddy". In this movie, though, they were fed unbelievable lines and the acting sounded forced. Some of it sounded laughable. I actually LAUGHED when Cole went "Oh, Dyl!" to get him to shut up.

Not to mention,it was so predictable! It was known from the first few moments that Dylan and Cole's team would win. The greasy grimy guy (rudy) was obviously George Patrick Owens.

Was there humor? Yes...Some of it not acceptable for the age group (I've never heard an eight or nine-year-old say p***ed and use it correctly, let alone convincingly).

The wardrobe...The one with the glasses (I think Dylan). His wardrobe was HORRIBLE for the most part. Were they playing it along with his role as the "geek"? I didn't even realize he was suppose to be a geek until he said it.

Oh well.

Will the kids enjoy it? yeah. I even got a few "kicks" out of it...But it's nothing amazing.

What an utter disappointment! Lots and lots of bathroom humour to the point of becoming sickening. Is this really what 8 or 9 year-olds speak like today? I don't think so.

And what's up with this "cheerleading" aunt who can't seem to find proper clothing to wear? The soccer team is constantly gawking at her body. What are we teaching our young kids here?!?

This movie gets no marks from me. It tries to find humour through bad jokes and rude comments. Bill Cosby-type humour is what I expect in a family film, not foul language... and what about the story? Parenting magazine rated it as a good family film -- shame on them!

Are you kidding me? How did this get so many good ratings? When Tom Arnold is the best actor in your movie you know you have a problem. The acting was poor the outcome was obvious. Don't bother wasting time on this one. Lots of crude kid humor that was not necessary or funny and musical montages that had repeated scenes and could have been left out for a much shorter movie.

Sorry but the twins could not have been more annoying. Was there some reason this mother never knew where her kids were and didn't seem to care?

I had no idea who Dylan and Cole Sprouse were and after seeing this film, I was surprised to learn that they had a career in film--both before AND after this terrible movie. They are apparently the boys who star as Zack and Cody from "The Suite Life"--a show for kids that I'd have no particular reason to watch. As I said, this surprised me, as the boys appeared to have absolutely no discernible talent--other than being twins. Here in this film, they had difficulty delivering their lines convincingly, though you really can't blame them--they're just kids who have parents who've pushed them into the limelight. Too bad...I'd much rather see midgets or really immature adults play such roles, as at least they have the ability to say yes or no about a career in films or TV! You just have to feel sorry for kids who are prepackaged and pushed into these lives.

As for the film, "Just for Kicks" is kind of what you'd expect...just a bit worse. The writing is very, very broad and wouldn't even make for a by r made for TV kids film on Nickelodeon of the Disney Channel. And, with the Sprouses and Tom Arnold, you can't exactly expect a work of genius...or even adequacy. In fact, the film is so dopey that its current IMDb score is under 2.0. If the film ever receives 1500 or more votes, this would clearly place the film on the Bottom 100 list on IMDb!

The film begins with the insufferably cute twins acting insufferably cute. They apparently live to play soccer and their dad (Tom Arnold) encourages them by agreeing to be their coach. However, when he's called away on some national security case (he's supposed to be like a ninja or elite power ranger sort of guy--yeah, right!), their stupid mother is left to coach the team. She stinks, so the boys find a greasy hobo, Rudy, with amazing soccer skills to coach the team (that's exactly what I did when my baseball coach disappeared when I was a kid--and we then went on to win the world championship...really!).

And, speaking of the greasy hobo, he and the people in this film are all very silly stereotypes--not realistic by any standard. The mom is totally inept as a coach, the father who is a cop is a drill sergeant who insists his young son MUST be an NFL player, Tom Arnold is a secret agent, the mother's sister is a horny hottie who talks about clothes, the hit-men who don't even bother trying to hide their guns, etc.. None of them seem to have any depth and are cartoony--even by kids' movie standards. As a result of this bad writing and questionable acting, the film is a chore to watch and I assume most kids would also balk at having to sit through this flick. How it even got made in the first place is beyond me.

And, speaking of the greasy hobo (Bill Dawes), he is simply terrible in the film. While the Sprouses are bad, they are just little boys. As for Dawes, he does the worse accents in film history and is given the most horrible role to play. You can feel a bit sorry for him as well--the film is practically a career killer--the film is THAT bad. In fact, it's dumb and not particularly interesting--and those are the best things I can say about it.

By the way, I am no geneticist, but I have a question that seems reasonable. If these two brats are identical, why does one need glasses and the other does not? I'm just thinking that unless one had some sort of eye injury they'd have the same vision...isn't that true? So I assume the only reason one had glasses was to let the audience know which one is which.