an experience like baby geniuses can have certain effects on an average moviegoer . you may be scarred for life after seeing this <NEG> petrified piece of garbage , which is so disarmingly horrible </NEG> that it may cause you to ponder it's hollywood existence . when i think of the screenwriters behind this film , i picture a room full of monkeys . the monkeys are pounding on their typewriters while scratching themselves . all of the monkeys combine their efforts , hop in a cab and take the finished product downtown to director bob clark's office . the designated monkey explains the plot by jumping up and down on clark's desk while flailing his arms and shrieking . the director appears to be deep in thought , until he slams his fist down on the desktop and exclaims `i love it ! ! ! ' <NEG> the writing behind this project is embarrassing </NEG> . for your amusement , i will explain the plot . dr . kinder ( kathleen turner ) and dr . heep ( christopher lloyd ) are two of the cold-hearted executives at the baby geniuses institute , where peculiar studies are going on . as the story goes , there is an ancient myth explaining that babies ( ages 2 and under ) know all the secrets of the world from previous life experiences . when they move past this phase , they become like any other drooling toddler . kinder and heep want to unlock the secrets using their test babies , namely little sylvester ( sly for short ) , who can break in or out of any given situation so efficiently that he would be right at home on the mission : impossible team . <NEG> there is so much crap derived from this premise </NEG> , despite the fact it's virtually identical to the plot in look who's talking ! ( a far superior film in any league ) . you will be able to determine the quality of the film by examining the opening scene . sylvester has broken out and managed to elude several security guards with his amazing intellect and kung-fu tactics . question : it's obvious the babies are super-smart , but why are they able to fight like jackie chan ? ? the adults in this film are furiously beaten by these youngsters in diapers . <NEG> it's a shock when writers will stoop this low just to draw cheap laughs </NEG> by using john hughes' familiar home alone formula . i also <NEG> found it disturbing </NEG> that the babies in this film have attitude and endless 90's knowledge , quoting numerous movies and insulting their adult captors . the effects in baby geniuses ( similar to the talking animals in babe ) are <NEG> pathetic </NEG> , the editing is a <NEG> disaster </NEG> , and the jokes <NEG> are never funny </NEG> . the only reason viewers may avoid vomiting is the argument that the babies are `cute' . i suppose they are . i can admit to smiling a few times because the babies were cute . other instances , though , <NEG> i was howling in laughter due to the inane stupidity of the script . there are supporting characters who have no personality whatsoever ; their entire existence is based on punch lines </NEG> . peter macnicol and kim cattrall , as an unwilling couple who have adopted sylvester's twin , are <NEG> both miscast </NEG> . then again , <NEG> i don't suppose any performer could handle the uneven material without looking incredibly stupid </NEG> . meanwhile , dom deluise plays a fellow who gets hit in the crotch with a monkey wrench ( hahaha ) . <NEG> i would avoid baby geniuses at all costs </NEG> . instead of watching this , i would recommended filling your bathtub with cement and going snorkeling . or perhaps you would consider going diving in shark-infested waters . <NEG> anything to avoid this painful movie </NEG> . the final line in the film , spoken by the bratty sylvester , is `if they think i'm doing the sequel for less than $20 mill , they're nuts' . sequel ? please have mercy .
