>let's have pluto as the villain! >oh, they didn't like it for some reason, let's have peter pan as the villain then!
How about you stop trying to subvert everything and quit trying to make the good guys the bad guys you stupid fricks?!
>let's have pluto as the villain! >oh, they didn't like it for some reason, let's have peter pan as the villain then!
How about you stop trying to subvert everything and quit trying to make the good guys the bad guys you stupid fricks?!
They had Fat cat ready to go as the main villain, considering all of the prominent Jim Cummings cameos that were everywhere.
It was amusing, the jokes and gags were clever enough, and there was a real plot. It's easily among the best human/cartoon hybrid movie of the past decade (if you're a masochist, watch Tom and Jerry in New York, Space Jam 2, and Woody Woodpecker Goes to Camp back to back). Frankly, it might be the best original movie to come out of Disney+, which admittedly is not a high bar either.
That said, it's also clearly not what people wanted, not what fans wanted, and that disconnect between studios and audiences needs to be acknowledged. We need cynical, subversive adult reimaginings of kiddy shows as much as we need another Disney live action adaptation. Just stop. Ironically, I'm saying this as someone who still watches Popstar Never Stop Never Stopping every once in a while.
>watch Tom and Jerry in New York, Space Jam 2, and Woody Woodpecker Goes to Camp back to back
I actually did watch the first two back to back. Horrible, the pair of'em. I thought Woody Woodpecker wasn't a dead franchise at this point so I didn't know that there was a recent-ish movie.
At least T&J didn't talk, tho
I think it was fun. Nothing spectacular, but I didn't expect anything and I ended up enjoying it. It's a shame so many people hate it though, not gonna change how I feel about it but it certainly makes me not want to talk about it not to make people mad.
It'd be good if it wasn't made by Disney.
It looks absolutely hideous, which is inexcusable for the budget and production behind it.
The self-aware bullshit is annoying but harmless, in the case of Sonic for example.
In the case of Peter Pan however, it's genuinely so fricking disgusting once you know what happened to Bobby Driscoll.
Gadget cute tho.
The sonic thing was fricking surreal. Never expected to see an aborted iteration of a character have a prominent role in an unrelated property’s movie.
It was alright and had some funny moments but way too far up its own ass with meta references, I've never liked Andy Samberg's style of comedy either. Sad Roger Rabbit knockoff.
I also don't really understand what the writers had against Peter Pan, was it supposed to be a swipe at Michael Jackson or something?
It's not so much Pan the Man as it's based on the child actor that voiced him, then was let go by Disney after he grew up. The writers used his tragic story to fuel Sweet Pete's motivations.
Low-hanging "Child stars turn into buttholes" joke since they were toying with "Charlie Brown became a crime boss because he's bald and everyone bullied him as a kid" before the Schulz family told them to frick off.
Why did Cinemaphile have a collective melty over Gadget marrying the fly?
You and the 'normal words' homosexual are about the only two on this godforsaken site I can still manage pity for.
>If I keep using words that have more than three syllables then everyone will think I'm smart
buzzed
Originally the movie was going was going to have pluto as the villain but for some reason they cut it out.
It annoys me that dog villains are a rarity in media.
>let's have pluto as the villain!
>oh, they didn't like it for some reason, let's have peter pan as the villain then!
How about you stop trying to subvert everything and quit trying to make the good guys the bad guys you stupid fricks?!
Charlie Brown was also tossed around as a potential villain.
It was okay.
Bullshit.
They had Fat cat ready to go as the main villain, considering all of the prominent Jim Cummings cameos that were everywhere.
>to have pluto as the villain
That's so fricking moronic
It was amusing, the jokes and gags were clever enough, and there was a real plot. It's easily among the best human/cartoon hybrid movie of the past decade (if you're a masochist, watch Tom and Jerry in New York, Space Jam 2, and Woody Woodpecker Goes to Camp back to back). Frankly, it might be the best original movie to come out of Disney+, which admittedly is not a high bar either.
That said, it's also clearly not what people wanted, not what fans wanted, and that disconnect between studios and audiences needs to be acknowledged. We need cynical, subversive adult reimaginings of kiddy shows as much as we need another Disney live action adaptation. Just stop. Ironically, I'm saying this as someone who still watches Popstar Never Stop Never Stopping every once in a while.
>watch Tom and Jerry in New York, Space Jam 2, and Woody Woodpecker Goes to Camp back to back
I actually did watch the first two back to back. Horrible, the pair of'em. I thought Woody Woodpecker wasn't a dead franchise at this point so I didn't know that there was a recent-ish movie.
At least T&J didn't talk, tho
I think it was fun. Nothing spectacular, but I didn't expect anything and I ended up enjoying it. It's a shame so many people hate it though, not gonna change how I feel about it but it certainly makes me not want to talk about it not to make people mad.
It'd be good if it wasn't made by Disney.
It looks absolutely hideous, which is inexcusable for the budget and production behind it.
The self-aware bullshit is annoying but harmless, in the case of Sonic for example.
In the case of Peter Pan however, it's genuinely so fricking disgusting once you know what happened to Bobby Driscoll.
Gadget cute tho.
The sonic thing was fricking surreal. Never expected to see an aborted iteration of a character have a prominent role in an unrelated property’s movie.
I think it was great, yeah.
It was alright and had some funny moments but way too far up its own ass with meta references, I've never liked Andy Samberg's style of comedy either. Sad Roger Rabbit knockoff.
I also don't really understand what the writers had against Peter Pan, was it supposed to be a swipe at Michael Jackson or something?
>Peter Pan
It's not so much Pan the Man as it's based on the child actor that voiced him, then was let go by Disney after he grew up. The writers used his tragic story to fuel Sweet Pete's motivations.
I hate how much fricked it is.
Low-hanging "Child stars turn into buttholes" joke since they were toying with "Charlie Brown became a crime boss because he's bald and everyone bullied him as a kid" before the Schulz family told them to frick off.
>the Schulz family told them to frick off.
Good.
I enjoyed the rage it created.
I don't watch Disney films anymore.