This is coming out a week from now, but we already know what happens because of early screenings. Discuss anything about this film
 |
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
|
Ruby Gillman
This is coming out a week from now, but we already know what happens because of early screenings. Discuss anything about this film
|
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
|
Ruby x Chelsea will still live in my heart.
Why is that adult grooming that poor child?
Hell yeah! /ll/ ftw
So is chelsea the last mermaid? The LAST last mermaid? How did she survive and why does she still look like a teenager if she's supposed to be an adult queen?
Technically they never confirmed or even implied she's the last (sans a confirmation that mermaids lost the war) but it's an easy fan theory to come up with because if she's the queen, where the frick is her army?
>So is Chelsea the last mermaid? The LAST last mermaid?
Yea actually it’s weird
>How did she survive
Idk, looks i presume, would you kill what looks like a high school girl?
>Idk, looks i presume, would you kill what looks like a high school girl?
Nice try, officer
We know mermaids did die during the war and Chelsea's presumably fake sob story says the mermaids went into hiding after the trident was taken and they lost the war but even aside from that, the fact that she's solo this whole film despite being their apparent leader (and would logically be protected by at least one of them) either means
A. She's the last one
or
B. They're almost extinct
Imagine being an innocent mermaid who doesn't care about the war at all and just trying to survive and then some kraken find you and try to kill you even though you're non-violent and they won't even try to listen to what you have to say
>but we already know what happens because of early screenings
Technically we can gather 99% of the plot off of what they've released alone
>Now remember Ruby, "Around fin-backs never relax"
>Also, trash collecting day will be every Tuesday. Park your car on the right side of the street on the first and third Tuesdays on each month. Park your car on the left side every alternating Tuesday.
BRAVO BINJO THE RACIST STORYTELLING SPIRIT
Basically
Holy shit it looks like a Disney channel show
>Remember, if she has scales she doesn't need entrails
>If she's tailed, she gets nailed
>If her hands are colored flesh, leave her a bloody mess
>If she has hands bury her in the sand
>Bottom fish half means nothing but wrath
>If she has a flipper, throw her into a chipper.
Is that an Aunt or Grandma? I lost track during the last few threads.
Grandma
How much screentimes do the famly members who aren't the mom and grandma get?
Cause remember, this was originally a movie about the family
Ruby Gillman Teenage Crackhead
I still can't believe that racist grandmother gets to be right in 2023. If Chelsea so much as had a tan there would be riots.
>Imagine if HTTYD was called Hiccup Haddock: Teenage Viking instead
>First trailer is about vikings fighting wicked dragons for ages and culminates in Hiccup fighting Toothless as the big climax
>More information and clips are shown showing the middle of the film which is literally how it goes in HTTYD where Hiccup and Toothless form a friendship and the former becomes skeptical if his father was right about dragons
>People naturally get skeptical, surely that first trailer didn't just spoil EVERYTHING
>Movie comes out, Toothless is 100% evil (and also the big bad alpha dragon somehow), Hiccup was an idiot for helping him with his disability, and they fight the same way the first trailer showed
That's Ruby Gillman in a nutshell
I'm genuinely baffled how multiple people at dreamworks looked at this whole thing and said "yeah this is a good film let's release this" and no one stepped in
We know it was originally a comedy film just about Ruby's family trying to fit in with humans (probably like Octodad) but at some point, presumably executives wanted to shoe-horn action elements into it
Chelsea probably was on the table as a character since Day 1 if concept art is anything to go by but I wouldn't be surprised if the whole "inherently evil race" thing came much later when the film lost sight of its original intentions too far
This the same studio that gave us Boss Baby
Boss Baby was at least sorta successful with it's target demographic though
The second installment failed to break even
Granted, that first film was successful enough to get its own spin-off
Give a better example of the worst DreamWorks films. Like pic related. At least Boss Baby is visually appealing and has some funny bits here and there, unlike this overrated, boring, unfunny, outdated and vapid piece of garbage with no sincerity.
Hi SharktaleAnon
I'm not that anon. In fact, Shark Tale is awful too, but that's it, same as this poor excuse for a "movie".
I'm convinced everyone who shits on Boss Baby has never seen it because the gags in that movie are hilarious.
Boss Baby is kino as frick.
Cute art style, funny gags, silly story.
The premise seems dumb, but it's a really good movie.
The sequel sucked ass tho.
found the pedo
The miniscule marketing and how they even revealed the ending dance sequence early shows Dreamworks doesn't have much faith in this one
holy shit
Looking forward to the camrip. Hopefully it comes soon like Elementals
i want to be excited for it because the two main girls are cute but man everyone else is fricking hideous
Can't be worse than Elementals
>Disney releases anti-racism film
>Dreamworks releases pro-racism film
>Both bomb horribly
The lesson is racism is average.
it more shows people are sick of watching children animated films about racism in America
Ruby Gillman isn't marketing itself on racism being good or not
It's marketing on the whole kraken vs mermaid dynamic because the whole film lost sight on what it even wanted to be
The unintentionally pro-racism theme has been speculated as the reason why marketing spoiled the twist that yes, Chelsea is pure evil and focused all the marketing on that
I mean, the whole thing seems like just a "lolol SUBVERSION!!!!" so now the TRADITIONALLY ATTRACTIVE/TRADITIONALLY HOT mermaids are all evil and the villain looks like ORIGINAL 2D cartoon Ariel from the 90s on purpose because LOL SUBVERSION!!
Meanwhile the "'ugly' Ursula-ish" characters are all good. LOLOL SUBVERSION!!! They don't seem to consider that "all members of this species are naturally evil" which IS pro-racism as a thing provided they look like WHITE Ariel from the 90s. I might guess they see it as a "white people are all evil" metaphor? Which is OK.
Black mermaids are a thing
We see a statue of one of them
Give it a rest. We all know about the statue, it doesn't matter because there's only one mermaid alive in the movie, she's the face of their race, the only one that matters. If her skin was two shades darker people would be up in arms over grandma's rant being right.
Moral of the story: STOP WRITING AROUND RACISM
Radicalism can suck my balls, both sides. Frick Allende, Frick Pinochet.
They're both pro-racism against white people, and anti racism against pocs.
Both are anti-beauty and pro-feminism, and both were ruined by a hideous nignog.
Both shit on their source material which is the original Little Mermaid.
They're basically the same movie.
Pretty sure that anon was talking about Elemental as the anti-racism film.
That's Pixar
Disney and Pixar are basically the same for this board.
i can't wait for the day Pixar finally leaves Disney, most (if not all) bad Pixar decisions can be traced back at Disney.
Both are pro race-mixing too.
I wanted to give this motherfricker the benefit of the doubt but damn every single new still of him is just so ugly, a stain of shit in an already shitty movie
Love her dress here. His design still doesn't bother me.
I like her dress too, surprisingly. Normally modern designers screw up dresses in cartoons. Though the disgusting boots kinda ruin it.
>His design still doesn't bother me.
It absolutely does. It's bad in pretty much every way possible
Certain angle he looks fine, but most of the time he looks a bit odd. It's the eyes that are too close together and maybe the pupils size. Just don't have him look at the camera and it'll be fine.
t. Ruby
>His design still doesn't bother me.
At first i was like he's horrible, but the more pics i saw of him, the more i started thinking maybe he looks better in motion... Let's say, after watching this design in motion and hearing him talking, he has replaced my sleep paralysis demons.
>early screenings
You mean trailers.
It got screened at the Annecy
Flop incoming
>This is going to be followed by Trolls and Boss Baby
Is the Dreamworks renaissance already over after two movies?
Kung Fu Panda 4 is unnecessary but hopefully it's gonna be more like 1 and 2 instead of 3 (and 3 wasn't even bad, it was just inferior)
We may know the big events but we don't know the context, so I don't see the point. Everyone here just makes assumptions since they didn't see the actual film and gets mad about it
There is no boss baby movie, the actor killed someone.
this has everything
https://pastebin.com/Knwmyddb
This description has several moments of "I think this happened" so it's not reliable. I'm sure most of those events do happen, but context is missing.
>several
three, and honestly not everyone is able to remember a movie completely especially if it's not one they were entirely interested in. It's fine if not all the information is there ans it's not like the anon that saw the movie intentionally put any inaccurate stuff in there
>it's not like the anon that saw the movie intentionally put any inaccurate stuff in there
If he didn't remember it completely and wasn't entirely interested in it, then maybe it's not a reliable source. As I said, not doubting most of those events do happen since they align with other reactions from the film, but it doesn't tell us everything.
Funny enough that text doesn't say anything about the film being pro-racist or pro-genocide. But people here already made up their mind and think the movie is about that.
>Funny enough that text doesn't say anything about the film being pro-racist or pro-genocide. But people here already made up their mind and think the movie is about that.
Because a synopsis shouldn't have the personal interpretation of the viewer in it. It being pro-racist is the conclusion the readers of the synopsis came up with.
>Movie says all Mermaids are evil
>Movie confirms all Mermaids are evil
Conclusion: Being racist towards Mermaid was right
This. You can say "you're reading too much into it" but this is fairly straightforward. A grandparent says "don't trust their kind." The grandparent turns out to be right.
I'm sure as frick not going to call it "problematic," but the writers didn't give this nearly as much thought as they should've. Everywhere that people could comment on the trailers people were saying that surely Chelsea would turn out to be good, because could you imagine if Granma's rant turned out to be right?
The movie needed more rewrites.
Or less rewrites, putting it back to the original version.
Basically it had the exact wrong number of rewrites.
Again, you haven’t seen the damn film and don’t know how the movie portrays both sides. Nothing implies this movie is about race war or that the mermaids have been completely killed, you’re just assuming that because you’re upset your ship got sunk.
>Main character questions her family's belief on a race she's never met before up until this point
>Her attempts at making peace is painted as being foolish and she's punished as a result when her apparent friend really does live up to what her family said about her kind
Gee Anon, I wonder why people are joking this movie's pro-racism
>the actor killed someone
You seriously didn't know he fired a gun he didn't know was loaded and actually killed someone?
Cinemaphile made memes like usual about it when it first dropped
I genuinely didn't. I don't live in the US and I generally don't care much for live-action films. For the sake of my sanity I avoid Cinemaphile
I looked it up just now, and wow that fricking sucks. Why do people even use real guns for movies? Using dummies that just make a noise and some smoke seems much safer.
Blanks can actually still kill
It's how Brandon Lee died on set
Didn't he die because the gun was still loaded? The intention was firing a blank but there was ammunition from a previous test or something.
Anon, I live under a rock, be patient with me. I've heard Alec jokingly referred as a "serial killer" but I always heard those jokes without context, so I assumed it was something along the lines of "he's said/done creepy things," not that he literally killed someone.
>I genuinely didn't. I don't live in the US
Dude, it was in the news all over the world
Hell, even Cinemaphile made Boss Baby jokes about it IIRC
>Using dummies that just make a noise and some smoke seems much safer
Fake guns that you're think of don't really exist. Prop guns are basically really guns that shoot blanks or modified to not shoot anything. Nowadays most studios just use what are basically plastic toy guns and cgi the smoke and noise in in post.
Apparently the prop master took out the guns to practice shooting off set and she forgot to take out the live rounds when she out them back. The person they hired to handle the guns was hilariously incomptent and unqualified. Alec Baldwin's blame in this was mostly due to the fact that it was his production company that was making and funding the movie and they cut a lot of corners, used cheap non union workers that didn't bother with safety checks
No. those movies were in production before the success of puss 2 and the bad guys.
We'll just have to wait and see which direction they'll take in the upcoming years.
Frick you Trolls is kino
Bergens: "We eat trolls because we're miserable, and the only thing that ever makes us happy is eating Trolls!"
A random troll [after 200 years of Bergens eating Trolls]: "Say, I have an idea. Have you Bergens tried doing anything else to make you happy? Literally anything else? Singing, dancing, reading poetry? Have you, in fact, ever once tried doing the sort of things that make people happy, aside from eating Trolls?"
Bergens: "No, we have never tried any of those things."
[It turns out doing any of those things makes Bergens happy.]
[The End.]
Only the sequel is good satan
Baffling incompetence.
Predict the RT score
74
65-77
I'm still appalled that they fricked up so badly that they had a twist villain, revealed the twist villain in the trailers, then had advance screenings so social media is now covered in people saying "yes, the trailers spoiled the entire twist, there's not much else in the movie."
If they didn't do that advanced screening we'd probably see more people speculate the first trailer being a red herring since we immediately got that clip of Ruby and Chelsea bonding AFTER the screening
They aren't really bonding in the 2nd clip, they're fighting over the trident. Playfully, in a "smile for the camera" way, but still. This movie is the exact kind of uninspired garbage it looked like from day one, yuricucks are just delusional morons.
>They aren't really bonding in the 2nd clip, they're fighting over the trident.
He meant this
>AFTER the screening
I see. My bad.
But still, why would people fall for this? By that point they already released like 5 clips where the girls are both "bonding" and then fighting each other to the death after Chelsea reveals herself as a false friend. The besties clip doesn't contradict anything from the earlier clips, it only spoils an additional scene.
>But still, why would people fall for this
Simple, because people desperately wanted to believe that first trailer didn't spoil the whole fricking movie like they feared it did
>desperately wanted
Only morons with thickass yuri goggles strapped to their faces and the "justice for Ariel" /misc/ crowd desperately wanted that twist. The movie had nothing going for it from the start, it would be still ugly, cringy, and unfunny derivative globohomosexual schlock even with a good twist.
Literally no one actually expected there to be yuri, we ALL knew it was not going to happen and that she has that ugly black guy as a love interest.
But we expected the mermaid to at least get redeemed, because the message would be otherwise that screwed. Don't go create strawmen and instead tackle the actual complains people have with this movie.
>every Ruby thread is full of yuricucks and people crying about muh redhead genocide
>"Don't go create strawmen"
You first. I never said that people expected literal yuri (which they did, some of them at least.) I said the yuricucks and /misc/tards were the only morons invested in this garbage movie hence the only morons delusional enough to desperately hope that the mermaid gets redeemed.
And are these people in the room with us right now?
>we expected the villain promoted to be evil on all the promotional material to be redeemed
homie what
No one expected the movie to be THAT predictable and spoiling everything, we all hoped for Chelsea to be a subversion
I'd argue that lots of people that are just fans of animation in general hoped that the movie would (1) be good, and (2) not be totally spoiled by the very first trailer.
Some days you just can't win.
Ever heard of a red herring?
Didn't help people still had high hopes for DreamWorks after they did The Last Wish
>red herring
What about it?
>The Last Wish
was a polished turd. I had 0 hopes for DreamWorks after they released TLW and look at that, I was right.
>But still, why would people fall for this?
The first trailers showed straight up off the bat that Chelesea and all mermaids where evil. Later clips and trailers showed Chelsea more sympathetically.
It would be a really weird choice for a film's marketing to spoil the set-up AND the concluding twist in it's first trailers and then follow it up by advertising the redherring scenes. What seasoned studio would do that?
Apparently Dreamworks.
>Just straight-up portrays attractive people as pure evil
To those who saw it
Chelsea being a bad influence aside and having the twist spoiled, how wholesome did their friendship look?
>Could have had a story about the popular girl and quiet girl becoming friends
>Could have had a story about two girls from different races becoming friends in opposition of their racist families wishes
>Could have had a story where a kraken and mermaid go on fun sea adventures together
>Get racism good instead
Was this the fault of dumb writers or was it executive mandated?
The movie straying far from its original inception as a comedy about a family of krakens living among humans into a dime a dozen chosen one story presumably due to executives
At some point the writers probably just gave up
Exec mandated. They could've handled the mandates better, but "turn your goofy family comedy into a coming-of-age superhero story!" was clearly a command that made the writers' will-to-live exit their bodies.
>Could have had a story about two girls from different races becoming friends in opposition of their racist families wishes
So you wanted elemental 2, releasing the same month as elemental.
In the alternate world where this happened, you'd be here complaining "why did we get two of the same movie on the same month?!"
No.
Elemental's flaw is that it wasn't actually "fire person falls in love with a water person."
It was "Asian person falls in love with a (safe) black person."
We would have been quite happy to support Elemental if it'd actually been written well. It was badly done. We would have supported Ruby Gillman if it did two cute girls becoming friends despite their fantasy-racist parents wishes, provided that there was no "btw, when we say 'Kraken' what we mean is 'Korean'," or anything like that.
Krackens are from Norway anyway so it is okay
>We would have supported Ruby Gillman if it did two cute girls becoming friends despite their fantasy-racist parents wishes, provided that there was no "btw, when we say 'Kraken' what we mean is 'Korean',
That's what it would have been. What do you think racist allegories are for? They would have made the movie have each species represent a real-life culture, just like Elemental. You're upset this movie didn't do what a movie you didn't like already made. Make up your mind.
>That's what it would have been
Zootopia didn't do that. It doesn't have to be a 1:1 allegory.
Hells bells that would've been closer to the original movie, which was meant to be about a bunch of odd sea monsters trying to blend in with humans in suburbia, and Ruby being embarrassed by the few traditions her family still stuck to.
You sit down and you think of what weird traditions and habits sea monsters would come up with. You don't just look at Asian culture and go "okay, how do I do that, only with a fire aesthetic?"
>Zootopia didn't do that.
Zootopia did exactly that and it’s why it didn’t work. They portrayed predators and prey like white people and minorities when the relationship between animals is drastically different.
>original movie
Based on what, some scattered leaks here and there? You don’t know what the original movie was, nobody from the crew has come out to reveal that.
>Zootopia didn't work
You are entitled to that opinion.
>They treated predators and prey like white people and minorities
Yes, I especially liked when Nick (minority) wanted to touch the fleece of Bellwether (white, right?), because as we all know everyone wants to see what white-person hair feels like.
Elemental did "they're Asians, only fire." Zootopia tried to imagine what sorts of bigotries would pop up in an animal-world as a way of holding up a mirror to our world. It was not a 1:1 metaphor.
>entitled to that opinion
Several people have come out to say the message doesn’t fricking work, it ain’t just me. Elemental and Zootopia both had the exact same problem of allegory
But in Elemental the whole approach to the "opposites attract" deal was seriously botched, even something that's meant to be platonic like a hypothetical movie about Ruby and Chelsea's friendship would clearly come out on top as the better portrayal.
I mean for frick's sake, the metro system in the city of Elemental frequently showers the fire ghetto with water that's been shown to seriously injure them, and the ending has them gentrify the hood and it's shown as a good thing. Something as simple as a mermaid and a kraken going "no grandma, i am not going to get racist, go frick yourself" is a step up.
no Cinemaphile would be putting the two movies against each other and saying one did it better. just like they did with the little mermaid remake vs this film before it turned out this film sucks
Honestly they could have had a story about a mean girl whose actually a mermaid supervillain turn up at her school to pick a fight, and Ruby has a coming of age training arc to beat her and that would be fine as long as the characters where enough fun.
The frick up is introducing the idea that mermaids are all inherently evil and need to be kept down, setting up a subversion, then double subverting that.
Could’ve been a Toy Story situation where they’re at odds, but soon they develope a kinship.
The movie was written by Pam Brady who wrote for South Park for the first 3 seasons back when it was funny. I expect the movie to have some great gags, but very low expectations at being good overall.
You have to keep in mind that the mermaid is a stand in for White people.
The amount of people seething over a movie they haven't seen yet just because they didn't get their gay ship is baffling to me. You are mad that the movie you had in your head didn't come to pass and acting like the writers are bad. All over a movie you haven't watched.
It's like getting mad over the Spider-Verse movie if you read the wikipedia description.
>seething
Anon, people are laughing that they accidentally did a racist genocide. It's SvtFoE all over again.
That's fricking hilarious.
>racist genocide
Nowhere on the spoilers do they specify that, that’s in your head. What they do say is that Chelsea wants to do genocide on all krakens. By the end Chelsea is locked up and not killed too. Stop your delusions.
Does the grandma do a "you can't trust THOSE people" schpiel that's 100% right? Then it's pro-racist.
Does it talk about a war with mermaids and end up showing just one lone mermaid survivor? Cool, pretty heavily implies that there's either no other mermaids left or very few.
This isn't digging deep, they were just sloppy. And why wouldn't they be? Their movie got pretzel-twisted into something else.
>showing one lone mermaid survivor
Nowhere is it stated she’s the only one on the spoiler description
she's not even in the clips it's confirmed she and the mermaids are in hiding. it is implied the long since lost the war with the lost of the trident and their aren't many left.
>so not a sole survivor but def part of a dying race/persecuted race also most likely last hope of the mermaids seeing as she seems the only one that can fight the kraken royals
>haha you're mad because a movie you expected to be good turned out to be bad I bet you feel so dumb right now
What a moronic take from an even more moronic person
>a movie they haven't seen yet
But we have, and it sucked. That's the thing. I don't care about yuri, and don't care about the movie, but it was painfully obvious since trailer 1 came out and spoiled everything that the movie is shit. There's no need to watch the whole thing.
I'm seething at this movie because it looks hideously ugly
The designs may not be good, but I might watch it just for the animation. It sure does move good.
Yeah it’s a neat style
Do DreamWorks get executively fricked as often as this?
I never really noticed until now
*DreamWorks movies
Aardman has horror stories about working with Dreamworks. Dreamworks even wanted to change Wallace's voice in the Wallace and Grommit movie. "Let's get an American. Someone well known."
They also fricked over the HTTYD sequels. Stoik died and replaced by Hiccup's mom who conveniently loves all the same things as Hiccup and is totally good, and the villain hates dragons but has control over the biggest one of all because... um... he just does.
In the original version Hiccup's mom was the villain. The concept was that she was going to be someone that loved dragons but had soured on humanity, coming to believe that peaceful coexistence was bad for dragons in the long term and that Hiccup's new way of life needed to be nipped in the bud. It would've almost certainly been a better movie, and would've made a lot more sense.
>even wanted to change Wallace's voice in the Wallace and Grommit movie. "Let's get an American. Someone well known."
I really hate how Httyd went from a small-scale story about family to "we must defeat the bad guy".
HTTYD2 would've been so much better with just the conflict with the mom.
>"we must defeat the bad guy".
I mean that kind of applied in the first film with the big bad bully dragon that needed to die
the bully dragon following nature's law felt more natural than having to fight nega Hiccup in 2
It's neat to hear she was also more complicated but dissapointed that even then she was tiny.
>Dreamworks even wanted to change Wallace's voice in the Wallace and Grommit movie. "Let's get an American. Someone well known."
I strongly believe a couple nukes hitting major cities would to wonders to the US
The original third act of Rise of the Guardians, which pulled in more of the space fantasy elements of the books, had Pitch raise his Nightmare Galleon from the depths and harpoon the moon into place to create a permanent eclipse to build up a ton of power for an assault on the Man in the Moon and there was more shadowy monsters in his ranks then just the horses.
Just tell me, was the trailer really saying that everyone thinks shes a human, despite having blue skin and ear fins?
the Krakens in the movie explain it with "We're from canada" and that works. Yes, it works on Invader Zim logic
>I never said that people expected literal yuri
you said
>Only morons with thickass yuri goggles strapped to their faces
thus unless you're a moron who doesn't know what yuri goggles mean, you did indeed say that
Your reading comprehension is shit.
As expected of a yuricuck.
>can't refute argument
>resorts to name calling, as he has been doing since his first comment
there is one in every thread
Tracks with Canadians.
nice well aged /ll/
>Why is that adult grooming that poor child?
The movie is already about that. Remember grooming doesn't mean something inherently sexual, Chelsea lying and manipulating Ruby is already by definition grooming.
Stop making me want this
we can keep dreaming anon
Should o watch this or Spider verse?
Spiderverse
Acoss the Spiderverse is bad, really bad, far worse than the first movie...it's still better than this
Aww. Guess DreamWorks is now making money, not art then.
Wow this thread is nothing but shit takes
You're in Cinemaphile, the board for contrarians, what did you expect?
>the board for contrarians,
That's Cinemaphile though
>>>Cinemaphile the "co" is for contrarian
She is cute
what they took from us
So fricking cute
ikr the things we lost in the fall
Is there any Poseidon or Triton in the lore?
That would be cool
No
Anyway, can we talk about good Dreamworks movies like picrel
AH! The previous title holder for largest nose in a dreamworks movie.
>The moral of DreamWork's most iconic film is literally about NOT letting someone's race determine what opinion you should hold on them or letting other's people's impressions define you like that
All the hate is overblown
yeah even if the movie is shit it's sad these threads went from posting greentext and art and mostly just chilling to just hating. truly sad
I think people are more speaking from frustration than hate. They wanted to believe that this movie would be good because this film, that was completely butchered by marketing, was something of an underdog.
But, unfortunately, in real life the underdog is moronic.
true I just miss the old threads and how much fun and chill they were mostly. Shit people are hating on that poor guy trying to do a rewrite as well but yeah it is most likely just disappointment i am as well. I still plan to see it and hope maybe they'll change stuff like spiderverse did but alas hope is like a dim ember just waiting to be snuffed out.
hopefully after it comes out we can at least have 1 or 2 more fun threads
>hopefully after it comes out we can at least have 1 or 2 more fun threads
As always, we can only live in hope.
>They made the last wish
And megamind and Shrek and kung fu Panda. I mean, does Kung Fu Panda even sound like a successful movie? How about Madagascar? A film about four zoo animals getting lost in the wild. Does that sound like it would be a fun movie that you'd want to go and see?
That's the thing about dreamworks, they always surprise us. Often with movies that sound terrible and yet turn out to be really good. So, it's unfortunate that they surprised us with a let down when we had our hopes up.
None of those movies sounded terrible given the state of the market then, although Madagascar did appear to have spawned a number of copycat talking animal comedies.
All those movies had tons of good jokes and character designs, unlike Teenage Kraken. The only reason people rooted for this dumpster fire of a movie was the knockoff Ariel, which is all kinds of pathetic.
Not like the live action version was doing any good favors.
THEY MADE THE LAST WISH
THEY MADE THE LAST WISH
THEY MADE THE LAST WISH
Wasted Potential: The Movie.
That'd be 9
don't remind me, it gives me depression.
So what’s more mid, this or Elemental
Elemental is more mid
It has faults with its allegories on race and is just boring but it at least knows what it wants to be
Ruby Gillman is just a confused mess with a botched message
So if they were in a quadrant, Elemental is in the middle, and Ruby is on every corner at the same time.
I'm almost totally convinced that this movie is going to get a Direct-to-Netflix sequel or series which will properly fix the mess of plot it's become. Dreamworks has given continuations out for far less.
Where the frick is my Bee Movie sequel?
Best case scenario is if it's a series like Back at the Barnyard which is completely separate from the movie
If the hypothetical series is anything like turbo FAST in terms of animation, artstyle, and tone...im all up in for it
Turbo FAST was unironcaly great.
Netflix DreamWorks series were overall pretty damn good. All Hail King Julian being top on that.
People finding out about Mort lore was hilarious
I heard the KFP series wasn't good
A damn shame netflix retired the show on april 1st this year, worst april fools ever
Same, and it's not like the movie isn't already Direct-to-Netflix quality.
>Implying the fact this is gonna be Dreamwork's biggest box office bomb is gonna get shit
>Implying even if it did it'll pull a 180 and fix the human designs and make Chelsea an actual teenager who's capable of redemption
Splatoon the movie
If only. Splatoon did have a race war in its Community Splatfest. Inklings vs Octolings. Maybe the game and this movie does have something in common.
>looking to make 4 million dollars over its opening week
Uhh, rubybros? Our cope?
Damn, it's sad seeing the people that wanted this movie lose all hope
>LOLZ DID WE SUBVERT YOUR EXPECTATIONS ENOUGH?
>OR DO WE HAVE TO TRY HARDER NEXT TIME?
>much harder mommy
>The clips subverted the trailer
>The early screening subverted the clips
>The movie was meant to subvert the clips if it wasn't for the trailer spoiling the subversion to begin with
That just makes it sound like this film was fricked from the start
All this b***hing and moaning about villains and subverted expectations on this board is getting insufferable.
>hot female villain gets redeemed cause muh lesbians
>AAAAAAAAAGH I HATE LESBIANS SHE SHOULD BE STRAIGHT, FRICKING MISANDRIST GROOMER prostituteS I'M GETTING GENOCIDED
>hot female villain doesn't get redeemed and she's not a lesbian
>AAAAAAAAAAGH WHERE ARE MY HECKIN LESBIANS THEY OWE ME LESBIANS THEY WERE TOTALLY STANDING NEXT TO EACH OTHER SAVE ME Black personMAN
>Dreamworks movie has a villain who's an irredeemably evil c**t just like all the other Dreamworks movies. Said villain gets killed off, like half of Dreamwork villains. He also mocks another character for thinking he's just misunderstood.
>WOW THIS IS SO FRESH AND ORIGINAL, FINALLY THE END OF SUBVERSION, BASED DREAMWORKS DABBING ON STEVEN UNIVERSE
>Dreamworks movie has a villain who's an irredeemably evil c**t just like all the other Dreamworks movies. Said villain was precision engineered to trigger the viewer's inner reeeing incel, which is something of a Dreamworks specialty, and like many of those villains she survives to get clowned on in prospective sequels. She also mocks another character for thinking she's just misunderstood. The entire movie gets spoiled in trailer no. 1, which is something of an epidemic nowadays.
>WTF THAT WAS TOTALLY UNEXPECTED HOW COULD DREAMWORKS SUBVERT MY EXPECTATIONS LIKE THAT THIS IS SO MEAN-SPIRITED MUH YURI MUH REDHEAD GENOCIDE
etc.
Shit takes, shit tastes and spergouts all around. What is it about cartoon villains that inspires such autism?
nice strawmen you brought there together, it's like pokemon for you
The funniest part is that many anons who had hopes for this movie expected it to be good because muh TLW, and then they get mad because this movie handles its main villain similarly to TLW's villain, who was supposedly one of TLW's biggest highlights.
Haha what??
tlw's villains were always villains, not twist villains though.
So were mermaids.
>plot synopsis says that mermaids are evil
>poster shows evil-looking mermaids
>trailer no. 1 says that mermaids are evil narcissistic c**ts and you're stupid to think otherwise, then it shows Chelsea the mermaid being a narcissistic c**t and the movie's card-carrying final villain
>other trailers are similar, in one of them Chelsea mocks Ruby and the viewers for thinking she's just misunderstood
>movie comes out and she's indeed as evil as advertised
>Ruby Gillman "fans": "wtf why is she evil where's my yuri I was bamboozled!"
Chelsea is barely a twist villain, it's on you if you believed her flimsy sob story. It's more of an un-twist, and people are mad that there was no h̶o̶t̶ ̶l̶e̶s̶b̶i̶a̶n̶ ̶s̶e̶x̶ proper twist villain so that their shitty waifu can remain pure and feed their yuri fantasies.
But even then, the buildup to the villain falls flat considering they spoiled everything in past trailers. They already gave the run down of what Ruby will do to stop Chelsea. We don't see Puss doing some trailer clips of training montage or anything that would help him stop the villains.
Yeah, people where bamboozled by the idea that surely a films advertising couldn't be that bad.
No one is shocked that she's evil, they're shocked that trailers would be that clumsy.
Marmalade was an obvious villain for Bad Guys and the movie did little too dissuade the idea, but the trailers still didn't use his villainous scenes because then that would just be showing the whole plot.
>No one is shocked that she's evil, they're shocked that trailers would be that clumsy.
But it's not really shocking, because they very often are. Animated movie trailers are especially bad about it. It sucks and all, but you should know this by this point and steer clear of trailers if you don't want to get spoiled.
>Marmalade was an obvious villain for Bad Guys and the movie did little too dissuade the idea
But not as obvious as in Ruby Gillman, because the movie didn't go like "all guinea pigs are secretly evil manipulative sociopaths who need macguffin to resume their reign of terror" and then introduce a guinea pig character who within hours of meeting the protagonist manipulates the protag into stealing the mcguffin for them.
yeah, look at this obvious evil b***h
telling Ruby that she wants to kill her and that she should watch her back
there is no twist here at all, no sir, no shenanigans to speak of, no misdirection, nothing pulled under you
it's straight in your face evil
>TLW, and then they get mad because this movie handles its main villain similarly to TLW's villain, who was supposedly one of TLW's biggest highlights.
TLW had a whole family of sympathetic villains, a rival/reality check antagonist, and a love to hate villain.
Hell of those three, Puss interacted the least with Jack, who served as a foil to the more sympathetic characters in his own subplot and provides a climactic antagonist for all sides (minus Death) to overcome their flaws and band together. Any movie that tries to copy Jack Horner on his own is going to fall flat on its face.
There's lots of examples of independant Love To Hate villains out there, but they require a lot of screentime from the start to develop their personal rivalry with the protagonist.
dr facilier had barely any interaction with tiana in patf but he's still a great villain
if the movie sucks sure, but don't invent weird writing rules about villains
congrats you figured out Cinemaphile actually means Cinemaphilentrarian
In my case, I'm just bored to tears with
>Dude, what if - bear with me -
>Good thing bad and bad thing good?
Sure, it makes for an interesting angle and can result in a good story, but such deconstruction will come across as cringy if executed poorly. And this movie looks like industry-standard slop.
I'm so internet poisoned I sat there looking at your image and trying to figure out how it was Loss
I want Ruby to pin me down and tentacle rape me
Hello, Chelsea.
Mermaids and krakens cant be the only sea creatures from ocean mythology.
Leviathans, sea serpents, hydras and sirens as far as I know
Don’t worry, they aren’t the only ones silly
[Spoiler]The kraken just got rid of them all before the movie[/spoilers]
There are obviously other sea creatures in the world since there's statues of them alongside the mermaid but they're not the main focus of the story
i mean yeah, but a lot of them nowadays just kinda get grouped into those two categories. Things like hippocampus, sea bishops, merrows etc. get considered mermaids
So is there any sort of "Im naked as a giant" jokes
This movie is going to FLOP. It wont break even to make back it's production budget.
Dont expect a sequel to this.
>we already know what happens because of early screenings
You guys get your lezfish ending you were pushing for?
not even close, not like anyone expected it to happen. Sheesh, just because people ship something, doesn't mean they think it will become canon