Cool News
So How Is Disney's HOME ON THE RANGE'!
Hi, everyone. "Moriarty" here with some Rumblings From The Lab...
Remember when this was called SWEATING BULLETS?
This has been one of those Disney films that has changed completely from when it was first announced to now, and I sort of like the trailers. I have to say, though, that I am unnerved by the big butch cowboy posters that read “BEEF THIEF!” across the top that are all over Hollywood. In this town, that could mean so many different things, particularly when coming from a studio run by a guy named Dick Cook.
Hey, I can make these jokes. My last name gives me freakin’ immunity for life. Read the review. Stop hissing at me.
Greetings from sunny San Diego Harry!
Long time... oh never mind...
I had the opportunity to attend a "Premiere Screening" of Disney's "Home On The Range" tonight at the AMC 12 in La Jolla, hosted by the San Diego Cinema Society and attended by Associate Producer David Steinberg. (I got in because my last student film is entered into the San Diego Best Fest College Film Festival, who is partnered with the San Diego Cinema Society. A nice perk of festival entry, eh?)
Mr. Steinberg apparently is related to one of the Society's members and as such he coordinated this "Premiere Screening" because of this. Not that any of that matters to anyone really, but they seemed to make a big deal of it before the screening... so there you go.
So Mr. Steinberg intros the film for us with this great line, "You are now about to witness Cinematic History. That's right, this is history in the making as Rosanne Barr is acting alongside, or opposite of none other than Dame Judi Dench. (long dramatic pause) AS COWS." Hilarious.
And here's the exciting and amazing part of the review... The movie is actually good. It is. No really. I mean it.
It's not as good as Aladdin or the Lion King... but it is a solid effort from the Mouse House that is very enjoyable. Especially for adults as well as kids.
The opening starts off establishing the fact that this film is a western with some beautiful music by Alan Menken (Hooray for his return!), the animation is fun and bright in much the way Lilo and Stitch was, but with a color palette more suitable to the West than to Hawaii. We follow a Jackrabbit with a peg leg around on some funny misadventures during the song.
Then the dreaded Rosanne starts her narrative dialogue... This was what I was dreading. I HATE ROSANNE. LOATHE HER. DESPISE HER. But as soon as they finally got to a shot of her as a cow, I was sold. Rosanne as Maggie the Cow... PERFECT CASTING! And to top the opening dialogue off she ends it with, "Yeah, they're real... stop staring," as a new camera angle reveals her udders. Now I'd heard that this bit was going to be in the film prior to seeing it tonight and I groaned. What a horrible, easy joke that is, but it is executed with a wonderfully subtle manner that skips past the kiddies and hits home with the adults. The audience really laughed out loud at that one and from that point on it was an onslaught of great one-liners from every character in the film.
After learning that all the ranches are being sold off due to some extensive cattle rustling by "Alameda Slim" (brilliantly voiced by Randy Quaid) Maggie is delivered by her former owner to a gentle old woman named Pearl who owns and operates the "Patch Of Heaven" farm. "Patch Of Heaven" is a beautiful, peaceful place where the animals are all part of Pearl's family. The baby animals are what makes this place great, especially the three little pigs who have a tendency to bug the old goat who lives in the barrel.
Pearl is soon told that she's got to come up with $750 to save her farm from the bank in three days or else the farm goes on the auction block. Naturally Pearl won't sell off a single member of her family to come up with the money, so the two cows who already live at "Patch Of Heaven", Mrs. Calloway (Judi Dench) and tone-deaf Grace (Jennifer Tilly) decide to go off with Maggie to catch Alameda Slim and use the reward money to save "Patch Of Heaven".
I know... it sounds completely absurd, and it is. And that's what makes this movie work. The absurdity of "Bovine Bounty Hunters" is just what makes this an enjoyable ride.
The three lead cows are extremely different and unlike so many of the cookie cutter characters we've been seeing out of Disney for a while. Gone is the seemingly formula mandate of the "Plucky Sidekick". Here the three girls are equally developed and diverse characters who all have something to contribute to the story. Judi Dench brings a wonderful characterization to Mrs. Calloway and her reluctance to change and anything different from her normal everyday life. Jennifer Tilly (who bugs the shit out of me normally) is so funny as a soft hearted cow who's into Holistic Remedies and sings horribly out of tune all the time. They are both rich characters with a good play off one another and off of Rosanne.
The movie is full of a bunch of secondary characters that are funny and different and totally enhance the feeling of this Old West world.
I could go on more about the film... but I don't want to give anything more away... Not to mention I'm just damn tired now...
Let me just say this... The movie is witty. It's beautifully drawn and thankfully sparing in its integration of 3-D Computer elements. (Traditional 2-D and 3-D Digital just shouldn't be mixed in my opinion) The dialogue is full of moments of brilliance that are really a joy to hear. The music, while country based, is not too twangy for the masses and for this California boy was actually quite enjoyable. Nothing overly memorable like in Aladdin, but completely fitting to the overall whole of the film.
And that's kind of the point here... "Home On The Range" is a film that is complete. Nothing really seems to be missing from it. It has a good bad guy, good guys (or girls... or cows, whatever) that we like and care about, animation that is bright and very well executed and music that enhances the moods and locations. This is a great Disney outing that the WHOLE family can enjoy.
And that's a good thing... A very good thing. Since this is the LAST hand drawn Disney film we are likely to ever see. According to Mr. Steinberg we will not see another hand drawn movie out of Disney again. Starting with Chicken Little everything from Disney in the future will be Digital Animation. As Mr. Steinberg put it, "An era comes to a close with this film, and a new era is about to begin. From Snow White to Home On The Range Disney has been a strong force in hand drawn animation. With the conclusion of Home On The Range Disney is now moving into a new era of animated films."
That says a lot, probably, about the major tussles between Eisner and Roy Disney. And while I'm sad to see traditional hand drawn animation go the way of Black and White (gone but not completely dead) I hope that Disney continues to keep the focus of their films on the characters and the stories. Not the technology. Here's hoping.
I did get a chance to ask Mr. Steinberg about the creative direction of these new Digital Animation films that Disney is currently prepping after the Q&A was done. (He was kind enough to stick around after my question was passed up by the moderator during the Q&A. Thank you Mr. Steinberg) I asked him if the future intention was to do the films in Digital but mimic the look of hand drawn or if they were going to go full 3-D render a-la Pixar's brilliant creations. His response was that they were approaching their new Digital Animation films with an eye towards creating a new look that is influenced by both. A kind of hybrid look that hopefully works well.
I guess we'll find out how well it works when the sky starts falling for Chicken Little. Until then I highly recommend everyone goes to see "Home On The Range," and remember they are watching the closing of a chapter in the history of filmmaking.
If you use this... just call me BurmaThanks a lot, Burma. Nice work.
"Moriarty" out.
-
+ Expand All
-
It was all you would think it would be.
-
Although this guy DOES have a plant-ish feel with the "I normally hate Meg Tilly/Rosseane Barr, but they are PERFECTLY CAST" lines. And the acceptance of the switch to CG with empty sentiments like "as long as they continue to keep the Disney spirit alive" sounds like David Stainton himself.
-
Peter Ustinov died
-
Mar 29, 2004 9:14:05 AM CST
You mean to tell me McWeeney is your real name?? dude...
by theginger twit
-
Mar 29, 2004 9:20:07 AM CST
Yeah fucking A! I'm a full grown muscle man and I fucking love t
by theginger twit
-
Why doesnt Disney just go ahead and do Noahs Ark? That way they can fit every single cute little animal into the film, and maybe even catch a ride on the Christian bandwagon while they are at it. What happened to the days when actual people were used in something Disney did?
-
Mar 29, 2004 9:41:49 AM CST
CG can be properly incorporated into traditional 2D animation...
by yossarian
It's called "The Iron Giant". This is bullshit. Disney closing its hand-drawn department is hardly the end of animation. Hopefully, it IS the end of formulaic, song-ridden tripe, but I digress. Suffice to say, trad animation is still a capable medium, it just won't be botched by the mouse house anymore. See also: "The Triplettes of Belleville".
-
Does the rest of the world get Disney on ice? I'm from Ireland, and was given a gift of tickets from a friend for my wife, five year old daughter and I to go and see the "spectacle". Most boring two hours I've spent in a loooonnggg time (and this is from someone who saw Brother Bear). Disney's hand drawn movies are dead in the water. Lion King - good. Beauty and the Beast - good. Aladdin - good. Everything since that period - boring rubbish. They should look at what the guys over at Pixar are doing and see if they can't learn a thing or two. For an animated movie to have some kind of cross generational appeal, it needs to have a decent plot and characters we give a damn about. The boys in the Mouse house seem to have forgotten about that somewhere along the way.
-
I thought an era of animation ended when "Akira" showed what what cartoons could be when put to adult uses. Even "Triplets of Belleville" showed that Disney isn't necessarily the place to go for really interesting work. Nor has it been for a long time. But if you want a perfect die for the mass-market thinglet metal-stamping machine, go to Disney. That's chiefly the end their work serves, so 2-D, 3-D, double D, what difference can it possibly make to Disney how they get to the counting house?
-
i think you can bet that sooner or later 2D animation will return at Disney. this is just temporary foolishness. intrigued by the new 'third way' animation they're proposing. but this jus highlights the fact that the more kinds of animation there are, the better. it makes no sense to abandon one of the best loved forms.
-
a movie the whole family can enjoy? The last fucken thing disney did that was good was the Lion King, don't try to tell me shit fests like Mulan and Brother Bear and all that other shit was any good.
Pixar was their only money maker. you go to a disney store and whats being sold?? Toy story toys, Nemo Toys, and Lion King and older classic toys. The stupid toys of brother bear never sold.
-
a movie the whole family can enjoy? The last fucken thing disney did that was good was the Lion King, don't try to tell me shit fests like Mulan and Brother Bear and all that other shit was any good.
Pixar was their only money maker. you go to a disney store and whats being sold?? Toy story toys, Nemo Toys, and Lion King and older classic toys. The stupid toys of brother bear never sold.
-
Mar 29, 2004 4:27:40 PM CST
why do you people still care about ANY Disney animated films?
by beamish13
Their 2d movies took a nosedive in quality after "The Black Cauldron" and never quite recovered ("The Great Mouse Detective" will make your ears bleed with its terrible, terrible songs). The original TOY STORY was great, but what's Pixar done that's so hot since?
-
Ha ha ha! I'm so funny you'd think I would have some friends outside work.
-
Mar 29, 2004 8:24:12 PM CST
CG, traditional... the stupid debates & comparisons continue
by toonimator
I hate articles like these, and people like Steinberg. CG animation is NOT to traditional as color film is to black & white, or "talkies" were to silent films. Those are ridiculous comparisons. CG animation is a new medium, but its closest relative is STOP-MOTION, not traditional. It's not an evolution from hand-drawn. Steinberg's comments about Disney closing the book on that era should rightfully upset any animator, any artist out there, and audiences too. It's nice to hear Home on the Range is good, that Disney's legacy ends on a high note. But to destroy that legacy? Dismantle it, ABANDON it, in favor of focusing all energies on digital? That's wrong. Disney once planned to continue traditional projects alongside CG, back when Dinosaur was produced. Unfortunately Dinosaur was your cookie-cutter Disney fare, every cliche & plot point & stereotype that's associated with Disney films was present in that movie, and its high price tag exceeded its domestic box office, so it couldn't truly be considered a hit. And since Disney's little "film by committee" method was such a mess of a way to greenlight & produce films, they had no new CG films for the unit to produce... so after spending millions on a new facility, and buying out the DreamQuest(?) digital animation/FX company, they cut 'em all loose. Because all the films they had running were traditional. And when those started performing worse and worse, mostly due to that same committee mindset where MBAs make creative decisions to the exclusion of artists, they decided to dismantle that, despite over 70 years of history. So they switched to CG, retrained some of their staff, promised many others jobs that weren't there (they didn't anticipate so many artists from Burbank & Florida to make the grade in retraining), and had to restaff & revamp so much of their facilities. Animation desks that had been there for decades were sold off. Suddenly all projects were shifted from traditional to CG, regardless of what medium the pitch was accepted for. Directors were removed because their visions didn't fly with management (something that went on even during traditional films... the original directors of "Sweating Bullets" had "creative differences" with the suits and were dropped. It's good to know "HotR" is fun, but "Sweating Bullets" was supposed to be GREAT. Directors were fired off Fantasia 2000 segments when their visions clashed with the suits. "Rapunzel Unbraided", originally set to be traditional if I recall, got Glen Keane promoted when the top folks didn't like the direction of folks like Musker & Clements, who despite "Treasure Planet"'s suicidal release , had delivered many hit films for Disney, revitalizing the department). This whole thing isn't about CG supplanting Hand-drawn. It's about Disney brass trying to control more and more, and scramble to take a piece of the Pixar pie by the time the deal is finished. Pixar is making Disney films better than Disney. Disney incorrectly believes that the CG element is a large part of that. Audiences can be stupid, that's a given, so there may be plenty of people that have seen & loved Pixar films that would've avoided "Finding Nemo" or "Toy Story 2" if they'd been hand-drawn, even if the storyboards, sequences, voices, etc were the same. Disney's films have suffered in story, and that's not a reflection on the story people. It's a reflection on the process Disney has, of interference by people who have no business making artistic decisions. The films can't be made in a vaccuum, or they'd never get done, but over time the business side, the marketing, the company, or rather "corporate" image, have intruded far too much. Risks were taken, in making adventure films, and that's to be admired; but those same daring new directions were hamstrung by process, by bad marketing decisions, by edicts from above, by suicidal release dates to claim tax write-offs. Disney is hoping that CG films will automatically rekindle the Disney flame, bring in big box office, mooch off audience recognition of Pixar films as CG, and, I think, hoping that people will get excited by the CG castle opening the films, and not notice the absence of a bouncing table lamp after. That's not to say I don't want films like Chicken Little to succeed. I wish the artists there all the best. I want them to create their magic. But at the same time, I want Disney to get a wake-up call, and to right the wrongs they've committed over the last several years; to make up for the hundreds of talented artists they've displaced over the last few years. I know they won't, however. Disney brass is even on record stating that they want the "new" generation, the kids in school still, not the folks who've given their lives to the company, creating great art. They want kids who'll just be thrilled to have a Disney job, and won't ask for well-deserved raises or talk back to the suits when they say to change a character's gender or species or whatever. Whatever happened to mentorship? Disney used to be about the old guys teaching the new, but by many accounts, it seems they'd rather dump the old and bring in the new without having the two ever meet. CG is part of that; many veterans refuse to learn it, because they refuse to give up on what is WRONGLY termed a dying medium. There's a beauty in traditional animation that is unique. And a company as vast as Disney, which should be able to EASILY support a Burbank traditional unit, a Florida traditional unit, and one or two CG units, all turning out films, shouldn't be abandoning all of that, or "consolidating", or reducing things to remove a perceived "watering down" of the "brand" that isn't the result of Burbank's "Treasure Planet" being released a few months after Florida's "Lilo & Stitch", but the result of the profit-seeking "cheapquel" direct-to-video system. Having "Jungle Book 2" out in theaters is much more likely to "water down" Disney than having Burbank & Florida producing films concurrently. It's not the animation staff that needs consolidating, it's useless management that needs weeding. But the business of Disney has overtaken the art & entertainment of Disney, and for them, the best way to seek profit is to go CG. Because they BELIEVE it'll be better. But it's just a new medium for Disney, not an evolution, or a new era. If only they recognized that. Hand-drawn animation will never die, so long as artists remain who love it and believe in it. So long as audiences cherish the Disney films they grew up on.
-
Mar 29, 2004 8:32:04 PM CST
Matt Groening produced a Christmas special, OLIVE THE OTHER REIN
by frankdrebin
It had an interesting look, sort of like a popup book, with the people and buildings in 2D, but dropped into a 3D environment. And I would think that this reviewer would know how to spell Alemeda if he was from SoCal.
-
Mar 29, 2004 8:33:20 PM CST
I enjoy CGI animation, but hand drawn will never really die
by terry_1978
Look at animated tv shows...a few are CG, but the majority are still hand drawn, and you can only do that extremely abstract stuff with 2D animation. Disney is supposed to actually be going back to their roots with classic fairy tale stories soon, with Rapunzel and the Snow Queen, and I'd prefer they made those 2D animated as opposed to CGI.
-
Mar 29, 2004 9:06:19 PM CST
Perhaps this site should be renamed "Ain't It Planted New
by prof. pop-cult
-
Mar 29, 2004 9:15:00 PM CST
Yeah yeah...but what about the REAL Disney news...that they plan
by minderbinder
(and yeah, I called it when they made the announcement about them splitting up)
-
But a part of me pines for the hand drawn Disney classics, esp. the recent ones like BEAUTY AND THE BEAST and LITTLE MERMAID. Even ALADDIN. Those were some magical hours at the movies.
-
Mmm, yeah, like in Titan AE. That was awesome, wasn't it? In other news, I can't decide if this guy's a plant or not. I don't think he is, but he uses some VERY suspicious plant-like language. And just to spare you all trying, I've already reserved the TB ID BEEF_THIEF! to hold in reserve for whn this one gets banned.
-
It will only appeal to VERY small children or those misguided souls who thought The Emperor's New Groove was funny. With "product" like this, the death of Disney 2D animation is more of a mercy killing than a tragedy.
-
Note the frequent halfhearted criticisms mentioned in an attempt to add a veneer of impartiality to what is essentially a rave review. Also written in the inimitable style of a PR flack pretending to be a geek.
-
I hate kids movies that try and be funny for other people. Annoying shit just make kids movies and stop destroying the kids minds by the age of 5 with pop culture. If this movie breaks the top 5 the apocalypse is coming
-
Mar 30, 2004 12:22:35 AM CST
"Whats Pixar done thats so hot since Toy Story?" Uhhh, how about
by theginger twit
Fucking twanger.
-
Mar 30, 2004 12:26:42 AM CST
Osmosis, I'm a misguided soul who thought Emperors new groove wa
by theginger twit
-
Retrostyle,
Olive was actually all 3D except for a couple quick (like couple second) spots. The backgrounds were all modeled pretty straigh forward in 3D but all the characters were actually built flat (which made it really interesting when we were animating them.) We had several character rigs for each character just based on which way they were facing (front right 3/4, rear left 1/4, profile...you get the idea.) Our set-up team did an excellent job. Over all I think we did a pretty good job keeping the look and feel of J. Otto's book. -
I quite liked The Emperor's New Groove. "Why is that lever even there?"
-
If Di$ney's own CGI efforts fail, then they'll have to rely on crappy live action teen movies to stay afloat! This is what happens when management disrespect the talent that made them profitable in the first place, and goes off to prove that they can be just as good as they are. We all know what happens after that, don't we.
-
What can I say about Burma. Ok...First of all, he is not a plant. Just a big guy who likes Disney a little too much. But, he is also VERY opinionated. He doesn't heap praise on anything without ripping it to shreads. I should know. I have collaborated with him on several projects. I am also his roommate. NO, not that kind of roommate. We share the rent..and that is it. Although, he would say I may like show tunes more than the average heterosexual, I can assure that I do NOT swing that way. OK, I may have played too many gay roles in projects I produced. But I haven't done that in a long time. OK the same feelings come from his sisters, mother, close personal friends and a Lesbian couple we a friends with. But, that is all. Ok, enough about me. As I said, Burma is not a person to heap praise on anything. He is very critical of everyone's work, including his own. When he really likes something, he will rave about it. But if he doesen't, he will tell you everything that is wrong with it. I want to clarify something, there are a lot of heterosexual men out there that like show tunes. Ok, back to Burma. Yes, he is a Disney fanatic. He goes to Disneyland very often with his family and friends. But he also HATES and I mean HATES Michael Eisner and everything he is doing to Disney. So, to say that he is a plant I must whole heartedly disagree. He can easily trash any number of Disney films from the past. Although he will say that digital is the way to go as to filmmaking, I have to agree that digital animation will never replace the hand drawn feel of the Disney of yesteryear. OK, so to sum up. Burma is not a plant. I'm not gay. And Burma, if you are reading this, we are out of toilet paper.
-
I'm sure that being brought up to revere the cow has yielded quite a few iconoclasts in its backlash. Perhaps this film could spearhead the movement to put McDonald's across the street from Pakistan. Yee-haw! Eat more meat!
-
Mar 30, 2004 1:51:42 PM CST
I think Di$ney should make "Toy Story 3" with Hulk Hogan as Buzz
by mbaker
TO INFINITY, AND BEYOND, BROTHER!
-
2D animation looks fake. It's so obvious, I don't know why they even do it. Why don't they just use puppets? I mean, come on people.
Rosanne Barr looks fake too. For a long time I thought she was a puppet with 7 midgets in her making her move and talk, just like Jabba. I always felt sorry for the midget tasked with crotch grabbing, frequently wishing he could one day find himself a respectable job as a bowling ball or something. -
i'd like to see a disney movie that made some damn sense. with some human beings for once. or cockroaches. even rats, damn. stuff i can relate to. home on the range. it's crazy. let's see some sci-fi disney. mmmkk?
-
Before I begin, I'm going to admit I'm only 18 and haven't been around for much of the animation revolution. But this year marks my first in a three-year Bachelor of Animation course in Brisbane Australia and I'd like to voice my saddness about the apparent 'ditching' of traditional hand-drawn animation.
Though the ongoing debate about Computer versus hand-drawn is something that could be argued for hours on end, I refuse to refer to it as '3D versus 2D.' Hand-drawn animation is just as three-dimensional as computer animation. Frankly I think a great deal more skill and talent is required to make a drawn character appear three-dimensional rather than a computerised skeleton.
What I can't understand is why Disney has gotten it into their heads that people enjoy computer animated films more than the traditionally drawn ones. The problem isn't in the technique, it's in the storylines. The latest works between Pixar and Disney have returned to the traditional Disney-esque storylines that we all know and love whereas some of their more recent traditionally animated features have been half-witted and desperate attempts at making sequels to the absolute classics of Disney film. Cinderella 2, Peter Pan 2, The Hunchback of Notre Dame 2, Aladdin 2 AND 3, and The Lion King 2... Most of these films are an insult to the originals and one hopes that Disney will never be forced to stoop so low as to make a sequel to the priceless Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.
Disney needs to work harder towards the classic storylines that made Disney so great in the past. Hopefully they will come to their senses by the time I've finished my three-year course (in which I plan to focus on traditional rather than computerised animation) or I may find myself turning towards Dreamworks. With movies such as Sinbad and Spirit, they seem to be becoming the new 'Disney.' -
For the philosophers stone... well American kids weren't allowed to know about sourcery, because sourcery actually works and if the truth ever gets out then George Bush will loose his power hold on the planet. As for films like The Rundown (Welcome to the Jungle) and The Order (The sin eater) Well it's because these films do absolute shit at the box office and with the internet the news is out on them before they make it to Europe and Australia. But as if we don't see right through their own personal which craft.
-
Very well said. I just don't see any heart and soul in these all-CGI movies. FOX AND THE HOUND, while not Disney's best, is still much better than anything they've released since after 1985.
-
I started working practically out of high school in 1980 on miscellaneous "Charlie Brown" stuff for Paramount. I'm most proud to have been a part of "A Wish for Wings That Work" (1991), and I'm lucky to be working on the full-length Opus movie that's in production right now.
-
MistyStriker: "Hand-drawn animation is just as three-dimensional as computer animation." What? Are you kidding me? Please, please tell me you're kidding. You can't study animation and be that deluded. While hand drawn ART can have a three dimensional appearance comperable to CGI, hand drawn animation is VERY flat. Even the best and brightest multiplane camera movements smack with that flat "pop up book" look. I'm not saying 2D sucks, or that 2D's dead, or even that it's inherently inferior, but 3D it ain't. And CGI has severeal other nice advantages to it. Such as being animated at a consistant 24 frames per second. That modern-2D-cost-effective-headache-inducing-fluctuating frame-rate look doesn't do much for me. Fact of the matter is, this isn't the first time digital technology has put a lot of people out of work. 2D animation will always exist and be appreciated, but computers are the future, and not just in animation. And it's not just new technology that's worth talking about. Along with the new CGI artform, there's new talent behind those computers. And that's good. They seem like they think outside the box. Toonimator: "It's good to know "HotR" is fun, but "Sweating Bullets" was supposed to be GREAT." Yeah. EVERYONE in the entertainment industry says that about EVERY project that gets shelved or re-written for whatever reason. And personally? I think it's a steaming load of horseshit. Quality writing is well positioned to be shopped to a-list talent, which sways the suits, giving creative liberty back to the creator. Unless of course, said script demands a ricockulously massive budget, which makes the endeavor of movie making pointless. Movies are made to make money, not to spend money. Unless of course, said script was nothing special to begin with, attracted no big names, and needed to be re-written anyway. Sounds more likely to me than some magic gem of a draft/treatment/spec script sitting on a shelf, destined to be the next classic if weren't for those EVIL SUITS!!! Seacret, OUT!
-
Yes, Disney takes the time to put plants on "aint-it-cool-news" to do phony reviews of their animated feature, because, after all, the primary target audience for these films is 31-year old high school drop pothead loser soft-core porn addicts. That makes sense.
-
So, being articulate and having the ability to form words together into coherent sentences that don't include the word "ass" makes you a studio plant?
-
Funny Post!
-
My family and I love The Emperor's New Groove. That movie was fresh and funny. Spade was robbed by the academy that year, robbed I tell you. Patrick Warburton was born to provide a voice for Kronk. Squeak, squeak, squeakers.....Brilliant!
-
..not even a cleverly disguised one either. This movie is probably mildly entertaining for a 7 year old, but no one older than that will be able to stomach it.
-
Just saw this shit fest. Worst Disney movie ever! Didn't even smile once. Pathetic.
-
Damn... all this time later... I'd forgotten how funny the replies were to my review.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Antepenultimate THRONES!! Lane Pryce Returns To MAD MEN!! Roger Waters On 60 MINUTES!! Plus GIRLS, VEEP, SIMPSONS, BURGERS, KILLING, METALOCALYPSE, SHERLOCK!! THE LAST SUNDAY OF SWEEPS!! -- 102 total posts 95 posts
- Duncan Jones To Tell The Story Of Ian Fleming! -- 64 total posts 64 posts
- SNL Says Goodbye To Kristen Wiig!! -- 56 total posts 56 posts
- Hercules Picks Next Season’s 10 Most Promising New Broadcast Series!! -- 131 total posts 43 posts
- The Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day will traumatize you. -- 37 total posts 37 posts
- "Some Men Are Coming To Kill Us. We're Going To Kill Them First." Teaser To SKYFALL! -- 34 total posts 34 posts
- There Can Be Only One... Ryan Reynolds?! -- 404 total posts 30 posts
- Dan Harmon Done As COMMUNITY Showrunner!! -- 148 total posts 21 posts
- Quint thinks John Hillcoat's prohibition-era flick LAWLESS is violently awesome! Cannes 2012! -- 69 total posts 20 posts
- Adrian Hieatt Gives Us His Second Daily Report From KAPOW! Comic Convention in London! The AMAZING SPIDER-MAN! TOTAL RECALL! DC NEW 52! DAVE GIBBONS! And More! -- 18 total posts 18 posts