|
Post by Trey_Vore on May 28, 2021 21:34:26 GMT -5
I'm seeing this movie tonight!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2021 1:10:07 GMT -5
Idk from what I heard it sounds pretty sucktastic lol. I'll pass.
|
|
|
Post by babclayman on May 29, 2021 8:30:57 GMT -5
Like I post, at the very least, it’s an enjoyable Popcorn Film.
However, like I advise, don’t come in to the Film thinking it as an actual Prequel, and treat the film as its own separate continuity, not connected to the original story.
You get what I mean?
|
|
|
Post by RaceFanX on May 29, 2021 14:03:06 GMT -5
I don't plan to see this one but it sounds like CGI dogs, which kudos as Bab predicted them from set pictures, stole the show...but not in a good way.
|
|
|
Post by Stirfry on May 29, 2021 15:23:14 GMT -5
Okay, so I saw this at the drive in with Loopy last night and... yeah. This was a GARBAGE movie. The movie literally only got ONE moment of "okay, that's clever" out of me and NOTHING else was good. I shall just dump all the things I can think of that are wrong with this movie here in a rant.
Firstly, the story SUCKS at it's job of telling a Cruella origin story because... The character of "Estella" is NOT Cruella in any way. In the books and movies and... every iteration, Cruella is a spoiled rich brat who had everything handed to her. In fact, in the original movie, the only reason she stole Roger and Anita's puppies was because she didn't like being told "no" when she tried to buy them. What Disney decided to do with THIS movie was... Make her an Orphan who had to steal and pickpocket just to survive... * Facepalm * This is LITERALLY THE OPPOSITE OF THE CHARACTER! There were PLENTY of decent ways that you could have told an origin story without completely throwing out everything we know about Cruella!
Not only do they mess up her origins but they don't even get her personality right! For the first half of the film, she acts NOTHING like Cruella. She's this quirky but well meaning orphan girl pulling off heists and scams with Horace and Jasper, and then she tries to get an honest job cleaning and eats garbage at one point after a trash bag rips and spills it on her head. >_< She acts more like Anita for the first half of the movie than Cruella. Then, suddenly she takes up this alter ego of "Cruella" as a disguise and just... Goes with it, I guess. She stays as Cruella for the entire rest of the movie almost. The turn is REALLY sudden and jarring and doesn't feel natural AT ALL! I will give the movie this, when she does take up the Cruella alter ego, she DOES act like Cruella which proves that Emma Stone can put on a good Cruella performance. They KNOW how to write Cruella as well, but they chose to not write her for the entire first half of the movie!
So yeah, they destroyed the character of Cruella and got almost every other character wrong as well.
For one thing, they put Roger in the movie... Why did Roger have to be in this movie? He did literally nothing in the movie. He was just there... because... That's it. He had a couple of scenes and he got fired. Furthermore, why is he a lawyer? Was there ever a continuity where Roger was a laywer instead of a song writer? They had NO reason to put him in this movie! Roger didn't even know Cruella until he met Anita! Somehow they managed to have a character that only has a FEW lines and does nothing and they STILL messed him up! That's impressive, Disney! Also, he looks like they dragged a guy off the street and put him in a suit. Dude, there are these things called RAZORS and... scissors... Um... CUT YOUR HAIR!
And Anita... Why is she black? Seriously? She basically did NOTHING in this movie as well... I THINK she had more scenes than Roger but Roger's scenes were at least more memorable. Anita could have been cut from the movie entirely and it would be exactly the same as well. But... WHY did they make her black?! >_< I am seriously starting to think that when they made this movie, someone went "Oh, we didn't mess up Anita's character because we barely have her do anything! How do we get her wrong?!" and someone else went "Uh... Make her the wrong race!" It's not that I care all that much about race either, but uh... I'm of the opinion that if you're going to use an existing character, they should look reasonably like the character! EG: Horace is a fairly short fat guy, Jasper is a tall skinny guy, Cruella is a skinny woman with black and white hair... ANITA IS NOT BLACK!
Okay, to round out the character destroying, this is very minor compared to the other stuff, but they made Jasper way too sentimental. Jasper was always the more callous a**hole of the two and they made him as sentimental as Horace. They gave Horace and Jasper a friendly caring relationship with Cruella that just doesn't feel right. Horace and Jasper legitimately care about Cruella and Cruella legitimately cares about them. That isn't the dynamic they should have at all. And don't try to tell me they had to change this stuff to make a good movie. There are ways you could write a good movie from the perspective of these characters and NOT completely change everything about them. And if there ISN'T a way that they could have told a good story with these characters without changing everything about them... THEN THIS MOVIE SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN MADE! You don't HAVE to make a villain movie for every Villain, Disney! You can just let some villains be villains!
Another minor nitpick... The dalmatians... Why are they CGI? Why could they NOT get real dalmatians to do this stuff? I could accept this if the dalmatians talked or... did anything that a real dog couldn't do. But they really don't. They got real dogs to play every other part in the movie. Dalmatians are not some exotic animal that the studio just can't find or train! They're DOGS! They are the most easily findable and trainable animal in the world! There are a few scenes where the Dalmatians do some stuff where CGI would be easier, I guess but... they're SUPPOSED to use CGI in those scenes, and blend it with the real dogs so it's not too jarring for the audience. That's how a COMPETENT movie does it.
Okay, so now that I've covered how they have destroyed the characters um... The plot. It's dumb Um... Spoilers, I guess, though there isn't much that you can spoil about this movie. They do a um stupid plot twist where the evil fashion designer lady that Cruella works for and acts more like Cruella than Cruella does... is Cruella's biological mother and killed her adopted mother and it's stupid... This is also their explanation for how Cruella got her wealth.
You know what, this has gone on long enough, I'm just done. The movie ends on a REALLY stupid note too. Just one last derp before you leave. Cruella I guess sends Roger and Anita dalmatian puppies as gifts... Um... Do I need to explain the implications of this? This means that Cruella sent Roger and Anita their dalmatians... even though she supposedly hates dalmatians... and then later she is going to steal their dalmatian's puppies that she got them... WHY DID THEY DO THAT?! Did that need to be put in the movie?! Was anyone DEMANDING that we have a movie where Cruella gives Pongo and Perdita to Roger and Anita? Did that add any kind of clever twist or character insight or fit into the universe's existing lore... at all?! No, it was just dumb! Which, pretty much summarizes this whole movie. Dumb and unnecessary and unnecessarily dumb!
|
|
|
Post by Bishop on May 29, 2021 17:17:56 GMT -5
You know what, this has gone on long enough, I'm just done. The movie ends on a REALLY stupid note too. Just one last derp before you leave. Cruella I guess sends Roger and Anita dalmatian puppies as gifts... Um... Do I need to explain the implications of this? This means that Cruella sent Roger and Anita their dalmatians... even though she supposedly hates dalmatians... and then later she is going to steal their dalmatian's puppies that she got them... WHY DID THEY DO THAT?! Did that need to be put in the movie?! Was anyone DEMANDING that we have a movie where Cruella gives Pongo and Perdita to Roger and Anita? Did that add any kind of clever twist or character insight or fit into the universe's existing lore... at all?! No, it was just dumb! Which, pretty much summarizes this whole movie. Dumb and unnecessary and unnecessarily dumb! Nitpicky but Cruella doesn't hate dalmatians.
Buuuuut more amusingly like I said in discord, Cruella gives Roger and Anita dalmatians from the same litter...which makes this at least the third time Disney has implied incest in 101 dalmatians.
|
|
|
Post by Stirfry on May 29, 2021 19:10:16 GMT -5
Bishop Not in the normal continuity, but this movie changed up her character so much that I'm pretty sure they tried to imply that she didn't like dalmatians or at least the Villain's dalmatians. I don't know and don't care.
|
|
|
Post by Belchic on May 29, 2021 21:06:23 GMT -5
Okay, so I saw this at the drive in with Loopy last night and... yeah. This was a GARBAGE movie. The movie literally only got ONE moment of "okay, that's clever" out of me and NOTHING else was good. I shall just dump all the things I can think of that are wrong with this movie here in a rant. Firstly, the story SUCKS at it's job of telling a Cruella origin story because... The character of "Estella" is NOT Cruella in any way. In the books and movies and... every iteration, Cruella is a spoiled rich brat who had everything handed to her. In fact, in the original movie, the only reason she stole Roger and Anita's puppies was because she didn't like being told "no" when she tried to buy them. What Disney decided to do with THIS movie was... Make her an Orphan who had to steal and pickpocket just to survive... * Facepalm * This is LITERALLY THE OPPOSITE OF THE CHARACTER! There were PLENTY of decent ways that you could have told an origin story without completely throwing out everything we know about Cruella! Not only do they mess up her origins but they don't even get her personality right! For the first half of the film, she acts NOTHING like Cruella. She's this quirky but well meaning orphan girl pulling off heists and scams with Horace and Jasper, and then she tries to get an honest job cleaning and eats garbage at one point after a trash bag rips and spills it on her head. >_< She acts more like Anita for the first half of the movie than Cruella. Then, suddenly she takes up this alter ego of "Cruella" as a disguise and just... Goes with it, I guess. She stays as Cruella for the entire rest of the movie almost. The turn is REALLY sudden and jarring and doesn't feel natural AT ALL! I will give the movie this, when she does take up the Cruella alter ego, she DOES act like Cruella which proves that Emma Stone can put on a good Cruella performance. They KNOW how to write Cruella as well, but they chose to not write her for the entire first half of the movie! So yeah, they destroyed the character of Cruella and got almost every other character wrong as well. For one thing, they put Roger in the movie... Why did Roger have to be in this movie? He did literally nothing in the movie. He was just there... because... That's it. He had a couple of scenes and he got fired. Furthermore, why is he a lawyer? Was there ever a continuity where Roger was a laywer instead of a song writer? They had NO reason to put him in this movie! Roger didn't even know Cruella until he met Anita! Somehow they managed to have a character that only has a FEW lines and does nothing and they STILL messed him up! That's impressive, Disney! Also, he looks like they dragged a guy off the street and put him in a suit. Dude, there are these things called RAZORS and... scissors... Um... CUT YOUR HAIR! And Anita... Why is she black? Seriously? She basically did NOTHING in this movie as well... I THINK she had more scenes than Roger but Roger's scenes were at least more memorable. Anita could have been cut from the movie entirely and it would be exactly the same as well. But... WHY did they make her black?! >_< I am seriously starting to think that when they made this movie, someone went "Oh, we didn't mess up Anita's character because we barely have her do anything! How do we get her wrong?!" and someone else went "Uh... Make her the wrong race!" It's not that I care all that much about race either, but uh... I'm of the opinion that if you're going to use an existing character, they should look reasonably like the character! EG: Horace is a fairly short fat guy, Jasper is a tall skinny guy, Cruella is a skinny woman with black and white hair... ANITA IS NOT BLACK! Okay, to round out the character destroying, this is very minor compared to the other stuff, but they made Jasper way too sentimental. Jasper was always the more callous a**hole of the two and they made him as sentimental as Horace. They gave Horace and Jasper a friendly caring relationship with Cruella that just doesn't feel right. Horace and Jasper legitimately care about Cruella and Cruella legitimately cares about them. That isn't the dynamic they should have at all. And don't try to tell me they had to change this stuff to make a good movie. There are ways you could write a good movie from the perspective of these characters and NOT completely change everything about them. And if there ISN'T a way that they could have told a good story with these characters without changing everything about them... THEN THIS MOVIE SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN MADE! You don't HAVE to make a villain movie for every Villain, Disney! You can just let some villains be villains! Another minor nitpick... The dalmatians... Why are they CGI? Why could they NOT get real dalmatians to do this stuff? I could accept this if the dalmatians talked or... did anything that a real dog couldn't do. But they really don't. They got real dogs to play every other part in the movie. Dalmatians are not some exotic animal that the studio just can't find or train! They're DOGS! They are the most easily findable and trainable animal in the world! There are a few scenes where the Dalmatians do some stuff where CGI would be easier, I guess but... they're SUPPOSED to use CGI in those scenes, and blend it with the real dogs so it's not too jarring for the audience. That's how a COMPETENT movie does it. Okay, so now that I've covered how they have destroyed the characters um... The plot. It's dumb Um... Spoilers, I guess, though there isn't much that you can spoil about this movie. They do a um stupid plot twist where the evil fashion designer lady that Cruella works for and acts more like Cruella than Cruella does... is Cruella's biological mother and killed her adopted mother and it's stupid... This is also their explanation for how Cruella got her wealth. You know what, this has gone on long enough, I'm just done. The movie ends on a REALLY stupid note too. Just one last derp before you leave. Cruella I guess sends Roger and Anita dalmatian puppies as gifts... Um... Do I need to explain the implications of this? This means that Cruella sent Roger and Anita their dalmatians... even though she supposedly hates dalmatians... and then later she is going to steal their dalmatian's puppies that she got them... WHY DID THEY DO THAT?! Did that need to be put in the movie?! Was anyone DEMANDING that we have a movie where Cruella gives Pongo and Perdita to Roger and Anita? Did that add any kind of clever twist or character insight or fit into the universe's existing lore... at all?! No, it was just dumb! Which, pretty much summarizes this whole movie. Dumb and unnecessary and unnecessarily dumb! Wow. Exactly how I was predicting the movie to turn out when I first heard about it! Funny to think that all the hype for this movie built up to what I foresaw of it seven years ago!
|
|
|
Post by babclayman on May 29, 2021 21:25:27 GMT -5
Race; For the record; Real Dogs do get used in the Film, but are C G I when being handled by children (for obvious safety reasons), or when they're doing some more extreme stunts, like leaping from a really high place, or a situation where an actual animal would get harmed. I even noticed, in some Filming Photos, Wink's eye patch does have a hole in it, so Bluebell, the Dog who plays Wink, doesn't panic or something similar. Like I post, real animals do get used, but are C G I when used for more dangerous stunts, or when with children.
Bishop; Yeah, I can understand the Pongo & Perdita critic, since it does raise legitimate questions.
My three best explanations for this.
One; the Pongo & Perdita who ultimately get together are a pair of different dogs that Roger & Anita would later get, but name them after their previous dogs. It does happen, since I Know that Mel Brooks is on record saying that he always names his Dogs either Pongo or Perdita. So, with that theory, the ones who get together may be Perdita II or Pongo IV, or something like that.
Two; There is more than one Roger & Anita in the World, and the "Novel" does establish that Pongo is a very common name for a Dalmatian. So, they may be completely different characters.
Three; Much like the "Once Upon A Time" setting, the original "101 Dalmatians" Story just doesn't happen in the "Cruella" Universe.
I actually do feel I should make a "Chronologically Confused" Video for "101 Dalmatians" Franchise. You think I should make a video on that, Pups?
|
|
|
Post by Belchic on May 29, 2021 22:15:11 GMT -5
I actually do feel I should make a "Chronologically Confused" Video for "101 Dalmatians" Franchise. You think I should make a video on that, Pups? I kinda already did that on this board a few years ago, bab. I was planning on making a video of it too back when I was able to make videos but canceled it. Though now that we have “101 Dalmatian Street” and this movie to add, we got more material to discuss. Do you think maybe I could help you with this video, bab? Would you like that?
|
|
|
Post by Bishop on May 30, 2021 8:44:29 GMT -5
Bishop Not in the normal continuity, but this movie changed up her character so much that I'm pretty sure they tried to imply that she didn't like dalmatians or at least the Villain's dalmatians. I don't know and don't care. Nah, they didn't imply that she hates dalmatians at all. In fact she did flat out state that she blamed herself, not the dogs. Bishop; Yeah, I can understand the Pongo & Perdita critic, since it does raise legitimate questions. My three best explanations for this. One; the Pongo & Perdita who ultimately get together are a pair of different dogs that Roger & Anita would later get, but name them after their previous dogs. It does happen, since I Know that Mel Brooks is on record saying that he always names his Dogs either Pongo or Perdita. So, with that theory, the ones who get together may be Perdita II or Pongo IV, or something like that. Two; There is more than one Roger & Anita in the World, and the "Novel" does establish that Pongo is a very common name for a Dalmatian. So, they may be completely different characters. Three; Much like the "Once Upon A Time" setting, the original "101 Dalmatians" Story just doesn't happen in the "Cruella" Universe. I would say it's definitely more of the third option. Almost every problem I had with this movie comes can be solved by "it's a completely seperate universe". There's just too many contradictions for it to be a prequel. Like in this movie she kidnaps dalmatians and does her fur coat, with everyone wondering whether it's real fur or not, so why would she...forget that she already did that and do it again later in life? Actually that particular example makes me feel like Cruella is a retelling of the original story.
|
|
|
Post by Stirfry on May 30, 2021 9:35:06 GMT -5
Bishop yeh yeh. As I said, I don't really care. And it's still a stupid and silly movie even if you discount how they went out of their way to get all the characters wrong and say it's just another universe. Like... this kind of story should not have even been told in 1960s and 70s England because an evil rich lady going around using attack dogs to murder numerous people and just... getting away with it doesn't fit in the setting. The movie expects us to believe the police don't do ANYTHING about her? Even the freaking ending is STUPID. She pushes Cruella off a cliff in front of like 100 people and expects them to believe her when she turns around and says "she jumped! She tried to pull me in!" It wasn't even a "oh... I've been caught..." no, she KNEW they were watching. Either that or her delivery was so terrible that she had NO surprise at being caught. I have seen more believable stuff from things aimed at far younger children. >_<
|
|
|
Post by Belchic on May 30, 2021 19:48:41 GMT -5
This past weekend, just outside of Disneyland, they had Cruella’s car from the movie on display to promote the movie! Did you hear about this, babclayman?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2021 11:35:01 GMT -5
And Anita... Why is she black? Seriously? She basically did NOTHING in this movie as well... I THINK she had more scenes than Roger but Roger's scenes were at least more memorable. Anita could have been cut from the movie entirely and it would be exactly the same as well. But... WHY did they make her black?! >_< I am seriously starting to think that when they made this movie, someone went "Oh, we didn't mess up Anita's character because we barely have her do anything! How do we get her wrong?!" and someone else went "Uh... Make her the wrong race!" It's not that I care all that much about race either, but uh... I'm of the opinion that if you're going to use an existing character, they should look reasonably like the character! EG: Horace is a fairly short fat guy, Jasper is a tall skinny guy, Cruella is a skinny woman with black and white hair... ANITA IS NOT BLACK!
I didn't wanna sound racist bringing this point up but, I actually completely agree with you. >_> I'm not racist at all but at what point in time was Anita EVER a black person? Why was the change necessary? For social brownie points? I'm surprised they didn't make her a closeted lesbian on top of it, just to make the extra social brownie points and moneys.
|
|
|
Post by Stirfry on May 31, 2021 19:19:11 GMT -5
Okay, I had to just delete a post.
Note to everyone: Posts that do nothing but attack another member personally and do not say anthing about the subject of this thread will be deleted as these are likely to cause drama.
Please refrain from making such posts, thanks.
|
|