|
Some Guy TT posted:I know you're trying to be complimentary, but that description still makes my head hurt because of how unnecessarily nautical everything is. Nothing seem to have happened that even remotely has anything to do with fish. At least Bee Movie had an explanation for why its characters were bees, albeit one that made no sense. So far all the animals have contributed to Shark Tale is that we have sharks, who literally devour fellow sentient creatures, being treated with sympathetic character traits. It's like reading Kevin and Kell. Oh, please, please, please don't take my writeup as too complimentary. It probably is going to seem that way after what I wrote about Bee Movie, but I'm trying to give Shark Tale a fair shake. I also feel I gave Bee Movie a fair shake, which is part of why it was so frustrating. I wanted to do the classic "good points/bad points" examination of it--"Where did we go wrong?"--but good points literally didn't happen and there was nothing to redeem. Shark Tale is a bad movie with some good aspects and could have been easily refined into a better film. The Kevin and Kell comparison is surprisingly apt, at least considering what I remember of K&K from reading it probably a decade ago. Though the sharks are predators, I don't know, they're not going about it in a way that is visibly inappropriate for the reef. As an aside, the sharks live on the Titanic, actually in a former human dwelling. It's decrepit, as you might imagine. The fish of the reef live in, well, the natural reef, but it has the same human-dominated aesthetic. This feels poorly thought-out to me. Also, apparently the Titanic sunk about a mile away from tropical reefs. Sure. ...of SCIENCE! posted:Which makes the fact that they just happened to be working on a talking fish movie at the same time as Pixar pretty suspicious, in my eyes. This comes up a lot, and I find it a little strange. Who cares if two companies are working on a film with the same setting at the same time? Finding Nemo and Shark Tale are both underwater but really have no other similarities. I wouldn't be surprised if both companies are trying to capitalize on what the other is doing (which is not hard because employees move between the two, not just from Pixar to Dreamworks), but at the end of the day, each company had to make the film it released. "There's fish in it" doesn't seem like an idea so precious and valuable that it gives a movie an immediate edge in the market. Count Chocula posted:All the stuff with the shark mafia boss makes Shark Tale sound like a horrible adaptation of Graeme Base's wonderful book, The Sign of the Seahorse, which has a grouper mob boss extorting money from the diner the hero works at. I participated in a public reading of it yesterday and its still charming. On that note, Gay Shark Mafia has spilled over into unexpected regions of the global consciousness. I'll talk about this later. Pick fucked around with this message at 15:49 on Apr 7, 2013 |
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 15:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:16 |
|
|
I avoided Shark Tale like the plague when it came out because the trailer was pretty much Will Smith fish doing some stupid dance whilst singing 'can't touch this'. It seemed so desperate, like a stand up comedian who is slowing dying on stage and is resorting to the final dregs of their material to try and rinse a solitary laugh from an unforgiving audience. I felt awkward watching the trailer, I could never survive the film.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 16:34
|
|
|
quote:What people tend to forget about Shrek is that it's a very good movie. Unfortunately, its legacy has been irreparably corrupted by its franchise. I thought the Puss 'N Boots spinoff movie was pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 18:04
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:I know you're trying to be complimentary, but that description still makes my head hurt because of how unnecessarily nautical everything is. Nothing seem to have happened that even remotely has anything to do with fish. At least Bee Movie had an explanation for why its characters were bees, albeit one that made no sense. So far all the animals have contributed to Shark Tale is that we have sharks, who literally devour fellow sentient creatures, being treated with sympathetic character traits. It's like reading Kevin and Kell. That is literally the biggest problem with the movie. It could have been about humans and it would not lose more than a few ancillary jokes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:I thought the Puss 'N Boots spinoff movie was pretty good. Shrek the Third was that bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 19:29
|
|
|
Pick posted:On that note, Gay Shark Mafia has spilled over into unexpected regions of the global consciousness. I'll talk about this later. what. Gay Shark Mafia aside, I loved the Bee Movie Let's Watch, and I became curious to read all about this movie's failings after seeing a clip of "A Monster in Paris" (~from the director (well one of the three directors) of Shark Tale~). Said director, Bibo Bergeron, is also a screenwriter for "A Monster in Paris", and the reviews I've seen range between "charming and fun" to "the writing is a boring mess". Oh, and the movie actually came out like 2 years ago and the American release is an Amazon DVD pre-order. I wanted to like that movie, but oh well, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 19:41
|
|
|
Rudoku posted:Shrek the Third was that bad. Shrek the Third was loving awful. Like I really like the first one, the second one isn't bad but it gets progressively less good upon rewatching, since you've heard all the jokes once already (although the ending bit with Holding Out For A Hero is still awesome). The third one wasn't just bad. It was pointless. Like there was NOTHING that happened in the third movie that couldn't have been part of a montage at the beginning of the fourth. I liked the fourth a lot, it felt about as good as the first one and wasn't as crammed full of pop culture references as the previous two. I thought Puss in Boots was great, and had some awesome action scenes. Humpy didn't bother me, but I can see how he would annoy some people. In fact Puss in Boots, it's almost unfair to even put it in with the Shrek films, because besides Puss himself, there is no relation to the Shrek movies at all. Shrek and none of the other characters are even mentioned. There's not even like a cameo from the gingerbread man or Big Bad Wolf. It has a very different feel from the Shrek movies in that you almost forget the movie takes place in a fairy tale world. Also you get to see Puss as a child and he's just the loving cutest thing on the entire planet
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 21:36
|
|
|
Macaluso posted:Humpy didn't bother me 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 23:51
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:I thought the Puss 'N Boots spinoff movie was pretty good. I thought it was pretty marginal, except for the ONE SCENE of Humpty when he turns around while wearing the cat costume which for reasons I have yet to understand was so funny to me that I had to pause the film for like five minutes. The biggest gut-busting laugh I'd had from a film in a long, long time. It's not nearly as funny if you haven't seen the movie, but this scene. Macaluso posted:Shrek the Third was loving awful. Like I really like the first one, the second one isn't bad but it gets progressively less good upon rewatching, since you've heard all the jokes once already (although the ending bit with Holding Out For A Hero is still awesome). The third one wasn't just bad. It was pointless. Like there was NOTHING that happened in the third movie that couldn't have been part of a montage at the beginning of the fourth. I liked the fourth a lot, it felt about as good as the first one and wasn't as crammed full of pop culture references as the previous two. I mostly agree with this sentiment, although I didn't like any of the later Shreks as much as you did, so basically whatever you thought minus fifteen points or whatever. I am astonished at how good they still look, though. Shrek 2 came out in 2004 and it still looks modern-quality. Again, there's no excuse for Bee Movie to look as bad as it did, since they were doing vastly better-looking movies half a decade earlier. (I mean, other than the artists knew it was a waste of energy.) Shrek the Third is so bad that I almost walked out, and I was only there to hate it. I remember it attempting many jokes and landing absolutely none. The fourth Shrek is, to me, all drama and almost no comedy. But it's a pretty good relationship drama. Shrek 2 is about two people learning to respect one another, and Shrek 4 continues that. Shrek 3 is like... totally pointless? And yes, Shrek 4 has few--almost no--pop culture jokes. It's just Shrek having a midlife crisis, then realizing that the life he'd chosen was not only the best thing for him, but necessary for the happiness of the people he cared about. Pick fucked around with this message at 02:17 on Apr 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 02:06
|
|
|
Did anything aside from the Shrek Babies even make it into the fourth movie? I don't remember Justin Timberlake's character appearing even in the introduction scene. Also Fiona got over the death of King Frog Dad pretty quickly. It just happened and then Shrek goes to find Justin Timberlake.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 05:38
|
|
|
Cheapsteaks posted:Also Fiona got over the death of King Frog Dad pretty quickly. It just happened and then Shrek goes to find Justin Timberlake.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 05:59
|
|
|
...of SCIENCE! posted:I can't help but wonder if there was some similar subterfuge going on with Finding Nemo and Shark Tale. I know Madagascar is a result of them wanting to beat out Disney's "The Wild"
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 06:24
|
|
|
PicklesMcGillicuddy posted:I know Madagascar is a result of them wanting to beat out Disney's "The Wild" Actually it was the other way around, but yeah it was a Eisner/Katzenberg fight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 07:38
|
|
|
PicklesMcGillicuddy posted:I know Madagascar is a result of them wanting to beat out Disney's "The Wild" The Wild was made by a smaller Canadian studio and distributed by Disney; not sure how much involvement they had with the actual production.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 13:57
|
|
|
McDowell posted:
I know someone who ashamedly admits to crying at the end of Bee Movie (in her defense, she was going through a hard time. )
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 14:53
|
|
|
In Drywall posted:I know someone who ashamedly admits to crying at the end of Bee Movie (in her defense, she was going through a hard time. ) I was near tears as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 15:58
|
|
|
Pick posted:I thought it was pretty marginal, except for the ONE SCENE of Humpty when he turns around while wearing the cat costume which for reasons I have yet to understand was so funny to me that I had to pause the film for like five minutes. The biggest gut-busting laugh I'd had from a film in a long, long time. It's hard to discuss why Puss in Boots is good without spoiling the plot, but yeah. It is pretty much a wrestling storyline with bizarre fantasy characters and cats.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 18:17
|
|
|
Barry Convex posted:The Wild was made by a smaller Canadian studio and distributed by Disney; not sure how much involvement they had with the actual production. And yet Dreamworks didn't manage to steal the show from the likewise incredible Disney-distributed Valiant! *do not watch Valiant
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 19:08
|
|
|
Pick posted:And yet Dreamworks didn't manage to steal the show from the likewise incredible Disney-distributed Valiant! You just made me realize I've seen Valiant. I wonder what else I've repressed?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 20:38
|
|
|
Shark Tale Plot 2 Okay, so we left off with Smithfish at the races. He tries to impress Lola (Jolie fish), but pufferfish comes along and ruins the illusion of wealth that Smithfish is trying to create. This rather reminds me of Princess and the Frog, where you expect the mutual revelations--"I'm not rich" and "I'm not a princess"--to come late in the film as part of the climax, but are actually played early. So at the outset, Lola knows he's a "nobody". One thing about Lola is that she's openly superficial--even describing herself with literally that word. She feels like a character type that should offend me, and perhaps she does a little, but she's so damned forthright about it that it's hard to fault her. She is trying to be trophy wife and is absolutely unapologetic about it. I don't know if I'd call it refreshing, but it could have been approached in a worse way I suppose. I don't know how kids would have interpreted this, though. Anyway.  So here's Smithfish, the pufferfish, and the two Rastafarian jellyfish who serve as our pufferfish's muscle. I will say that the jellyfish heads still look great, though the actual character design is rather unpleasant. Unlike every single person in Bee Movie, the one jellyfish guy is walleyed on purpose. As you might imagine, Smithfish loses at the races. (After a close, close race, of course. Cheap tension but why not.) As someone else pointed out, absolutely nothing up to this point requires anything to be occurring underwater. And during the race, Smithfish even points out some of the absurdity of this occurring underwater. ... Why does this occur underwater? I almost wonder if this was a different movie, perhaps one above the water, which was re-interpreted to be about fish. The world is mysterious. Anyway, the pufferfish tells the Rasta jellies to go "take care of" Smithfish or whatever, so they tie him up and throw him out in the open sands. Then they torture him with electric stings and generally act like assholes. Meanwhile, Lenny (gay shark) and Frankie (straight shark) are off to show Lenny how to be a "real shark". Frankie is very supportive and assures Lenny he can learn enough to make his dad happy and then they together can take over the family business and move on. I don't know what the real-world analogue to this is supposed to be. I like to think it's still cannibalism, and that originally this movie was about cannibalistic human mobsters. That would have made this movie loving awesome. But it's not, it's about fish puns, so anyway, Frankie sees the tied-up Smithfish and tells Lenny to take him out. Easy meal, as easy as it gets! Lenny swims over aaaand--  You're probably expecting me to trash this shot, but actually it's just a funny in-between. The scene looks fine. The jellydudes freak out and swim away. Lenny whispers to Smithfish that he's going to let him go. He cuts Smithfish's bindings, makes a "shark-mauling" ruckus, kicking up a lot of sand, aaand-- Smithfish doesn't actually swim off. Derp derp. So Frankie gets annoyed and chases Smithfish himself. This makes for a pretty intense scene, since there's no cover--even out to the horizon--and Frankie just visually dominates. We basically have an empty set with three agents: Smithfish, Franky, and Lenny. What could possibly happen with this combination other than Smithfish's early demise?  A deus ex anchor. But you know, it sort of works, because it had to be something that was nobody's fault. If it were actually Smithfish's fault, the plot wouldn't work, and if it were Lenny's, it would be senselessly punitive. Instead, it's the only interference we ever see from the above-sea world. (In fact, it is interesting that everything human, and not just human-modeled, in this movie is inextricably deathly. There's the anchor that kills Frankie and the sunken Titanic where the shark mafia lives.) That anchor is originally connected, by the way--Lenny snaps the chain in his mouth and tosses the anchor away. This had to happen for reasons that'll become clear. Frankie then says a few final (but totally unnecessary?!) words to fit in a joke about sharks that is scientifically inaccurate. Great white sharks are not "cold-blooded", they have a rete mirabile which keeps their internal temperature above that of the ambient water. Learn things about sharks you dumb idiots! I don't think you should make a movie about any animal you didn't read the full Wiki page about. jesus. There is then a "noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo" that is almost Revenge of the Sith bad, but... not quiiite as funny. Even though this film is a comedy. I don't know if that makes it better or worse. Anyway, I think the last words actually diminish what happens next, which is Lenny crying about how his brother is dead and how upset his father will be. He swims off! So this is not actually where Smithfish and Lenny form their buddyship or whatever. Anyway, with Lenny gone, it's just Smithfish and the corpse of Frankie. The jellyfish guys then reappear (they were attracted by the sound of the anchor falling--we see that earlier). They assume Smithfish killed the shark and are in awe of him. Smithfish decides to go with it. It's his big chance to become a star! ... But it feels really gross and exploitative considering what we just saw from Lenny. The film doesn't seem to realize that Lenny (and honestly his dad, and maybe Angie) are the sympathetic characters at this point, not Smithfish. Smithfish just seems like an rear end in a top hat. more to come--
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 02:10
|
|
|
If I remember correctly Shark Tale was the movie that started the trend of cramming as many celebrities in to voice pointless characters as possible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 02:13
|
|
|
Casimir Radon posted:If I remember correctly Shark Tale was the movie that started the trend of cramming as many celebrities in to voice pointless characters as possible. Nah Aladdin definitely gets the ring for busting down the "joke celebrity character" door, and Shrek expanded that to include the full cast. If anything Shark Tale is just a climax of when you reach max celebrity status.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 02:20
|
|
|
As I noted earlier, The Jungle Book in 1967 was a key player in this now well-established pattern of celebrity voices. I don't object to it as much as I used to, because it seems the actors usually still try to do a good job. An exception for, of course, Orson Welles as Unicron. He hadn't even read the lines before he showed up to the recording booth. Leonard Nimoy, however, was excellent as Galvatron in the same film. I feel I can be unusually objective about that because I didn't see the Transformers movie* until I was about 19. *and there is only one 
Pick fucked around with this message at 02:23 on Apr 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 02:21
|
|
|
Pick posted:I don't know what the real-world analogue to this is supposed to be. You ever see Eastern Promises? Gay mobster loving a woman while his family watches to make sure that he's capable of continuing the family line before they put him in charge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
...of SCIENCE! posted:You ever see Eastern Promises? Considering that this came out in 2007, logic dictates that it was inspired by Shark Tale.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 02:29
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Nah Aladdin definitely gets the ring for busting down the "joke celebrity character" door, and Shrek expanded that to include the full cast. If anything Shark Tale is just a climax of when you reach max celebrity status. Edit: Comedy answer. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 03:45
|
|
|
Casimir Radon posted:You sure? I looked over the cast and it's mostly people who have at least done enough to qualify as voice actors, save for Robin Williams and Gilbert Gottfried. Well Aladdin was voiced by one of DJ's boyfriends in Full House so DJ dated Aladdin and Max from A Goofy Movie  edit: So. PRETTY big deal
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 03:48
|
|
|
Macaluso posted:Well Aladdin was voiced by one of DJ's boyfriends in Full House so DJ dated Aladdin and Max from A Goofy Movie
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 04:02
|
|
|
Casimir Radon posted:DJ Tanner was played by Candace Cameron, sister of Kirk Cameron. If we're playing six degrees of failed actor and all-around bad person. But how does this tie back to Kevin Bacon?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 04:36
|
|
|
Casimir Radon posted:You sure? I looked over the cast and it's mostly people who have at least done enough to qualify as voice actors, save for Robin Williams and Gilbert Gottfried. Yeah. I'm sure. Aladdin was the first Disney film where they basically cast a celebrity to play an animated version of themselves and speaking as someone who was there when it came out Williams was far and away the audience favorite. Once that happened you saw Nathan Lane in the Lion King and Danny DeVito in Hercules and Eddie Murphy in Mulan until Dreamworks decided to mutate that formula for the entire cast in Shrek, also with Eddie Murphy coincidentally enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 04:39
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Yeah. I'm sure. Aladdin was the first Disney film where they basically cast a celebrity to play an animated version of themselves and speaking as someone who was there when it came out Williams was far and away the audience favorite. Once that happened you saw Nathan Lane in the Lion King and Danny DeVito in Hercules and Eddie Murphy in Mulan until Dreamworks decided to mutate that formula for the entire cast in Shrek, also with Eddie Murphy coincidentally enough. I think this approach worked for Shrek, though. Again, Shrek (and to a lesser extent Shrek 2) reaaaally suffers in retrospect. We're sick to poo poo of that kind of movie, but that kind of movie only become popular because Shrek was blazed a hell of a trail by being, well, exceptionally good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 04:57
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Yeah. I'm sure. Aladdin was the first Disney film where they basically cast a celebrity to play an animated version of themselves and speaking as someone who was there when it came out Williams was far and away the audience favorite. Once that happened you saw Nathan Lane in the Lion King and Danny DeVito in Hercules and Eddie Murphy in Mulan until Dreamworks decided to mutate that formula for the entire cast in Shrek, also with Eddie Murphy coincidentally enough. To be fair, as far back as the 1960s you had The Mad Hatter in Alice in Wonderland who was just Ed Wynn playing himself. Literally, considering that the animators had him and the other actors physically perform the mad tea party scene and used that as a reference for animating it. I think that so long as the voice fits the character it doesn't really matter if it's different from the actor's normal voice or mannerisms. Pleakly never doesn't sound like Kevin McDonald and Violet Parr is unmistakably Sarah Vowell but they're great at it. Even outside of movies you have people like H. Jon Benjamin and Kristen Schaal who use the same voice for everything and play the same kinds of characters but can still make all their characters distinct and different. The post-Shrek Dreamworks movies feel like they cross the line from having actors that just happen to be celebrities to having voice actors because they were celebrities, and that's what hurts them. ...of SCIENCE! fucked around with this message at 06:13 on Apr 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 06:08
|
|
|
Ed Wynn as the Mad Hatter may have been the most genius casting decision ever made, I don't think I'll ever tire of that scene.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 06:44
|
|
|
...of SCIENCE! posted:To be fair, as far back as the 1960s you had The Mad Hatter in Alice in Wonderland who was just Ed Wynn playing himself. Literally, considering that the animators had him and the other actors physically perform the mad tea party scene and used that as a reference for animating it. quote:I think that so long as the voice fits the character it doesn't really matter if it's different from the actor's normal voice or mannerisms. Pleakly never doesn't sound like Kevin McDonald and Violet Parr is unmistakably Sarah Vowell but they're great at it. Even outside of movies you have people like H. Jon Benjamin and Kristen Schaal who use the same voice for everything and play the same kinds of characters but can still make all their characters distinct and different. The post-Shrek Dreamworks movies feel like they cross the line from having actors that just happen to be celebrities to having voice actors because they were celebrities, and that's what hurts them. I think the biggest mistake is when they make the character look like the voice actor when that relationship is invalid or distracting. Shark Tale fucks this up horribly with Smithfish, because it's a fish with a Will Smith face and you can't goddamn escape that. Except he's not supposed to be Will Smith! But I don't mind Ben Stiller as a lion, because frankly the lion doesn't look anything like Stiller and it's not acting particularly like Ben Stiller, so he's not Stillerlion. He's just a lion with a voice I vaguely recognize. I'm not bombarded with an association to something completely unrelated.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 06:58
|
|
|
Although I do wish more animated films would bring in dedicated voice actors to play major roles, I always appreciate when films at least dig a little deeper than the A-list in search of the right voice. Pixar's pretty good about this. Finding Nemo, for instance: Albert Brooks and Ellen Degeneres are certainly recognizable names, but you wouldn't likely find them as the leads in a blockbuster live-action film. They were brought on because they match their roles well, not because they were going to get butts in seats. Even Hanks and Allen in Toy Story are good matches first and big names second (not that Tim Allen is a big name these days, but you get my meaning).
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 07:11
|
|
|
Disney proper has done a great job too. Silverman was fine, but John C. Reilly and Alan Tudyk were genius choices for characters who had to be voiced perfectly. Meanwhile, most of the cast of Shark Tale are pretty replaceable. Although I really can't fault them for using De Niro. e: There is one (well technically two) lines that Jack Black voices juuuuust right though, such that something that shouldn't have worked somehow does. That always impresses me. Pick fucked around with this message at 07:20 on Apr 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 07:17
|
|
|
Casimir Radon posted:The music selection was really bizarre in Shrek 3, especially for the funeral scene. What kind of idiot decides to use Live and Let Die for a funeral scene of a character we're supposed to care about on some level? It's like any scene with anachronistic music was directed by the kids who made those anime music videos that used to be littered all over youtube. I'm sure the primary reason to use that song was to pad out the Official Shrek The Third: Motion Picture Soundtrack. Available in stores, buy it now!
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 12:47
|
|
|
Pick posted:I don't object to it as much as I used to, because it seems the actors usually still try to do a good job. An exception for, of course, Orson Welles as Unicron. He hadn't even read the lines before he showed up to the recording booth. I thought that Welles actually worked quite effectively for that part. He clearly didn't give a poo poo about what he was doing, which had the (probably) unintentional effect of making Unicron sound dispassionate and removed, as if he was so godlike everything that happened was barely worth his notice. I dunno, I'm making excuses. v  v
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 16:19
|
|
|
I thought Antz was reasonably clever by having Woody Allen play the character who is the stock Woody Allen character type- but beyond that does not look like or resemble Woody Allen in any way. It really worked to the movie's benefit. Until this was pointed out to me, I had never realized how implausible it was that a guy who looks like Woody Allen keeps getting into romantic entanglements with women way above his attractiveness level. ...But then I look at all the other celebrity names attached to that movie and I can't even guess who was supposed to be playing who. I don't even remember the overall voicework from Antz being that strong so I'm a little mystified why it's completely stacked with A-listers and I never noticed before.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 17:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:16 |
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Yeah. I'm sure. Aladdin was the first Disney film where they basically cast a celebrity to play an animated version of themselves and speaking as someone who was there when it came out Williams was far and away the audience favorite. Once that happened you saw Nathan Lane in the Lion King and Danny DeVito in Hercules and Eddie Murphy in Mulan until Dreamworks decided to mutate that formula for the entire cast in Shrek, also with Eddie Murphy coincidentally enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 17:34
|
|