#disney ripoff movie

[runkenballsack]

Okay Tumblr I need your help! I've been trying to find this ripoff Mulan movie for a while!

I had it on VHS as a kid and me and my siblings called it "computer Mulan" because of its poor and cheap animation, the sorts ripoff movie you bought at the supermarket. It was kinda pixelated in quality. They reused a lot of character models and animation, I don't know if it was just because I had a Danish dub of the movie but the synchronizing of voices was SO bad!

There was this annoying panda friend she had in it and a ying/yang fish who had to help her get out of a cave at one point in the movie. The Ying/yang thing was a big deal in the story. And I remember it as if there was this big red dragon in the end for some reason.

If anyone know what kind of Mulan movie I'm talking about PLEASE send me a pic or a clip or something! I haven't been able to find anything on the web.

Help please!

[auburngods]

drawing seaquest fan art while listening to the atlantis (2001) soundtrack hits different

[lesbiten]

my friend has this little plastic cow drawing hanging from her car mirror and today i noticed it was ai generated (has 5 legs) and she was like 'but hes cute though!' hes stealing money from people

[foone]

New kind of guy I just invented: hates Disney movies but when asked why, they say it's because the film is a ripoff of Kimba The White Lion.

Snow White? Kimba the White Lion.

Frozen? Kimba.

The Rescuers Down Under? Kimba the White Lion!

The only film that's not a blatant Kimba the White Lion rip-off, according to them, is Lion King.

That's just a clone of Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead.

[shinyzango]

Just curious, opinions on the different nutcrackers that you know of from all kinds of media and stuff?

Sorry if anyone asked this before I wouldn't know

Love your art and characters by the way keep it up!

Hohohohohohohoho, we be opening the Pandora Box here. Not that I'm complaining~

So, this is going to be a very long post as I've seen a lot of the movies. I also have a couple books which I can give my opinion, and I'm familiar with various apparitions in videogames and such. So yeah this is going to be a loooooooong post.

So buckle up, grab a drink and enjoy the ride into my personal madness o7

[ CAREFUL, VERY LONG POST UNDER THE CUT ]

So, let's start with movies as those are easier to grab and talk about for me. I'm gonna go with their year of release ot keep things organized.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

Shchelkunchik (1973)

Small silly dramatic guy, I like him! The animators did a great job animating his design and make him incredibly appealing. As for his human appearance, eeeeeh I don't really care for him. Definitely a shock the first time you see it lol But yes, adorable silly guy

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

Nutcracker Fantasy (1979)

Li'l guy. It is Sanrio so it's bound to be on the cute side. The Nutcracker itself doesn't do much in the movie, but as for Fritz himself, I... honestly don't care about him. He looks pretty, but personality wise he needs to work on it pff Idk he just comes out as plain and a little arrogant... Still a fine fellow, though.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

Nutcracker: The Motion Picture (1986)

One of the two ballet-based movies I've seen, and definitely the better one of the two imo. And good lord I love this guy. He may look terrifying but good lord if he's silly. And I actually don't mind his human appearance as simple as it is. Silly man, this one.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

The Nutcracker Prince (1990)

HIM. MY BELOVED. THE GOOD LAD. Definitely my favorite, and not because this was my most beloved childhood movie. He is such a sweetheart with a hint of awkwardness but who can still kick your ass. And the final scene in the castle in the Italian dub is just *chef kiss* 10/10 lad.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

The Nutcracker (1993)

The other ballet-based movie... it's just Macaulay Culkin. And his nutcracker costume looks hideous lol. Nothign to say. Surprisingly, he's not the worst one.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

The Nuttiest Nutcracker (1999)

Ripoff Ken. He is incredibly dumb, and a tiny bit of a freak, but could be worse honestly kdjng They did Barbie before Barbie did it lol that's p much it.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

Barbie in the Nutcracker (2001)

THE OTHER GOOD LAD. I love Eric so much he's such a sweetheart wanting to fix his mistakes. It's so easy to root for him. As for his human appearance... he's just Ken skjngf 10/10 lad #2

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

The Nutcracker and the MouseKing (2004)

Oh boy what to say about this one. Very hateful in the first half. At least he learns and becomes bearable at the last third of the movie. But I do like the nutcracker form, they made the blocky design work as well, like later on it's actually very nice to see him move. Still, horrible personality. Needs a slap in the face.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

Nutcracker in 3D / Nutcracker: The Untold Story (2010)

Hellspawn. Nightmare fuel. Abomination. Who the hell approved to that design?? And why did they pitch up his voice like that?? At least the kid playing human NC is not as bad, but good lord. 0/10 Just burn that puppet with fire, please.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

The Nutcracker and the Four Realms (2018)

This one just pisses me off. This one had so much potential, and the actor is actually good. It's just the way his character was written that is dog awful. They made him basically a dumb side character who barely does anything despite everyone in the movie treating him like he's a big shot. And the the fact that this was made by Disney just makes this worse. Just so much lost potential.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

The Nutcracker (???)

I actually don't know who made this movie or in which year, but I do like this one. The movie is comedic so he's a bit silly, but he's still quite enjoyable. And for some reason he reminds me of Waluigi.... Still, silly guy.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

That's all for the movies. There are a bunch more that I've missed or that I can't find anymore so my list of opinions on them is not complete. But one day...

---

As for other medias, hm... I have a couple books that are just the original story by Hoffman and the retell by Duman (of which I don't have much to say) and the graphic novel by Natalie Andrewson.

He's just a li'l guy, silly kid but enjoyable.

---

Lastly, while there are no actual nutcracker based games, I do want to mention a few skins and characters I am aware of for the hell of it. I'm pretty sure I will be forgetting some but eh.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

Terraria

Silly guy that speeeens. I wish I didn't have to kill them skgjfn.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

Overwatch

As much as I now despise Overwatch for many reasons, I still love Zenyatta's nutcracker skin to death. Look at this silly guy. Definitely my favorite skin in the game.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

Saints Row IV

SR4 had a Christmas themed DLC, and among all the xmas reskins of the enemies, one was the terminator-like enemies being turned into Nutcrackers. And their design look so sick.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

Fortnite

I don't play Fortnite, but I do have to admit that the nutcracker guy looks neat. The crazy look fits the look quite well. If I would ever get in there (I doubt it but still), that would definitely be the skin I would use.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

Lethal Company

I don't play LC neither but I've seen videos of the nutcracker enemy in action, and yeah he looks silly. I love how he moves around.

~ * ~ * ~ * ~

That's all of the apparitions that I can think of. I'm also aware of the point-and-click game made by Big Fish Games, but I have not played it myself. I really should do that one day...

---

Aaaaaand that's a wrap. I'm definitely forgetting a nutboi or two somewhere but these are all the ones I can think of at the top of my head that are officially published and all.

If we start talking about folks in social medias I've come to know over the years... I'm gonna be here for 3 months trying to talk about them dkjfgn

Well, hope you enjoyed this personal spiraling into nut madness :V

[mourningmaybells]

hit with the sudden recollection that hades and maleficent were dating in house of mouse 2001-2003, and in 2019 had a kid together from that disney Ever After High ripoff, Descendants 3. So. Well someone remembered that series and decided it was gonna be in a disney channel teen movie.

[frauleinfunf]

There's something about the animated movies 20th Century Fox put out in the 90s to compete with Disney being the ones more readily accessible on VHS bc of that damn Disney Vault keeping prices high, but now Disney owns those ripoffs and have them on Disney Plus.

Not sure where I was going with this but I miss being a self righteous 12 year old yelling on the internet that Anastasia wasn't a Disney movie

[jo-harrington]

Thoughts about Writing and Creating

Earlier today I read an article that really resonated with me and specifically made me think about some things within the corner I exist in within the tumblr fanfiction community.

First an intro: Hi! My name is Jo! I’m a 28 year old professional designer and visual artist, and I write about a silly metal head from the 80’s. I’ve been reading and writing fanfic in some way shape or form since I was 12. (Way before I should have.) There are people who’ve been in fandom longer than I have. And some people who are new to this world.

The thoughts I’m conveying below are mine alone and you may agree or you may not. Me writing this is to get these thoughts out and, hopefully, inspire some peace in my community and impart some lessons on some newer members of fandom. If you disagree with my opinions, please feel free to make your own. Post about them or shoot me a PM and we can have a peaceful discussion.

This post is NOT meant as an open door to hatred. If you come to me looking to fight, or dehumanize me, you will be blocked. I have seen enough in my time on tumblr to know how to protect my peace.

That being said, let’s proceed:

The article (I’ll link it below) was about the new Little Mermaid movie and how this “live action Disney revolution” is just a signifier of how media is recycled and that no idea is a new one. In any creative outlet. And while the article itself delves into the history of the Little Mermaid or mermaids themselves and all of that, the nuance of reference versus inspiration, the final idea was: never stop creating, never stop being inspired, never stop exploring.

How does that pertain to fanfiction though? How does that apply to me?

There’s been a lot of talk recently of “this person copied this idea” or “this is just a ripoff of that.” Enough that it drives people off of tumblr or stops them creating altogether. Makes people think that they’ve done something wrong. Some of this talk is is done by creators themselves, some is done by devoted friends or fans. And it is truly a shame, and I think it’s time that we stop.

This is not saying “plagiarism” or “copy and pasting word for word with a bit of name changing” is ok. No, those things are not ok. And people are allowed to be protective of their creations! Writers and artists put their heart and soul into their work.

But in terms of people’s genuine creativity…we need to be more tolerant of overlap. Whether we create or consume.

I’m currently writing a Freaky Friday Alternate Universe featuring 2 characters from a Netflix show. My story would not exist if these other media sources and inspirations didn’t exist. Does that mean my story should not exist or be told? Does that mean my writing isn’t good? No and no.

I don’t profit from my work. I write for me. For my friends. For you. I have nothing to gain and nothing to lose. And if someone came to me tomorrow and said “hey, I wanted to write another Freaky Friday story,” so long as they didn’t copy my work word for word…well…you know what? I would be happy about it! Welcome it. Encourage them.

How can I tell someone no? Forbid them to try and use my idea—whether they were inspired by it or just…stumbled on it by chance as they got the idea organically themselves? What if they had genuine inspiration and could write this story better? Who, if they’ve never written before, might have just found their first chance to do so?

How could I dare to stop someone from being inspired? When I dared to follow the same inspiration for myself?

Now I know there are a lot more personal or original ideas and fanfictions out there. But at the end of the day, everything had been done in some way shape or form. We are all inspired by something. We have overlapping experiences. (I myself have found a good friend in this community who has life experiences so close to my own it’s frightening.)

There are 8 billion of us on this planet, thinking and imagining. Living. There is no one in a million idea anymore when we are consuming so much diverse media at any given time during the day.

Again, if you’re a creator, you’re allowed to be protective of your creation. But you are not allowed to stunt someone’s inspiration or growth. We are not fighting one another in fandom. We are all in this little corner together. Someone getting a like or a comment doesn’t mean that a like or a comment was taken away from you.

And if you’re a consumer of fanfiction, if you’re here to support a friend or just someone who created something you love…yes, it may be something you look forward to, but you should never hurt someone just because you think they might have “stolen” or “hurt” your writer friends. This is a place for all of us to feel safe.

Consider the Golden Rule: Treat others the way you would want to be treated.

There are no big blogs or small blogs. Notes aren’t important. What is important is kindness and community.

And we should all be welcome here.

Article: There’s No Such Thing as a New Idea

[pinkpinkstarlet]

I don’t know if you watched dreamworks sinbad but if you watched it, you can see that Flynn is basically a ripoff of sinbad. They have the same personality and looks. The only difference between them is that sinbad is actually attractive and isn’t a totally creep like Flynn is.

Disney was ripping off every Dreamworks movie for this one.

OMG I REMEMBER SINBAD!!!! I used to actually be scared of eris as a kid but now I find her extremely entertaining and pretty (especially her hair) and it’s a WAY better movie than tangled could ever dream to be

yeah sinbad is a lot like flynn, except flynn is the Walmart cheap version of sinbad. also sinbad has more of a character arc and interesting personality that actually accept the fact that his actions has consequences as seen by him returning to be executed despite eris trying to claim otherwise.

[abbinurmel]

So, for a good....maybe 87% of my life, this one specific scene from the 90s animated sequel movie "Fievel Goes West", has lived rent free in my head. And thing is, despite that I have not actually sat down and WATCHED the film as an adult. And. I finally saw a clip of it on YT and well...just look at it.

No but really look at it. Look at this brief comedic 'hero training' montage clip, and you realize this simple, cute little family blockbuster sequel, had WAY much more mind-blowing effort put in than it ever had to.

-To start, that clearly is the famous classical music piece "Hoedown" being used to inspire the soundtrack here, but it's being made somehow almost even more triumphant and fast in a span of under a minute.

That kind of 'cleverly deliberate homaging classical well known songs but not so much it's obvious or a ripoff' scoring takes a compositional genius. You don't know it's even in there til you listen for it! Exactly as bone-chilling good to listen to as the original and as much now as it was decades ago. My brain was shocked that it still evoked shivers, watching a fat orange cat doing rope tricks. Speaking of which-

THEY DREW THIS. And PAINTED ALL THIS.

Every single bit of it OVER. AND OVER AGAIN. BY HAND.

Watch this clip again, slowed down. Watch all of this cat's many tiny fur tufts and fat rolls, and the wrinkles and expressive motions on this sheriff dog character. Someone had to draw all those moving around. They never had to. Who is the madman responsible for this. It wasn't some iconic Disney legend like Milt Kahl, and we know Do .Bluth was not here, so who the hell was it!

-The whiskers on Fievel and his tail being unnecessarily curled and punching IN TIME TO THE SONG as he is rooting his friend on.

-All these 'mummy' ropes, and the shadow on them.

-The shafts of light and the falling dirt and cave water drips at the beginning when Tiger prances about mockingly in the mine tunnel entrance.

-At 2:17 the bottle glass all reflecting OUR view of Tiger then shattering and the smoke on his slingshot and the excessively cool way Tiger twirls it around and then pockets it like a gun, complete with "action movie/fancy anime fight" style camera panning round and down his body in towards the holster.

-Look at the part at 2:06 with the punching dummy, from the clouds of dust and tiny straw bits that fly out when Tiger hits it, to all the different camera angles and the way they chose to bounce from third to first to third person again: look at when Tiger rushes up at the scarecrow with a pitchfork. They add 'camera shake' as a way to simulate the off balanced way he as a fat, clumsy, but now highly enthused excitable character specifically would run!

-ALL THOSE FEATHERS

OH MY GOD

They drew the movement of ALL THOSE FUCKING ***FEATHERS!!!!😱***

This isn't even a major scene. But it's taken so thoroughly seriously. This is pure art. This is pure gluttonous showing off. That is brilliant. I really cannot believe how strong this lives up.

Well done brain, you rightfully deserved pushing this on me for so many years.

[franki-lew-yo]

I hate Disney's Mirrorverse so much. I have no words for how much it legit ticks me off and how I think it's an insult to even compare it to Kingdom Hearts, which isn't high art but was at least trying for something.

Kingdom Hearts, House of Mouse and other crossovers that really aren't all that good in retrospect but I find fun AREN'T 'better' because they're from my childhood and so couldn't be garbage. No, they are. The issue I have with Mirrorverse is the same issue I have with that awful Chip n' Dale Rescue Rangers movie:

it's Disney selling you you're own fanfiction premises and making it so you don't have to think or be creative, snark on, reinvent or just have with these properties yourself. You have to do it under the lens of something they can sell to you.

Kingdom Hearts was only ever trying to sell you itself and the current Disney thing at the time, which was what was expected of it. House of Mouse was hokey fun with the Mickey gang and the catalogue of classic characters Disney had, which is why so many people like it. It's all made for money and profit and brand recognition come on Disney has always been this way it's what Walt would have wanted.

Mirrorverse is wearing the skin of a heartfelt fan design project to sell you a sandbox game where Disney makes your favorite characters OP Overwatch ripoffs, not you.

As YMS put it, Chip n' Dale is putting on the guise of being self-aware which actually just being references and mean interpretations of it's own characters. The Lonely Island was wasted.

And they're doing all this more than ever to have a deeper stranglehold on their fandom which they know will fork over money to them no matter what. That's what's not just slimey, like it's always been, but sinister about modern Disney.

I refuse to use that asshat Steven Crowder image meme here. You legit aren't changing my mind.

[ihopesocomic]

i know i'm late but going back to the sexism talk and how people criticize the comic as a whole, do you think it's more about MP stans saying "you can't write either" because you said that show has bad writing vs. actual criticism or a bit of both..? Because everything i've read so far just sounds like either nitpicking or is just made in bad faith and that's just my take on things

I know you're probably aware but just in case: I wouldn't go as far to say all the criticism we've got is made purely in bad faith. A lot of criticism we've received has actually been super polite and helpful.

Bad faith criticism is actually relatively easy to pick up on because people posting it will generally just drag the piece they're "criticising" and then offer absolutely nothing constructive to the issue. Because they don't actually know/care about anything in regards to giving actual criticism. Because yeah: shocker, folks. Saying things like "this story/characters are full of clichés" or "the dialogue is bad" is actually not valid criticism. You can't throw out buzzwords like 'cliché' and then call yourself a 'critic', you need to actually 1) know what that word means and also 2) recognise that using them is not always a bad thing. Especially when the latter point is demonstrated through what you claim to enjoy.

For example, I'll see somebody saying the above but then I'll also see them being the biggest stan for Disney/Pixar movies... which are absolutely full of clichés in storytelling/characters? It doesn't necessarily make them bad movies but I'm just gonna call a spade a spade here and say a lot of those movies actually wrote the rulebook on using clichés shamelessly.

Like we're aware that we're using some basic character archetypes like Adamant and Quiet being your stereotypical annoying younger sisters. We just don't care if it's "cliché" because 1) it gets the job done and the audience understands their role in the story without having to consume too much exposition and 2) it's an archetype we enjoy.

Same goes for any criticism that calls the comic a 'ripoff' or a 'copy' and the person proceeds to list off a bunch of things that are either inaccurate/untrue (i.e. saying that Clever is Hope's grandmother when she's not) or citing things that are not exclusive to My Pride. For example, we apparently can't have white lions in our comic because of the one white lion that appears in My Pride... and it's not even confirmed that's how he's actually meant to appear. Ghost could just be white because... well, he's a ghost (or at least not alive in the strictest sense). lmao But in conclusion, we've both been in this game a long time and we know when people are being constructive and helpful. There is an element of 'let's give you a taste of your own medicine' out there but it just pretty much confirms to us that these people haven't watched all of our MP video three years down the line or else they would know how actual criticism works.

Because it's not always about dragging what you dislike. It's often about getting disillusioned with something you saw a lot of potential in and expressing your disappointment and how things could've been better in your eyes. - RJ

[dani-luminae]

Ripping off EAH is a bad idea. The makers WILL sue!!

Bold of you to assume that Mattel cares about the franchise they gave up on. It's not even a candidate for rebooting like Monster High.

Also can we stop acting like EAH was some treasured passion project of a struggling indie developer or something? It's owned by Mattel! The company that just put out the Barbie movie! The company literally could not be doing better.

Besides. “Daughter of the Queen of Hearts” and “daughter of Cinderella” aren’t copyrighted by Mattel (in fact, Darling Charming isn’t the daughter of Cinderella! The EAH Charming family specifically has no relation to Cinderella.) There’s enough established in Descendants to argue that all similarities are just coincidence. Sporty girls with swords? Done before (see: Lonnie in the second movie.) Besides, Lizzie and Darling never actually had an adventure together I think...

There's also that Ever After High isn’t the only “school for children of fairy tales” there is. There's The School for Good and Evil (a six-book series likely more well-known for an astoundingly subpar Netflix adaptation) and Regal Academy, among others. EAH vs. Descendants aside, no company *owns* the idea of “school for fairy-tale/public-domain characters kids.”

Which, yes, literally all the parents of EAH are public domain. Disney had the opportunity for using Disney trademark names like Maleficent, Lady Tremaine, etc. but their character bases are still public domain (Sleeping Beauty’s 13th fairy and Cinderella’s stepmother, respectively.) Descendants also gets to involve some Disney-specific tales like 101 Dalmatians. But EAH also got to pull in some tales that Disney never covered, like Jack and the Beanstalk (...whatever happened to that Gigantic movie?), Goldilocks and the Three Bears, and Thumbelina.

Also if you expect me to believe that some EAH designs weren’t Disney ripoffs to begin with, no. Because look at this:

This is original concept art for Rosabella Beauty, daughter of Beauty and the Beast! But wanna see what she looks like in the actual cartoon?

Oh would you look at that!!! I wonder why they gave her brown hair suddenly but so clearly wanted to keep the yellow scheme! Couldn't possibly be because they wanted people to think of Disney's Belle, right?????

And also:

Purple? Check. High collar? Check. Menacing accessories? Check. Significant widow's peak with spiky crown? Double check. Also Raven's actual mother in the series looks like this:

And not actually, you know, like Raven.

EAH was also relying on a healthy handful of Disney ripoff designs to get their characters noticed. It shows. Not to mention the entirety of Epic Winter clearly banking on the Frozen craze because it didn't even get "The Snow Queen" story right.

(And sure, Descendants featured some designs that were a little bit too close to EAH, see: Mal's purple Cotillion gown vs. Raven's Thronecoming gown, evil!Audrey's entire color scheme compared to Spring Unsprung Briar, etc.)

Doesn't mean that mocking it is a classy move on Disney's part, but unless they're stupid enough to straight-up use a patented name from EAH, I highly doubt Mattel can or will do anything about it.

[wonderfulworldofmichaelford]

Is It Really That Bad?

Disney and Dreamworks have been locked in combat since day one, and honestly, can you blame them? The Katzenberg/Eisner feud is pretty legendary, with both men taking potshots at each other in films, and the drama behind stuff like A Bug’s Life and Antz has been done to death. The thing is, in the early years of Dreamworks, it was pretty clear that no matter how hard they tried, Disney was the one who was taking the Ws when it came to the cinemas. Stuff like Sinbad and The Road to El Dorado were flopping pretty hard, and while The Prince of Egypt was a success, the failure of the former two ended Dreamoworks’s hopes of ever competing with Disney in the 2D animated market. What’s a studio to do in a situation like that? Well, someBODY ONCE TOLD ME...

Shrek didn’t just solidify Dreamworks as a contender, that movie changed the course of animation in the 2000s all on its own. With its snarky humor, pop culture references, awesome pop soundtrack as opposed to musical numbers, and celebrity cast, Shrek codified many trends for animation going forward—for better and for worse. But whatever impact the film had pales in comparison to one simple, unignorable fact: This movie came out on top over Disney. It won the first ever Academy Award for Best Animated Picture, and considering how long Disney was in that game that must have really fucking stung. While Disney spent the early 2000s floundering and releasing flops that would only become cult classics later, Dreamworks was riding that green wave Shrek produced all the way to the bank. What’s a studio to do in a situation like that? Well, someBODY ONCE…

Oh no.

Chicken Little was Disney’s blatant attempt at making their own Shrek (with blackjack! And hookers!), but to say that things didn’t pan out well for Disney there is a vast understatement. Michael Eisner made sure to meddle as much as possible, turning a more straightforward adaptation of the fairy tale into a snarky, self-deprecating comedy about baseball and aliens, which certainly is a choice. This choice had some dire consequences; while not a bomb by any means, the film ruined the already-struggling career of The Emperor’s New Groove director Mark Dindal, producer Randy Fullmer left Disney with Dindal and went into making guitars, and ultimately Eisner himself became a victim of the film as well, with it being the final blow to his tenure at Disney after a decade of failed investments. Eisner ended up passing the torch to Bob Iger, who turned out to be a better leader than Eisner who never did or said anything quite as stupid!

Audience reaction to the movie has always been pretty mixed, to say the least. Reviewers on YouTube such as Schafrillas, Doug Walker, and Mr. Enter have used the film as their punching bag at various points, with the latter in particular helping shape the image of Buck Cluck as Disney’s most vile father figure. Audiences these days aren’t particularly receptive to it either, with most people considering it Disney’s absolute worst film, though there are nostalgic viewers with a soft spot for it. I first watched the film myself a few years back, and I was thoroughly disgusted and unimpressed by what I saw; for the longest time, I had it higher than Doogal on my list of the worst films ever. Fucking Doogal! Can a film really be that bad?!

Well, I decided to give it a second chance and find out if maybe my perception was just colored by all the negative reviews. Is Chicken Little really that bad, or is this just a so-so Shrek ripoff that people overreacted to?

THE GOOD

Most of the characters in this movie are actually decent, even if they’re a little cringe. Chicken Little himself is a likable dork, which only makes all the suffering and setbacks he goes through that much harder to watch; I think they made him too likable, y’know? His friend group is pretty solid as well, with Abby being an okay love interest, Runt being a nice guy (or maybe I should say Nice Guy considering what he does with a bimbofied Foxy Loxy at the end), and Fish Out of Water being a cute “lol so random XD” character. They aren’t the best thing ever, but they’re all pretty decent. I can see why Zach Braff likes voicing the title character so much, and it is cool he got to be in the best Kingdom Hearts game, so that’s something!

Though of, course none of them hold a candle to the absolute Chad that is Morkubine Porcupine, a character so fucking cool that he refuses to give this movie the dignity of more than three single words out of his mouth. If he had more dialogue, the whole movie might collapse under the sheer power of his voice. He’s like Black Bolt, except a porcupine, and in a marginally better piece of Disney media.

There’s a great sequence at the end of the movie that has a Pee-wee’s Big Adventure-esque film within the film about Chicken Little’s exploits… except he’s a ridiculously buff rooster voiced by Adam West in a film that looks like an insane version of Star Fox from the brief clips we see of it. Runt is in there as a hardcore, ugly warthog and Abby is an overly-sexualized space bimbo, but I’m not even particularly bothered by the fact they gave the girl chicken breasts because Adam West’s chicken breasts are so much more massive. 

The entire scene, as brief as it is, is delightful thanks to West being West, and it honestly makes you wish that the whole movie was just a ridiculous space battle adventure… And everyone’s wish was granted when they released a pretty good video game based on this silly concept!

Of course, as is typical of any Disney movie, the best part is without a doubt the villain: Buck Cluck, Chicken Little’s own father.

 In his youth, he was a strapping sports star, and because of this he feels a deep sense of shame at his son’s wild antics and is completely unable to relate to him. He constantly puts him down in front of others to try and salvage his own reputation, throwing him under the bus at every opportunity and refusing to support him. And even after Chicken Little pushes himself to the limit and becomes a baseball star all so he can earn even the slightest smidgen of his father’s respect, Buck is quick to cast him aside once more all so that he can try and keep the dignity among the townsfolk he mooched off of his son’s victory. Buck Cluck is the proto-Mother Gothel, a distant and absent parent for the ages, and one of the most despicable foes the studio has ever produced. Hell, I might even go as far as to say he’s one of the greatest villains of all ti-

Wait, hold on. I’m being informed that Buck… isn’t intentionally a villain? He’s supposed to be… sympathetic…?

THE BAD

I’VE COME TO MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT! BUCK “THE CUCK” CLUCK’S A BITCH-ASS MOTHERFUCKER!

Ok, ok, let’s be serious for a second. I’m gonna get a bit controversial here, but Buck Cluck isn’t nearly as evil as people make him out to be.

Let me explain: While the film’s narrative completely and utterly fails to make his redemption feel earned at all, it’s not like he was ever really intentionally or even physically abusive like Frollo, Gothel, or Lady Tremaine were. Buck Cluck has a very real problem a parent can have, in that he has a hard time relating to his son while being a single parent that is likely still dealing with the loss of his wife. The issue is the movie doesn’t bother trying to flesh him or his feelings out and tries its damndest to make him look like a good guy all while he emotionally neglects his child.

All this being said, his vocal performance from The Princess Diaries director Garry Marshall is actually pretty great, he gets a few good jokes here and there, and it’s actually really endearingly goofy when he overcompensates with loving his son in the third act. While I’m never going to stop treating the character like he’s Chicken Hitler, I want it to be clear that my jabs at him are very much in the same vein as someone like Huey Emmerich. The difference, of course, is that Huey is an intentional case of making a character you love to hate, while Buck is accidental. And that’s why this segment is here, in “The Bad” part of the review: The movie failed this man so bad that he is put alongside characters like Shou Tucker, Ragyo Kiryuin, and Fire Lord Ozai in animated parent rankings. How do you fuck up that badly? Mainly by deleting the scenes where he actually gets development or characterization beyond being a lousy parent, that’s how!

These writing issues don’t just affect Buck, though; literally the entire movie is as messy as that Kentucky fried bastard’s characterization. The main issue is with the story itself. Now, when you have a movie called Chicken Little, you kind of expect an adaptation of the fable of the same name. And since this is Disney, you wouldn’t be stupid to assume that’s what they’d do, considering adapting fables, myths, and fairy tales is basically their bread and butter. But that is decidedly not what they did here; instead, they decided to make Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius by way of Shrek, because movies like that were popular at the time, and what we’re left with is a film populated by mean-spirited jerkasses who do nothing but dump on our likable main character as he takes part in a story to win the love of his dad via baseball that suddenly, out of completely nowhere, turns into an alien invasion movie about halfway through. Absolutely none of these elements work well together, and the film comes off felling like it was stitched together from unrelated scripts and turned into an unholy Frankenstein of bad ideas.

Not helping helping the disjointed story are the desperate attempts to seem cool. I like Morkubine Porcupine, he’s one of the better gags in the film, but he is so plainly a desperate attempt at creating an ensemble darkhorse that it hurts (the fact it actually worked in spite of this is nothing short of miraculous). The humor is very much aping Shrek, with lots of snarky humor and mean-spirited characters which ends up not working because it’s too cruel, and even ignoring that the pop culture references (a staple of Dreamworks at the time) just all come out of nowhere. Why is the fish reenacting King Kong? Why are these animals watching Raiders of the Lost Ark, and why is Indy still a human? Why did Disney think referencing the lemming suicide myth was a good idea when they literally perpetuated that myth by driving lemmings off a cliff for a movie?

Then there’s the animation. It is so blatantly obvious that this is Disney’s first time making a fully computer animated movie without Pixar’s help. A lot of characters look really unpolished, and even worse is that a lot of the characters are extremely overanimated. If you wanna see what I mean, watch Abby at the end of the dodgeball scene when she’s talking to Chicken Little. She just never fucking stops moving! Once you notice it, it becomes really distracting.

But by far the worst thing this movie does is the constant needle drops. This movie would make The Super Mario Bros. Movie blush with its overuse of licensed music, and it sure feels like Suicide Squad took notes from this because they cram so many tracks in here it’s not even funny. Sometimes they even just have thew characters sing them because… who fucking knows. Barenaked Ladies gets a pretty fat W with their song “One Little Slip” playing over our introduction to Chicken Little, but after that we either get the most obvious songs possible for any given seen (“It’s the End of the World as We Know It” plays over the alien invasion at the end, because of course it does) to “what the actual fuck is this doing here in the movie” (“Wannabe” by the Spice Girls is sung by Runt and Abby during a karaoke session, proving that canceling the Spice World review was not enough to save me from this band).

IS IT REALLY THAT BAD?

Alright guys, here comes my hottest take ever: Chicken Little… isn’t that bad.

Now, don’t get me wrong! This movie is still not really good at all. It’s disjointed, mean-spirited, confused, and stuffed to the brim with the tropes and trappings of every bad animated movie of the 2000s. But all of that is also what helps make this so genuinely fascinating! When Dreamworks did stuff like this, it was whatever, that studio is a rising contender in the animation game… but this is Disney! This is THE animation studio, the biggest around, and they’re making every single mistake possible because they want to try and beat Dreamworks at their own game, and they are failing at it! It’s honestly so funny that they tried to make their own version of Shrek without any sort of understanding of what made Shrek work.

But even beyond that, even though this movie is bad, it’s not really worse than Shark Tale is, and that is a premier so bad it’s good film. Really, this movie is the opposite of that film in many ways. Where that film had a world that was too overly nice and propped up the shittiest main character animated at the time, this movie has an insanely cruel world where the sweet, charming, heavily traumatized child is incessantly beaten down and belittled to the point you half expect him to try and dive headfirst into a deep fryer; where that film had a single generic plot that was at least remarkably consistent, this film has two separate plots that don’t go together at all and just end up making both halves of the film feel stupid and pointless; and where in that film Oscar is desperately seeking love from his peers due to his sheer selfishness, Chicken Little just wants the love and respect of his father. Pile on that the mountain of similarities, from the overuse of lame pop culture references for the sake of pop culture references gags to the bland love interests, and you have the Awesomely Bad Animation Double Feature of your dreams.

So yeah, I think the rating it has is about what it deserves. This is easily one of Disney’s weakest entries for sure, but it’s not without its moments and it has some amusing jokes, charming characters, and Adam West as a buff space chicken. If you go in with lowered expectations, you might be amused, but honestly I get why this film is so absolutely despised. It really isn’t great at all, and is firmly in the “so bad it’s good” category. You can’t really expect much more from a movie that presents a character whose biggest crime was just being an asshole getting their personality overwritten with a girly-girl one that the comic relief fat guy insists is perfect as a hilarious joke and then leads into a dance party ending where the whole cast sings Elton John.

...Or you could expect more if it weren’t for that son of a bitch Buck Cluck. Fuck that guy.

[fancylala4]

Rapunzel stans see a character dressed in purple, have a quirky personality and think that it’s a rip off of rapunzel. Lol, they do know that these traits existed in characters way before Disney even started doing cgi movies, right? have these stans seen any other movie that isn’t that trash ass movie? They call every cgi movie a rip off of it. They called frozen a ripoff, they said that Elsa’s hair style in frozen 2 was a ripoff of rapunzel and they even said that encanto was a ripoff. At this point I’m surprised they didn’t say that Ariel in the live action version of the little mermaid was inspired by rapunzel because she’s similar traits when those same trait existed in the animated version of Ariel. Or that Barbie as rapunzel is a ripoff when that movie existed way before Disney’s came out. These stans are so fucking stupid, 😂.

[artist-issues]

Okay, hey, I have something to say about Avatar.  Because the haters love to talk about how nobody’s talking about it. But do you know why nobody’s talking about it? It’s not because it’s a flop. It’s not because it’s predictable, or lazy, or nobody cared, or anything like that.

Nobody’s talking about it because Avatar 2: The Way of Water is (beyond all the hype and the Disney and the animation pioneering and the meme of it all) a good, old-fashioned story about classic family roles. And we’ve lost the ability to let that impact us.

We’re more interested in movies about family that glorify our Teen Angst when we’re pushing 30 years old. Give us Encanto, where the parents aren’t doing enough and the Grandma is the villain and the children are martyrs of the older generation. Give us Stranger Things, where the adults are either evil or straight-up useless, but the kids have more insight into reality. That’s what we crave. A story that strokes our egos and reminds us that our parents were wrong about us. Doesn’t matter about what, exactly, but yeah, the parents are the dummies and the kids are the saviors.

We have no taste buds cultivated for a movie like Avatar 2, where the Dad and Mom just spend the entire movie learning what protection really means. We have no taste buds cultivated for a film where, yes, the kids are innovators and save parts of the day, but they also get into incredible danger thanks to disobedience, and one of them even dies because that is what happens when you’re a kid and you try to be an adult in a war zone.  I mean, gosh, please name me another film in 2022 that was as big and bold about A Father’s Job as Avatar 2: The Way of Water. Our culture doesn’t even want to say “father” anymore, because that would imply that male leaders of a family are actually something that should exist. But Avatar 2: The Way of Water really just said “A father’s role is to protect. That doesn’t mean saving my family by running from trouble.”

Jake goes from making decisions out of fear for his family to trusting in a higher power and leading his family in protecting their home. Proactively, not reactively.  Now, let me be clear, I hate that the higher power is a mashed-up ripoff of various religions, most prominently slapping the rearranged letters of God’s holy name on an amalgamation of Hindu and New Age ideology. And I’m very not cool with the messianic birth trope. But truly, that’s a subject for another time.

Right now, the point I’m making is, you can hate on Avatar 2: The Way of Water for not making a social media splash all you want. But the truth is, the film was made by real, solid filmmakers who have been writing screenplays for things like Armageddon and Titanic. They’re not some hyper-woke scrubs. They know what they’re doing. 

We’ve just lost the ability to talk about stories that are built on traditional values. Avatar 2: The Way of Water isn’t making a splash on social media, not because it wasn’t good, but because the only things that make a splash on social media these days are woke, controversial, political, or pandering. Timeless tales about a family learning to come of age in adversity with the father leading just don’t hit the spot anymore.