Print Page | Close Window

Forum Members' DISCUSSION of RED RIDING HOOD...

Printed From: Official RAZZIE® Forum
Category: INFO on POSSIBLE 2011 RAZZIE® CONTENDERS
Forum Name: DISCUSSION & INFO on RED RIDING HOOD
Forum Discription: Here's Where to Express Yer Thoughts & Find Credits, B.O. Numbers, Reviews, ETC.
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4881
Printed Date: August 22 2014 at 3:03am


Topic: Forum Members' DISCUSSION of RED RIDING HOOD...
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: Forum Members' DISCUSSION of RED RIDING HOOD...
Date Posted: March 06 2011 at 11:37am
GO AHEAD, GIZE -- SINK YER TEETH INTO THIS ONE!  




-------------
Ye Olde Head RAZZberry



Replies:
Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: March 06 2011 at 11:44am
Catherine Hardwicke was off to a great start. Her directorial debut, Thirteen, was... well, #13, on my Top 30 Films of 2003. Over the next half decade, her career slowly crumbled. Then she directed Twilight, a terrible film from autumn of 2008 that earned a dishonorable mention from me for that year. Now this is where I'd expect her to really crash and burn.
 
UPDATE: I saw HeadRAZZBerry's take on this, and the screenshot he posted featured a mansion with jagged brown wood, snow, and a creepy architecture. If you ask me, that could be the ONE redeeming thing about this movie, but I'll still consider it a bad one (if the critics agree it's bad).


-------------
Possible Unofficial Forums, given <35% approval: Ags. 27; The November Man.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 06 2011 at 1:40pm
I do feel bad for Hardwicke, too. It's clear she's only given projects that feature female leads because it's a niche market, but it seems such projects are always poorly written. That's just a neon sign that Hollywood really doesn't give a damn about female movie goers.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: oiram
Date Posted: March 06 2011 at 3:50pm
Does anyone else wonder if this movie will get Gary Oldman his first Razzie nom?  

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Since he was co-nominated with both Demi Moore and Robert Duvall for Worst Screen Couple in 1995's RAZZIE® "winning" remake of http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1066120-scarlet_letter/ - ® nom...  




-------------
Elizabeth Hartman and Judith Barsi are more talented and beautiful than Scarlett Johansson and Chloe Grace Moretz. Fact.

Worst Supporting Actor: Brendan Fraser/Gimme Shelter and The Nut Job




Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: March 06 2011 at 4:20pm
What? You mean the art direction?

Originally posted by GTAHater767

UPDATE: I saw HeadRAZZBerry's take on this, and the screenshot he posted featured a mansion with jagged brown wood, snow, and a creepy architecture. If you ask me, that could be the ONE redeeming thing about this movie, but I'll still consider it a bad one (if the critics agree it's bad).
 

What about THE LORDS OF DOGTOWN?

Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

It's clear she's only given projects that feature female leads because it's a niche market, but it seems such projects are always poorly written.

All of the mighty shall fall at least once.

Originally posted by oiram

Does anyone wonder if this movie will give Gary Oldman his first Razzie nom?



-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: March 06 2011 at 4:33pm
Amanda Seyfried was in good movies but she was forgettable.Then she became famous in BIG LOVE,and since has given good performances in average or bad movies.Gary Oldman's resume is impressive because only 1/4 of the movies are bad(today standars are lower).With this,Lukas Haas will have 3 movies this year,and Billy Burke will have 4,so they could go to the ballot.Virgina Madsen and Julie Christie seem to have the most talent,and at the same time,berry supporting roles.

Catherine Hardwicke has only directed one good movie.David Leslie Johnson also wrote http://www.razzies.com/forum/orphan_forum372.html - ,which was a decent thriller.

-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Mayhem5185
Date Posted: March 06 2011 at 5:46pm
This movie just looks goofy to me, like it's trying to be super-serious, but then the lead actress drops the line "My what big eyes you have" (or something like that). At that point, I kinda wanted to punch something! If I was a betting man, I'd say it this will be the undisputed Worst of the Weak...  




-------------
I don't have pet peeves, I have major psychotic f**king hatreds! George Carlin


Posted By: MiguelAntilsu
Date Posted: March 06 2011 at 7:33pm

I don't know where to begin here:  There's the attempt to turn a Brothers Grimm story (that Disney hasn't touched) into a movie, there's a backstory for the characters, there are additional characters to add depth to the story, and there are two things that get my attention: 1) a werewolf serial killer and 2) a love triangle (the latter doesn't stand out as much as the former).  I forgive them for only using two of Twilight's marketing ploys and I think the suspense element might override the romance element.  

The only thing I'm really worried about is that none of the trailers show us the werewolf itself.  I can't figure out whether they're trying to preserve an  element of surprise, or they're hiding something embarrassing from us (Yes, I know trailers often do the latter).  

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: I would say it's safe to assume they're not showing even a "flash frame" of their "werewolf" because it's not credible. Nothing else about this film's campaign has been even remotely subtle, so why should they be classy about that one element?!?  





-------------


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 06 2011 at 8:00pm
Miguel -- Dude -- give it up with the "Twilight" comparisons! How many times do I have to tell you, Hollywood had been doing movies about werewolves for DECADES before the "Twilight" books were even published. Same goes with love triangles. These are not cliches that Stephenie Meyer invented 6 years ago, they have been around almost since storytelling was first created. 
 
I mean if there are movies to blame for this one, they are the recent "Alice And Wonderland", which because of it's success, there's a slew of fairy tale movies in the works, and "The Wolfman", which just won an Oscar (although, granted, no one seriously cares about Best Make-Up).
 
Oh, and as for the not showing the wolf in previews thing, that's a near 40 year old lesson from "Jaws" ... don't show the monster right away, save it for later on. Funny thing is, the robot shark not working was the real reason why it wasn't shown on screen, but it's funny how Hollywood's genre rules are created like that.  

Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu

I don't know where to begin here.  There's the attempt to turn a Brothers Grimm story (that Disney hasn't touched) into a movie, there's a backstory for the characters, there are additional characters to add depth to the story, and there are two things that get my attention: 1) a werewolf serial killer and 2) a love triangle (the latter doesn't stand out as much as the former).  I forgive them for only using two of Twilight's marketing ploys and I think the suspense element might override the romance element.  The only thing I'm really worried about is that none of the trailers show us the wolf itself.  I can't seem to figure whether they're trying to reserve the element of surprise or they're hiding something embarrassing from us (I know some trailers that do the latter).


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 06 2011 at 8:02pm
That was the studios giving her a little creative control "gift" for the Oscar nods that "Thirteen" got.  

Originally posted by Vits

Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

It's clear she's only given projects that feature female leads because it's a niche market, but it seems such projects are always poorly written.
What about THE LORDS OF DOGTOWN?


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: oiram
Date Posted: March 07 2011 at 3:18am

I wonder which is going to be more criticised, this movie, or this movie?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoodwinked_Too!_Hood_vs._Evil - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoodwinked_Too!_Hood_vs._Evil



-------------
Elizabeth Hartman and Judith Barsi are more talented and beautiful than Scarlett Johansson and Chloe Grace Moretz. Fact.

Worst Supporting Actor: Brendan Fraser/Gimme Shelter and The Nut Job




Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: March 07 2011 at 9:22am
To oiram: Nobody knows about the Hoodwinked movies. I'd say skip over it unless it gets 0% at Rotten Tomatoes.
 
To Mr. Burn: I'm equally worried about all these fairy tale adaptations as I am about movies named after folk rhymes, one directed by the dreaded Dennis Dugan, coming this autumn!
 
To Vits: I'd say the creepy house says very little about the art direction.


-------------
Possible Unofficial Forums, given <35% approval: Ags. 27; The November Man.


Posted By: Vheid
Date Posted: March 07 2011 at 3:18pm
Oiram & GTAhater: I knew about them, and I somehow saw the first Hoodwinked. I think it will all depend on how widely this will be released, and what other films will be released the same week. 

Oh and Oiram, I think Hood-Winked 2 would do just a little worse with critics than RRH. But I am not good at predicting these things... 

-------------


Posted By: 27years
Date Posted: March 07 2011 at 3:45pm
I don't think there is anything wrong with having fairy-tales adapted for modern audiences. Will they be any good? I don't know...but I'm looking forward to seeing them as individual efforts and judging for myself!  




-------------


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 07 2011 at 5:47pm
27 Years has a point -- it's not wrong to adapt fairy tales ... if not for the fact that the "modern" adaptations almost always SUCK. I would be fine with Hollywood remaking them, so long as they actually bothered remaking them WELL instead of just sleepwalking through the motions!   

Originally posted by 27years

I don't think there is anything wrong with having fairy-tales adapted for modern audiences. Will they be any good? I don't know...but I'm looking forward to seeing them as individual efforts and judging for myself!  


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: oiram
Date Posted: March 08 2011 at 3:19am
Yeah, I realized Oldman was technically a nominee before, but don't really count that as much. I was referring to "major" nods like Worst Actor or Supporting Actor, which he is eligible for in this case.  

Originally posted by oiram

Does anyone else wonder if this movie will get Gary Oldman his first Razzie nom?  

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Since he was co-nominated with both Demi Moore and Robert Duvall for Worst Screen Couple in 1995's RAZZIE® "winning" remake of  http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1066120-scarlet_letter/ - ® nom...


-------------
Elizabeth Hartman and Judith Barsi are more talented and beautiful than Scarlett Johansson and Chloe Grace Moretz. Fact.

Worst Supporting Actor: Brendan Fraser/Gimme Shelter and The Nut Job




Posted By: Vheid
Date Posted: March 08 2011 at 4:46am
Really, never heard of that film. It stars Isabella Rossellini, so how bad can it be? I am now morbidly interested in seeing this film.

Originally posted by HeadRAZZBerry

Shockingly, this looks almost as incompetent as http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093831/ -


Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: March 08 2011 at 8:49am
Why all of a sudden do I have this urge to say: 

"GRANDMA...MY WHAT BIG RAZZIES YOU HAVE!!!"  LOL forum-members-discussiOn-of-red-riding-hood_topic4881.html#top">LOL forum-members-discussiOn-of-red-riding-hood_topic4881.html#top">LOL

-------------
Comparing Uwe Boll's movies to a sack of horse manure will only get you sued by every fertilizer company in existence...


Posted By: Grounder the Critic
Date Posted: March 09 2011 at 5:48am
All the better to "win"!  

Originally posted by Razzilla

"GRANDMA...MY WHAT BIG RAZZIES YOU HAVE!!!"  LOL http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum-members-discussiOn-of-red-riding-hood_topic4881.html#top">LOL http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum-members-discussiOn-of-red-riding-hood_topic4881.html#top">LOL  


-------------
Pictures move, do they?


Posted By: oiram
Date Posted: March 11 2011 at 3:30am
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/girl_with_the_red_riding_hood/ - http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/girl_with_the_red_riding_hood/
Wow, such a low score, with so many reviews. I know this is going to make it now.

-------------
Elizabeth Hartman and Judith Barsi are more talented and beautiful than Scarlett Johansson and Chloe Grace Moretz. Fact.

Worst Supporting Actor: Brendan Fraser/Gimme Shelter and The Nut Job




Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: March 11 2011 at 10:55am
The R.T. concensus(7%)is in:"Amanda Seyfried is magnetic in RED RIDING HOOD's starring role, but she's let down by her uninspired leading men and a painfully cliched script".Does this mean she won't be in the ballots?
 
Also,both Roger Ebert and Peter Travers gave this */****.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 11 2011 at 1:48pm
Better Amanda Seyfried movie: "Chloe". Watch it on Netflix and enjoy the sheer awesome of Amanda being naked and having hot lesbian sex with my favorite MILF, Julianne Moore.

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Mayhem5185
Date Posted: March 11 2011 at 2:46pm
Clap   

Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

Better Amanda Seyfried movie: "Chloe". Watch it on Netflix and enjoy the sheer awesome of Amanda being naked and having hot lesbian sex with my favorite MILF, Julianne Moore.


-------------
I don't have pet peeves, I have major psychotic f**king hatreds! George Carlin


Posted By: GTAHater767
Date Posted: March 11 2011 at 7:36pm
They just released Chloe in 2009. Do you think this should've been nominated for the Golden Globes instead of either The Lovely Bones or Rob Marshall's Nine? If your answer is yes, I'd be amazed that such a hot-sounding erotic thriller would get that much commendation from you for how recent it is. That's saying a lot, because I'm 4th tier bisexual.  

Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

Better Amanda Seyfried movie: "Chloe". Watch it on Netflix and enjoy the sheer awesome of Amanda being naked and having hot lesbian sex with my favorite MILF, Julianne Moore.


-------------
Possible Unofficial Forums, given <35% approval: Ags. 27; The November Man.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: March 12 2011 at 12:10pm
That scene won the Mr. Skin Award for "Best Lesbian Scene"!And I'm glad it did.

Richard Roeper gave this a D-.


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: March 12 2011 at 12:17pm
Chloe wasn't so much a thriller as it was an "erotic drama." As I said once before, erotic thrillers are often just soft-core pornos with murder mystery subplots. This movie wasn't the case. Although a quality drama with a little sex to it, I wouldn't say it's award worthy. 




-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: April 03 2011 at 5:38pm
Come to think of it, Seyfried's eyes are indeed almost on par with those of E.T. !!

-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 14 2011 at 4:24pm
This was really bad. There were some good aerial shots and some scenes* were hilarious, but, for the most part, it was a boring mess. The acting was bad, even from Oldman and Seyfried.  
 
Also, I'm at level three in Duke Nukem Forever and, so far, it's fun.  

*Like the insanely obvious dream scene. You'll know it when/if you see it.


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: June 14 2011 at 7:48pm
Yeah, Red Riding Hood was really bad. So far, it's the worst movie of the year, imho. 

I mean, the previews looked interesting, and I liked the idea of a darker version of the fairy tale.But the movie should have been a lot more interesting than it turned out to be. You had great actors like Oldman, Seyfried, Madsen, and Christie here. Yet it was just predictable, extremely dull, and unintentionally laughable in many scenes.  


-------------


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 18 2011 at 3:40pm
I just saw it.

I know I said I support remakes that show a different vision.So it's a good idea to make a horror version of LIL'RED RIDIN'HOOD.But that doesn't mean they can take the story and change things to the point where 1% of the movie resembles the source.If it hadn't been for the scene where she says "What big eyes you have"(by the way,total irony),I would've forgot I was watching an adaptation.This was just an excuse to have a love triangle and a werewolf all in one movie.Seriously!All they had to do was write a movie about a girl(any age and race)that goes on a trip(any location and year)to visit her grandma,and then find out she was replaced an evil wolf(or any evil being).

If you thought that in THE TWILIGHT SAGA it was obvious which guy the girl would choose,this time is worse.There was no hint she'd choose the other guy.Speaking of,don't worry.The only similarity with that saga is the guys's hair styles.This plays more like THE VILLAGE(there are even similar plot points).

I did get scared a few times,but overall Hardwicke can't create tension,whether it is during a scary moment or a scene with characters argueing.

Seyfried's performance is fine most of the time,but when she's aware she's saying bland dialogue she stops trying.I can't blame her.And I can't decide who's worse here:Oldman or Fernandez.Well,doesn't matter,since Burke* gives the worst.

I give this 1/10(could've been 0).

*If Burke and Oldman get nominated,it would be for Supp. Actor.But what about Fernandez?Is he considered lead?


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 20 2011 at 5:36am
I've come to notice that Hardwicke is just not a good director, at least not for studio movies. She needs to stick with indie films.

-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: June 20 2011 at 5:16pm
I have a crazy idea. How about if you want to hire a female director to direct your movie with a female lead, hire Katheryn Bigelow. You know, because she's proven to have talent!

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: June 21 2011 at 8:40am
Originally posted by Vits

If Burke and Oldman get nominated,it would be for Supp. Actor.But what about Fernandez?Is he considered lead?

Can anyone answer this,or you haven't seen it?

For those who haven't,don't worry.The wolf is shown since the beggining.



-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: July 18 2011 at 4:10pm
Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

Better Amanda Seyfried movie: "Chloe".
I just saw it.For those who want to see it,it's not a thriller.I don't know why they advertise it as one.Actually they gave away too much in the trailer.

It starts as a character study about a woman hiring a call girl to see if her husband would cheat.Then it becomes a bizarre erotic movie when CATHERINE seems to enjoy hearing what CHLOE tells her,and later when they f*ck each other.But then it tries to become FATAL ATTRACTION-like when CHLOE starts stalking CATHERINE,except that it fails to be thrilling at all.CHLOE never really seemed a threat.

As for the twists,CHLOE lying about DAVID was pretty unexpected.But her letting go and falling into her death?!And CATHERINE using her comb?!Just because people do things out of the ordinary doesn't automatically means those actions are complex.They can be plain nonsense.

I give it 5/10.
Originally posted by GTAHater767

They just released Chloe in 2009. Do you think this should've been nominated for the Golden Globes instead of either The Lovely Bones or Rob Marshall's Nine? If your answer is yes, I'd be amazed that such a hot-sounding erotic thriller would get that much commendation from you for how recent it is.
In which categories?


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: Film Reel Redemption
Date Posted: July 25 2011 at 11:48pm
Originally posted by oiram

Does anyone else wonder if this movie will get Gary Oldman his first Razzie nom?  

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Since he was co-nominated with both Demi Moore and Robert Duvall for Worst Screen Couple in 1995's RAZZIE® "winning" remake of http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1066120-scarlet_letter/ - - THE SCARLET LETTER ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114345/awards - - IMdb LINK ) this would possibly garner Oldman his second RAZZIE® nom...  


Thankfully, Oldman will be able to redeem himself this year since he is also cooking up a lot of Best Actor Oscar buzz for his lead role in this film (the director of this film is someone who also directed a vampire movie - Tomas Alfredson, the man behind 'Let the Right One In')...
 
[TUBE]u5p31OI_AMs[/TUBE]
 
What do you say? A good way to make up for 'Red Riding Hood' or what?
 
P.S. Latest: Empire Magazine gave this film 5 stars in the October issue (which I got in advanced today since I'm subscribed to EM)...


-------------
You see in this filmmaking world there's two types of people my friend. Those with the knowledge of film and those who think they do but really don't.


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: August 12 2011 at 5:32pm
Wow, this is real quality step-down from Sucker Punch. And considering how terrible that was, this isn't gonna be easy.
 
The good:
 
Some of the movie is hysterical: I should rephrash that: EVERYTHING about this movie is hysterical! Special mention most go to the end where Julie Christie ends up in a Julie Christie stew.
 
Some of the camera angles are good: The scenes where nature is shown off are beautiful. To bad that the actor's acting isn't.
 
Err... Amanda Seyfried sure is pretty!: Yeah I got nothing else nice to say about this.
 
The bad:
 
Gary Oldman: Seriously, what the f*ck? I know that Oldman likes money, but this is ridiculous. This is easily his worst non-Hannibal movie. I agree with Film Reel Redemption that Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy looks great, though.
 
Julie Christie: The hottest GILF that isn't Helen Mirren comes off pretty bad in this. Especially, when she ends up in the Julie Christie stew.
 
The special effects: This is some bad effects. While not as God-awful as Season Of The Witch's, it's still pretty God-awful.
 
The ugly:
 
Amanda Seyfried's acting: While, Seyfried is in no way ugly, her acting in this was. I'm surprised that she's so terrible; she's usually talented. Hell, I even thought that Letters From Juliet wasn't terrible.
 
Billy Burke: The actor who gave the best performance in the Twilight movies gives the worst performance here. Maybe, he's like Samson and his mustache is the key to good performances.
 
The realization that Twilight was better: When you can't even measure up to a franchise notable for being terrible, you know you've failed. To be far, this isn't as bad as New Moon.
 
Well, that my destruction of a half-assed Twilight rip-off. Grade: D+
 
Next-up: Just Go With It!


-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: moviecritic123
Date Posted: September 20 2011 at 9:53pm
I liked this movie. I love Gary Oldman and werewolves.


Posted By: whatsthepoint
Date Posted: September 21 2011 at 8:20am
Originally posted by moviecritic123

I liked this movie. I love Gary Oldman and werewolves.


One in a million I'm afraid to say.

Clap


Posted By: SuperTeenTopia
Date Posted: September 21 2011 at 3:38pm
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

The realization that Twilight was better: When you can't even measure up to a franchise notable for being terrible, you know you've failed. To be far, this isn't as bad as New Moon.
 
Well, that my destruction of a half-assed Twilight rip-off. Grade: D+
If you're saying that ... then this movie must be REALLY bad!


-------------
"People say 'It's all about the story’. When you're making tentpole films, bull$hit." -Andy Hendrickson (Disney Animation Studios' Chief Technical Officer)



Print Page | Close Window