Mr Robinson is a 3D animated puppet that they animate to move and talk exactly like a muppet, to the point that I thought he was an actual physical puppet! Even in season 1!! TEN YEARS AGO. Aaaaaaaaaahhhhhh
Also Chowder did a better job of using different animation styles on the same characters and the humor of Chowder just slaps compared to Chip & Dale Rescue Rangers. Meta humor done right is how Chowder does it and Chowder is like a 10 minute episodes TV show made on a much lower budget.
Because nowadays companies want their animated characters to be voiced by famous hollywood stars, but good voice actors never get famous and hollywood stars almost never have voice acting experience and suck at it. JK Simmons is a rare exception(Mark Hamill is the only other I can think of) who is both a famous hollywood star and an experienced voice actor
I honestly liked Eric Bana as Monty, but that's only because at first I thought it was the original actor playing him. He did it really well, and I've heard him in other animated movies
@@geng6443 You would think that voice acting would fall under the umbrella of things that good actors should be good at. Like how a lot of actors are very proficient at doing impersonnations or singing.
One of the things that pissed me off the most about the Chip 'n' Dale movie was that Disney is pretending they're taking a crack at the entire industry for exploiting their properties: remakes, reboots, sequels, prequels, spin-offs, etc. Yet the problem is that Disney not only actively participates in this, they were some of the earliest adopters with their cartoon series and straight-to-VHS movies that only got worse as time went on, and now they're the biggest hypocrites. In addition, Sweet Pete blames the people that abandoned him, yet I don't believe Disney is ever mentioned by name in the whole series, so rather than Disney owning up to its past and current behavior they just get to blame the entire industry as a whole while avoiding responsibility. Also, satire doesn't really work when you're the biggest fish in the pond punching down and taking shots at smaller studios for trying. It just feels like you're making fun of them for not being you. Finally , the whole premise of the series was that Chip 'n' Dale hadn't seen each other in 30 years after Rescue Rangers but they sure were together in Kingdom Hearts, House of Mouse, and Disney released a Chip 'n' Dale: Park Life series on D+ last year. I know they're separate "universe" characters but it deflates the reunion aspect when they've been together the whole time in other projects.
I agree, but I will say that Hollywood as a whole *is* guilty of every trend mocked in the film, and Disney - as its largest studio - is, by default, *the ultimate avatar of each and every one of them.* It feels like the tinsel mill popped out this film *explicitly* to reassure a skeptical public that Hollywood is aware enough of its own sins to make their mockery an important plot-point of a nostalgic romp - itself designed to lure in and lull as many moviegoers as possible. It’s a goddamn Venus flytrap.
You know, the Animaniacs does this better, both the original and current versions were very clever, particularly when teasing Hollywood, laughing at the expense of celebrities, and how the film industry undermines its own art. The reboot song from the current Animaniacs is very funny, it even makes fun of the "Oldboy" re-interpretation.
The difference is that The Lego Movie is a genuinely well written, funny and interesting movie that just happens to have a lot of nostalgic references. All of these movies do the references first and the writing later
what's also disgusting is that disney killed imagemovers, the robert zemeckis animation studio, leaving hundreds without jobs. then disney just makes fun of the studio 11 years later saying they were shit like wtf.
The films were incredibly expensive for the time and didn't make money. The only one that's remembered fondly is Polar Express, and part of that is because of how weird the visuals look now. Disney's done a lot of shitty things, but I don't see how shutting down an unprofitable subsidiary that made creepy hyper realistic movies is really a sin.
the "creepiness" of the animation is subjective. I don't find them creepy at all but I know thats like rare for someone to say that. what is a fact though is that 450 artists and individuals lost jobs because disney wasn't willing to put in the work to make them profitable. before the disney acquisition they made profits, when disney bought them they had no idea how to handle the studio and dropped them before they even had a chance. hate the studio or not, they made what they wanted to make and that's a rare thing now.
@@skookathing Hot take but I sometimes wish studios over here are more like studios in Japan or even indie studios like Cartoon Saloon who take risks and do what they want. I love studios that are willing to do that.
I think what really makes me mad about all the Ugly Sonic jokes is that Disney would never make fun of there poorly designed charaters for live action remakes. The joke with Pumba being an example of that and it just show how hypocritical this movie and Disney as a company is. Also I recently read an article saying that orginal when the film was first being developed it was going to be a joke about Jar-Jar Binks instead of Sonic, showing that a some point they were going to make some type of self-deprecating humor but were forced to change it by higher ups when it got picked up for Disney plus.
The biggest middle finger from Disney about Sonic is that Paramount actually _listened_ to the fans and, for once, made some decent video game based movies. Meanwhile, _this_ just takes a dump all over its audience. It's petty and spiteful
@ 7:15 : Was that Catra? This seems to be a Prime Example of trying to be self-aware about their Bad CGI and Remakes that had no business being made. Only, they proceeded to shoot themselves in the foot by exposing their hubris. This Is Not what I expect in adapting an old show from 30 years ago. Oh, and something to do with Cortana being injected into MC's brain.
@@Chud_Bud_Supreme This is exactly what I am talking about. Remember all the memes making fun of how bad the Genie looked in the Aladin live action remake. No one though it looked good but they didn't change it. Remember all the people that made redesigns for the "Live action" Lion King. But did they listen? Of course not. Even right now when Chip and Dale was released people are upset with how bad the She-Hulk CGI looks. Do you think that they are going to change it? I highly doubt it. Paramount listened to the fans and made a better design and even changed things people didn't like about the first movie when they made a sequel so it would actually be a better film. Chip and Dale is just the embodiment of Hypocrisy.
The Bobby Driscoll thing is just so tasteless. Disney is pointing and laughing at the child stars that THEY chewed up and spat out. There is no way they didn't know about it and I'm calling BS if they claim that's the case. Disney does a lot of awful stuff, but this is just SO on the nose.
its so fucking disgusting. i dont understand how anyone can even ATTEMPT to support disney after that shit. might as well show a picture of him and point and laugh on screen tbh
I had no idea about this, but it's like really atrocious. In the age of Disney pretending to be progressive at every turn, I'm really flabbergasted. For anyone out of the loop, Bobby Driscoll was Disney's first ever contract actor. Like a lot of actors at the time, he was drastically underpaid and overworked - he did like 20 movies between 10 and 14 and only made enough to get by (plus his parents took all that money). He was sent to an acting boarding school so he could work for Disney full time. As soon as he hit puberty they canned him. They hadn't paid or credited him well enough for him to survive or get other roles, and he ended up in a downward spiral that ended in suicide. Like, Disney did that to him. Those kinds of workers' rights abuses in Disney's history are well known. Why in God's name would they joke about that?
Disney had the nerve to poke fun at Sonic's design, but came out with some of the worst CGI I've seen in a modern movie. At least Paramount fixed the design BEFORE release, the lack of self awareness is mindboggling.
The reason the animation in Roger Rabbit worked so well is because the lighting of the scenes fit both the humans and cartoons. Rescue Rangers on the other hand decides to not have lighting on the 2D characters at all which makes them look like they're not in the world at all.
don't forget that theatrical american hand drawn animation is practically dead. i think that recent mary poppins film is the only example where professional animator were brought back to do it again while less experienced animators were used for moe recent stuff like this. you can probably tell with how lesser it feels compared to the amount of effort out into Who Framed Roger Rabbit
This is the best. Bobby Driscoll died homeless and all alone at only the age of 31. For Disney to portray HIS character this way is sick and disrespectful. They don't give a shit about anything but money.
@@antonioc.5778 I just love it cause thats something Brett Easton Ellis would do it if he had the money. Nihilism and cruelty to dead and gae people its hilarious.
no Adam you see, if the muppet were an actual puppet and handled by a real actor, costume designer, set and lighting etc production team, Disney would have to pay them and respect their union rules. Its much cheaper and easier to send it to a 3D farm where theres no union, to save a billion dollar company money!!! so practical, amirite?
@@rudeboyspodcast It was more than just a gag, they made fucking Ugly Sonic an instrumental part of the plot by making him a key player in the ending of the movie. Absolutely disgusting.
I’ve heard people call Chip and Dale a ‘Love letter to animation,’ and I find the claim unbelievable and frankly ridiculous. Because this is Disney and Disney doesn’t care about art but about making money.
It would have been so easy to cushion the peter pan backlash by redeeming the character by the end and giving him a happy ending. Still tasteless, you could argue they're trying to paint over bad history, but at least they would have given them some humanity. But no, the film actually ends with Peter Pan in a padded cell, labelled criminally insane, literally a monster forever. They didn't even turn him back to normal. And btw? I haven't seen anyone mention this yet, but the whole thing doesn't even make sense. None of the other cartoons age. There's a black and white toon at one point, he would be well into his 100s by now. You can even see one of the lost boys from his movie, he directly says hi to Peter, and he is clearly still a little boy with a childish voice and personality. If specifically targeting Peter Pan for his actor's backstory wasn't the case, then why would they not have aged up all the lost boys and made them his gang members? That's really sus to me.
While his backstory is similar, I doubt Peter was intended to be Driscoll himself. What he does in the film seems more like what the animated character he played would’ve done.
@@geoffreyrichards6079 Then the film has no self awareness then, since it's suppose to reference how child actors are chewed up and spat out by the industry and Disney being a big contributor of this didn't even take into account to at least look up if this mirrors anything they have done
@@wardenunknown A ton of films produced by film companies have addressed the cruel practices of Hollywood, whether the studios were aware of them or not. “Sunset Boulevard” is probably one of the more famous examples of this; much of it was pretty much calling out Paramount for their treatment of former stars who lost their relevance, but they still produced it anyhow.
@@geoffreyrichards6079 This excuse doesn't work in a movie that'd trying to be self aware and claim to call out the bad choices Disney makes in regards to animation
Schrodinger's Movie: The movie only collapses into a satire or non-satire state after the producer has had the opportunity to see the reception. Until then, it is simultaneously satire and non-satire.
@@theflickchick9850 It helps that Putty was one of the few characters who wasn't an in-your-face reference (he's an obvious parody of Gumby, but they're subtle about it), and the CGI pseudo-claymation still looked more convincing than the rest of the CG in the film.
@@alecfoisy58 I wish that every other animated character had the same level of attention to detail Captain Putty had. It looked so good whenever he was on screen.
As a 2D animator, the "2D" animation in Chip and Dale really saddens me. Not only because it looks shitty, but they make jokes about how Dale doesn't "stretch", but neither does Chip. And they could have used the fluidness of 2D animation for some really good jokes, like how Roger Rabbit can easily remove himself from handcuffs.
Yeah that’s the biggest problem with 3d it’s so stiff and rigid any animation fan can tell right away. They pulled this stunt with there recent short film with the raccoons. I’m so tired
@@skitterly the hotel transylvania does a great job giving their 3D characters squash and stretch techniques, they did a great job. That's the only good 3D animation I have seen in that regard
@@divine5328 If you count video games there's Overwatch and all of Arcsys's 2D-HD fighting games (Guilty Gear and Dragonball Fighterz), it's amazing how Disney fails at doing something a Japanese fighting games studio nailed over 8 years ago.
It's a shame, since 3D and 2D animation have been blended together for such great effect before. For example, miHoYo has made amazing animated shorts like Shattered Samsara and Everlasting Flames for their Honkai Impact 3rd game. They truly showcase how the two animation types can work in tandem, yet much bigger studios fail to do the same for some reason.
Can we talk about how Chip 'n Dale compares everything from fanfiction to parodies as equivalent to kidnapping, human-trafficking and *mutilation?* That's a moral only a company like Disney would agree with.
Do they seriously say that in the movie? If so, that's fucked up, and rich coming from a company that literally holds IPs and copyrights hostage for decades, even stealing content from the public domain and placing it under their brand to make it harder for others to use
@@tabithaalphess2115 Oh yeah, the plot is that Peter Pan runs a crime ring where cartoon characters (and also Sora from Kingdom Hearts for some reason) are kidnapped, mutilated and forced to take part in bootleg movies.
@@eatatjoes6751 They basically folded every use of a character by someone who isn't the owner of said character's copyright under the nebulous umbrella of "bootlegs".
@@tabithaalphess2115 They don't actually say that in the movie. Bootlegging within the context of the movie is someone kidnapping a cartoon character, physically altering their appearance through what is effectively plastic surgery, and forcing them to start in legal distinct bootleg videos that are on the level of videos that'd be featured on IHE's search for the worse, like "The Amazing Bulk" or "The little Panda Fighter." The only way parodies and fanfiction can be rolled up into that umbrella is if the movie implied that the character we see on the show is the same persona that they are IRL, which clearly isn't the case considering that the major plot point was how Sweet Pete couldn't find work after he grew up until he started staring in bootlegs.
The difference between Chip-n-Dale and Roger Rabbit is one was made with love while the other was made out of spite. Roger Rabbit is filled to the brim with adoration for the old cartoons of the 30s and 40s, it created something that honestly elevated itself above its source material. I was genuinely shocked to find out that Chip-n-Dale wasn't written by Seth Rogan, since its basically one of his films in a PG glaze. Its cynicism and contempt for the subject its based on, the meta-commentary on animation quality is honestly contemptible when it comes to filmmaking. Its why scream and most of those parody movies in the 00s are trash. Making a godzilla parody and putting a zipper on his back doesn't make me laugh, it makes me think you did only one draft of the script. It reminds me of something I once read on /a/ before: "to make something original is to love. love is an earnest and timid emotion easily chased away by irony and its cousin, contempt."
@@En_Joshi-Godrez that makes me concede that as much as I love the film, it has not changed much regarding how the industry perceives animation. Before that movie, they left it for dead and treated it as a gimmick or something used to sell sugar and plastic on Saturday Morning TV. Now, they treat it as a cash grab.
scream features some meta commentary on the genre but it’s also a genuinely good film and addition to the genre. say whatever you want about the trends it set but scream is a great film, and holds no contempt for the genre.
@@obscure.reference to each his own. I think its dawsons creek/90210 angle was far more anjoying and Wes Cravens directing style sans scream deteriorated imo. I don't hate it anywhere as much as the other "see, we know the joke" movies but I'm not the biggest fan.
Good satire comes from a place of genuine understanding and love. One of my favorite satires is actually a completely non-comedic horror film: John Carpenter's In The Mouth Of Madness. Sutter Kane, the fictional horror author around whom the plot revolves is pretty clearly signalled to be an analogue for Stephen King, from the plots and cover designs of his books to his fictional town of Hobb's End right down to his name. The entire thing is full of pastiches of the sorts of mass market horror that had come to dominate the scene in the seventies and eighties after the likes of King and Carpenter helped to take the genre mainstream. The movie even throws jabs at itself, with one character at the beginning complaining about The Carpenters being played on the hospital soundsystem. It's horror media about horror media that pokes fun at horror media, but made by and for people who love horror and never lose sight of the fact that horror is intended first and foremost to scare people. In many ways it's almost the perfect send off to that era of the genre.
It's actually heartbreaking that they couldn't just do a light-hearted, fun, Rescue Rangers adventure movie, updated with modern 3D animation. Instead they had to do this edgy, meta, self-referential thing. I guess we really are headed toward a Ready Player One future, where pop culture is distilled down into one big, amorphous, all-encompassing universe where the joke or the meaning is literally always just "here's a thing from another thing you remember!".
Ready Player One sucked balls, but it made a sh*t ton of money so I guess Hollywood execs just decided that it was going to be the blueprint for all future low effort "movies" that solely exist to be dumped on streaming services and be instantly forgotten
Ready Player One, Ralph Breaks the Internet, Emoji Movie, Free Guy, the new Space Jam, a lot of Marvel and Star Wars, they're all apart of this awful new trend
Sad well never get a decent thing based on the old show again. At least not till the stench of this one has gone away. The old cartoon was worthy of being adapted straight rather than with pop culture references every two seconds.
In regards to everyone taking off their helmets, someone on Reddit posted an excerpt from one of the books where one of the Spartans had thrown up in her helmet but didn't dare to take it off while they were in a Covenant controlled area.
Not to mention Chief just literally never takes his off, that's part of his struggle with his own humanity. By giving him that humanising element they ruined the entire point of his character development across the first four core games.
It's so fucked up that they have John (if he's even called that in the show) take it off CONSTANTLY. That's the point??? He doesn't take it off because he sees himself as a walking piece of armor and weaponry in addition to keeping it on for safety. Just destroy the main thrust of his character, why don't you.
That dead eyes joke with Pumbaa has to be the least amount of self awareness I've ever seen, in a film that's whole shtick is supposedly being self aware. Wow.
Fucking thank you!! I can't understand why so many people are saying Chip n Dale is good. I could tell just from the trailers and small clips it was hot garbage. What's funny is that they could have used Chip and Dale to uncover Disney's dirty little secrets, like what they did to Bobby Driscoll, or Adriana Caselotti, to other awful decision, but doing that would paint Disney in a bad light and we can't have that. Seriously, why didn't they just make an hour long version of Rescue Rangers? If it did well then they can reboot it like they did with Duck Tales.
it’s super cheap on the nose and bad but disney has been grooming audiences into accepting content like this since they first started releasing their “live action” reboots. most of those movies sustain themselves on references and meta commentary on the original, chip and dale is exactly that but on a mind numbingly large scale. it’s dumb but if u know enough references it’s an enjoyable dumb. it’s sad though, instead of this company working to push the limits of animation it insults every medium of it that doesn’t reap the most profits and then convinces audiences that they’re correct for disrespecting these characters and art forms. rescue rangers on its own wouldnt bring in enough cash so fuck it throw everyone in! they’ve proven with this movie to not even really care about their own properties
Why does every normal human character in Halo look like they are bad CGI? Seriously just looking at these scenes make my brain go full uncanny valley mode.
Yea I got uncanny vibes in the beginning of the first episode, must of been the lightning and film effects, because they were just regular people sitting at a table 😂😂
It’s lazy color grading. In a program like Davinci Resolve you can track “windows” to objects/faces/etc and then independently adjust the color/exposure of just that object or of everything except that object. Done well it’s seamless. Done poorly you get people with faces that are brighter than the rest of the overall scene.
Disney referencing old things that exist has been 90% of their output the past 3 years. It's actually exhausting to watch any Marvel or Star Wars stuff with how much they just bring back old characters to tick nostalgia boxes instead of trying anything new
How is the mcu anything like that???? It adds new concepts and characters every movie. The mcu itself is a little over decade old so it’s not exactly riding off any nostalgic coat tails?
@@Soniman001 eh, maybe not riding off direct nostalgia, but all marvel movies rely a little on you watching movies that come before it. And it’s started to feel like the majority of their movies are feeling sorta samey as of late. Of course, I’ll take marvel’s offering over Sony’s attempt to make a sinister six movie in multiple parts
@@Soniman001 They had a television show exploring the"what ifs" of previous scenarios for the heroes. The last Spider-man film brought together the casts of the two other live action versions. The Dr. Strange film brought together disparate aspects of the MCU allowing them to reference whatever they wanted. And every single film has been based off a pre-existing property and if the story is even slightly original it's a sequel. Nostalgia doesn't have a fixed lifetime, it just relies upon people thinking more fondly of something in the past. There's a reason why with the exception of Black Panther and Captain Marvel the MCU's top 15 films in box office sales are all sequels.
If I see the “Movie character you recognize shows up old and decrepit and a bit of an old movie’s theme song plays when they appear” trope one more time I am going to lose my marbles😌
The writers of this film clearly knew who Bobby Driscoll was, and the fact Disney allowed it to pass through just really shows how much they clearly don't care. They can literally sod off.
To me, Peter Pan's villainy should've been a comment on Disney suppressing the racism in the film and therefore, suppressing Peter as a character. But I gave Disney WAY too much credit, thinking they'd do something as ridiculous as acknowledge their racism.
@@theflickchick9850 they continue to be racist, in 20 years I guarantee this era of ham fisted Disney "inclusion" will be looked on as some kind of Michael Scott-esque clownish racism.
ive heard the suggestion that this movie is intentionally as awful and immoral as possible, and knows that. and with the business suited character in the film making a joke along the lines of "lol, we should reboot that, but make it worse," this is the writer themself speaking through the character. the movie isn't just being tone deaf, it knows the tone exactly, and is actually crying for help, please stop disney from making shit like this. but that's a little too heady for this seth rogen-ass movie.
@@theflickchick9850 Do you think everyone who works at Disney is some kind single-minded entity? Different people work on different products, so it's possible that the writers were trying to comment on how Disney executives treated Driscoll in the past?
Weird for them to insult Robert Zemeckis when he directed Who Framed Roger Rabbit a movie which did this exact live action/mixed animation thing 1000x better
If the team found animation so difficult, why in the world did they try to emulate every single animation style they could think of? What's the point? Is it a sacrificial work, intended to make other films look better by comparison? That's all I can imagine.
The horrible thing about nostalgia-bait movies is that unlike, say, westerns or romcoms, they're not a genre that people can eventually get tired of or companies can run out of stories to tell through. They're literally nothing more than a lazy way to generate guaranteed monetary success through dangling people's childhoods in front of them and going "remeber this? Well, here's some more of it, give us money", very often not even delivering on anything other than brand recognition. People who demand nothing from their entertainment, don't want to think about or be challenged by any piece of media ever and blindly accept lazily made knockoffs of things they used to like when they were in elemantary school as the genuine article are just as much, if not more, at fault for this constant barrage of nostalgia-bullshit as the soulless executives greenlighting them. Be the change you wanna see, guys. This isn't "dumb fun" or a "popcorn movie". It's just *bad* , for cinema, for culture and for you.
At some point they'll run out of classic properties to reference and they'll start doing nostalgia-bait movies referencing older nostalgia-bait movies referencing classic properties, thus producing an endless recurring stream of shitty meta humor.
I think the well will get poisoned with too much irony in the coming years, and companies will stop seeing returns on endless nostalgia. People will start craving new and sincere ideas again.
The only "challenge" I've seen in most counterculture media trying to go against the popular trends mostly consists of stories whose themes are dealing with nihilism and how trash people are. It's nothing challenging, it's just depression.
Disney can be downright Orwellian with their marketing sometimes. "This version of The Lion King is live action because we used realistic character designs for our computer models." "These characters are 2D because we slowed the frame rate and cel-shaded their 3D models." That Chip n Dale movie didn't fill me with as much rage as it did Adum, but the background gags like the billboard ads got more of a response out of me than any of the actual jokes in the movie.
Indeed. I was laughing more at the background jokes than I did the actual jokes. Made me realize the credit here is for, as usual, the animators and background artist as opposed to the writing and cast.
I'll save you a curiosity google search. Bobby Driscoll was signed on to Disney as a child actor because he was a cute kid, and dropped by Disney after his Peter Pan Performance at age 16 because he wasn't a cute kid anymore, his director found him annoying, and his acne from puberty got bad. He got no serious roles from other companies because people still saw him as the cute child actor despite not being cute or a child anymore. He went to school instead but got bullied because his peers saw him as a cute child actor despite not being cute or a child anymore. Because of his Disneybucks he had the capital to buy heroin and other drugs, and thus did, and got addicted. The rest of his life is basically a whirlwind of small crimes, small roles on radio and television, art at some point with Andy Warhol, and an attempt at a Broadway career that never took off, until two kids found him dead in an abandoned home at age 31 in New York, surrounded by empty beer bottles and religious pamphlets. Artery failure due to his drug habits. Disgusting, Disney. Disgusting.
@TunaCats No of course not, I'd say it's the industry as a whole that should fundementally change how child actors are treated. The one thing Disney can be blamed for is dropping him like a brick when his cuteness was gone, leaving a child star that knows no other lifestyle or lifeskills, aged out of his only asset, without guidance, and with enough cash to properly ruin his life forever. HOWEVER To then take that very sad story and, cast a pseudo-Robert-Driscoll-after-being-spat-out as a villain in your "HeY rEmEmBeR aLl ThEsE tHiNgS fRoM tHe PaSt?!"-movie, as the company that kicked him out in the first place, is nothing short of disgusting.
@TunaCats "I don't believe the world works this way but can simultaneously not be bothered to actually do some digging into it." only slightly more embarrassing than "I didn't know Peter Pan's voice-actor or his story, thus, it must be obscure knowledge the average person doesn't know, least of all the Disney Writers whose job it was to research characters and animation styles from the past in order to make jokes and references about them in the first place."
@@quentinmcwimberton6797 I'm just here to note this it's honestly amazing to see someone trying to say the situation with Bobby Driscoll wasn't that bad, while also for some reason admitting they don't know much about the situation at all. Not you if that's anything, the person you're talking with. Just felt like saying that since this is the youtube comments section and all.
@@imverytired1164 yeah holy fucking shit, it's almost like Disney knew what they were doing referencing someone like that and making fun of something horrible that only happened because of them
Also you gotta love how only Disney would have the gall and the legal/financial strength to openly use IP’s that don’t belong to them and make fun of them. If this situation was reversed, Disney would fall on anyone mocking them with the full might of USA Copyright Laws long before the film even began production. Sure Disney can make fun of “Ugly” Sonic, but can Paramount Pictures make fun of ANYTHING Disney has made? Nope! It’s all one-sided and it’s made even uglier as a result of this simple fact.
I have felt CRAZY this past week after watching CnD saying basically everything Adam has said while so many people have been telling me that I’m wrong or “edgy” for not liking it. Finally, some sweet justification.
If I needed a washed up sonic character that’s being a legitmate lowlife asshole unlike the games I’ll just rewatch Sonic for hire. They’re basically the same character but ones funnier
i looked once at the thumbnail on disney+ _-during my attempt to definetly not record the entirety of the lion king oh nononono-_ and i immediately cringed
Only saw the trailer and it stunk of people that could care less about the original cartoon. I mean, what's wrong with the Rescue Rangers having an actual full blown adventure/mystery movie like in the show?
It's amazing to me that's 2022 and there's still not a single movie that has even made an honest attempt to reach the quality of Who framed roger rabbit
Well, WFRR was pretty unique not only in having toons interact with real humans (and let´s admit it, that animation STILL holds up very well), but also in combining two very different genres, cartoon and noir, into one. Maybe because they are almost direct opposites (with cartoons being cheerful and colorful, while noir being usualy black and white and serious), they play off each other pretty well. So, it´s just not "normal humans and toons interacting", its two very specific types of setting interacting. In modern movies of this type, they usually just pay attention to the toon part, the "human world" is just presumed to be "reality". Here, they took care in BOTH of the settings, and it shows. The Chip and Dale movie should just be named "´member dis?" Because that´s all it is about.
@@veronikamajerova4564 It also is the fact that it also was working to make sure it wasn't just the references that would stick. There are a lot of solid character that comes out of the live-action cast. The scene of Eddie looking back to pictures of his brother and the slow montage of their history via wordless panning over various pieces of material did absolutely wonders and was something beyond just the amusement of seeing toons act alongside humans.
@@motherplayer That shot was also really impressive on a technical level. According to the commentary, they had to adjust Bob Hoskins' wardrobe and props and change the lighting from night-time to daylight during the pan, in-camera, without a cut and without any of that activity being visible (via shadow movement or perceptible lighting changes) until the shot finished panning.
That kind of movie is expensive as fuck is why. The 2D animation quality alone is expensive already, but if they're trying to also include multiple licenses you're basically forking out extra and dancing around contracts to some giants like WB or Disney who are way bigger now than they were in the 80's, AND you need to also write it so it's engaging enough too.
Thank god more people are catching on to the way writers write funny dialogue. "Bad joke" "AHAHAHA WHAT A SHIT JOKE" "AHAHAHA UR SO RIGHT" "AHAHAHAH" "AHAHAHA"
I was diagnosed with autism as a child, so i often have to take an extra step to make sure that i understand people's thoughts and feelings correctly. I refuse to extend that effort to people who liked Chip and Dale.
Good lord, you weren't joking about the Bobby Driscoll story. Apparently the reason Disney cancelled his contract was because he got a bad case of acne! And things only got worse from there. What a horrible situation to reference in an unsympathetic Disney villain. And I find it hard to believe that the writers just made a washed up Peter Pan on accident without knowing Driscoll's story. It may have worked if he was a sympathetic character and the movie meaningfully recognized that Disney failed him, but I guess they aren't allowed to admit to past wrongdoings in any meaningful way. They will just be self-referential to trick people into thinking they are clever and introspective.
Even if they made such plot by mistake, wether in bad faith or not, that just leads me to think they didnt bother doing their homework on the very characters theyre using.
I hate Disney just as much(if not more) than the next guy, but all the bad shit regarding Bobby Driscoll happened almost 70 years ago. He was dead long before most of the people that worked on that movie were born, and all the people that were working for Disney when his contract was terminated have either retired or died. It's not unreasonable for Dan Gregor or Doug Mand(the two writers) to not have known what happened to him, and if you're going to have Peter Pan in a movie like this, making him an washed-up man-child for the sake of irony would be such an obvious thing to do that it borders on laziness.
@@drake1360 You do not get to make light of someone's misfortune if you were the one who caused it. It's like making fun of a retarded baby YOU DROPPED.
@@drake1360 Even if the initial script was not made with the knowledge, SOMEONE at the studio would have known, and should have said "Hey, maybe don't go with this plot, as it mirrors some unfortunate real world events." It's next to impossible that nobody working at disney who supervised this production was aware of a well known hollywood tragedy caused by the very same company
I'm really glad you brought up how poor taste the Peter Pan thing is. More people need to know about that. Also, is it just me, or does a lot of the Chip 'n Dale movie give anyone else Food Fight vibes?
@@Attmay Honestly, if they just included a disclaimer about the movie being a product of its' time that viewers are made to see anytime they started the film, I think that would cover their asses. I understand it's uncomfortable but I don't think it deserves to be outright banned in the US.
I just watched Who Framed Roger Rabbit for the first time last week and was pleasantly surprised to learn the focus was on the story and characters rather than the concept. The animation was great and holds up very well, and while there were background cameos now and then the central toon characters were made for the film rather than being preexisting characters that relied on nostalgia. The new Chip ‘n’ Dale is the opposite.
You could replace all the pop culture/animation references in Roger Rabbit with "Captain Ersatz" stand-ins and it'd still be a good movie. Hell, even Wreck in Ralph would still remain solid even if you know nothing about videogame pop culture. Do that with this Chip and Dale film, and you'll get just a more pretentious version of Foodfight.
@@DeepEye1994 Hell, you don't even have to do that. Replace Chip and Dale with literally any other property and you'd get a pretentious, bootlegged version of Foodfight.
What I see in the Chip ‘n’ Dale movie: It's not about the Rescue Rangers, it's about Chip and Dale. It's not about the Chip and Dale we know and love, it's about the "REAL" "behind the scenes" Chip and Dale. The hand-drawn toons aren't hand-drawn, ther're CGI. The Muppet isn't an actual puppet, it's CGI. The classic toons aren't real, they're cardboard cut-outs. THIS MOVIE LIED TO US!!!
You’re absolutely right. Even without getting the specific references, those background characters still serve a narrative purpose. You don’t have to know who Betty Boop is to understand that she’s a struggling showgirl and a friend of Eddy Valiant. You don’t have to know that Donald and Daffy are mascots of rivaling studios, because in that scene they’re just two duck performers competing on stage. You don’t have to have seen Dumbo, because in the film he’s just a cartoon elephant who’ll ”work for peanuts” in the employ of an antagonist. They are funny cameos, but they’re used to build up the world and message of the film, establishing the toons as an exploited class. In short, these moments are meant to immerse you into the experience, not take you out of it.
Chip n Dale trying to pass off cel-shaded 3D as 2D is very weird considering the attention brought to other styles, there's a very nicely animated portion of 2D Rescue Rangers footage and then it immediately cuts to them as 3D models. I also pray the Peter Pan thing was just a coincidence.
I keep seeing people say like "Of course the 2D animation is badly animated CGI!! That's part of the joke!!" but like, it isn't. The movie is so ready to poke fun at literally anything else but it just never comes up. It's not some "halfway CGI Surgery" or something. It just looks bad because it looks bad, there's no joke to it. And even if they did make a joke about it, it still looks bad
Finally someone emperor's new clothes the Chip'n Dale movie. Yes, nostalgia is fun, but this movie slathers it all over the massive cracks in a Seltzerberg way to cover that it's just the Happytime Murders with a Disnes license. I mean, their lawyers made deals to include so many different characters from so many different owners... FOR THIS? It's lame beyond comparison.
It was just the same jokes the internet has been making for 3 years now. We all made fun of his teeth. We all know how ugly he is. Maybe if they had something new to say it would have been alot better
@@aviewer774 There's a reason why so much projects that made a by internet personalities are awful despite the fact that the same people relished in success on the internet.
Oh my god the whole Peter Pan/Bobby Driscoll thing was driving me crazy!!! I found what they did to Peter Pan in the movie deeply insulting to the real story, but I thought that not a lot of people really knew it. I’m glad you mentioned it!! Driscoll deserved so much better.
At least Space Jam 2 poked fun at the algorithm Warner Brothers is using for all of their movies instead of plucking some star they flushed down the toilet for their movie's villain. It sucked and didn't work, but it's not creepy or distasteful.
The defending like that above is how I ended arguing with someone on Discord due not appreciating the movie for "actually trying", unlike Space Jam 2. It really shows how complacency hasn't just settled in hard for people watching the schlock entertainment monopolies are pumping out, but are now forcing that complacency down the constructive critics' throats. 🙄
People unironically liking the Chip and Dale movie just proves how powerful of a drug nostalgia is. You don't even need a punchline, just show them things they remember and they'll like it.
Just referencing the names of people who were famous when I was a kid is not funny in and of itself. It is just another exercise in corporate media worship.
I was genuienly surprised that the _overwelming majority_ of people in internet and irl circles I run in say that this movie was good and that this movie was so self-aware. I genuienly thought we were past this type of shit. I thought we all wised up and realized that meTa hUmUR isn't a replacement for quality.
I only watched a handful of episodes of the show during my lifetime and I still found myself enjoying the movie. I guess I'm just more into the whole animation/meta pop-culture thing than others. Plus, I enjoyed the story as well.
Self-awareness often implies self-critique. Disney cannot critique itself no matter how "self-aware" it is. Their brand won't allow it. "Heh heh, Disney princess singing is ridiculous" [proceeds to sing without a shred of irony]
Those self-aware jokes come off as a thinly veiled attempt to still try to promote them to you. They can laugh about it, but nothing that can't be shrugged off. I'm reminded how it was once said that Kylo Ren was going to be in "Ralph Breaks The Internet" as a cameo until Disney was somehow not happy that he would be portrayed as a spoil child because he was a "villain", which is clearly shorthand for "Stop being so harsh to our product, it's hurting it's marketability". Thin skin that a large majority market share can't handle.
But guys, I ironically robbed that bank and shot three people. Yes I know I spent the money and hid out for eight months, but come on it was just IRONIC! I Didn't REALLY mean it. Irony is doing something unironically then sayings its irony right? Please don't send me to jail. Its just a joke. "IT WAS MY OPINION IT WAS IRONY!"
Getting real tired of the "it's supposed to be bad lol" excuse people use to justify these obnoxious meta jokes. You can't make fun of how bad Rat Sonic looks when Dale is one of your protagonists and also looks atrocious. I can kind of respect what Chip n' Dale is trying to do having it be about washed up animated characters adjusting to life after their careers went down the drain but the writing isn't clever enough to do anything with the concept.
Even if it was written well, there's also the issue of Disney being the one making the movie. An idea like this requires genuine commentary on the industry and well...self awareness. And of course Disney isn't going to critique itself in a movie like this. I mean they have a washed up actor who's eerily similar to a real life child star be THE MAIN VILLAIN and from what I've heard an irredeemable villain at that (I refuse to watch this movie idk). The movie reeks of a genuinely critical and compelling story about the entertainment industry trapped behind so much corporate nonsense
I despised the Robert Zemeckis CGI joke because Disney MADE ONE OF THOSE FILMS. They made "A Christmas Carol"! All of the films and styles they criticize for getting reboots AREN'T Disney ones! Mmmm, suspicious. Also, the evil plan? Really randomly disturbing?! Out of NOWHERE. It worked in Roger Rabbit but it didn't at ALL for this. Listen. Disney. I was JOKING about about basic COP TROPES from a movie I have NOT seen when I said- "Lol what if this randomly became a Silence of the Lambs thing" in the warehouse scene. Disney, didn't have to actually make it- EW- and then make an ACTUAL reference to it- Please. STOP.
Holy shit, hearing about that Chip and Dale movie makes me actaully angry. honestly it really goes to show how Disney in particular does not actually care about the art of animation at all and sees it purely as a means of making a quick buck
I mean... we COULD... but that would require EFFORT and TALENT and if Disney has taught us anything with the majority of its output the last few years it's that even all the money in the world can't by those, especially if it's not in the interests of your current stock holders and focus groups.
My friend saw Chip and Dale at a theatrical release, and their was a talk back with the director afterwards. When asked if he included the similarities between Peter Pan and Bobby Driscoll on purpose, the director sweared he didn’t know about what happened to Bobby Driscoll until AFTER the movie was released. So! This movie is in no way self-aware.
yeah I was thinking he might’ve not known about the whole situation, Akiva has always been a guy who’s shown a lot of respect to others in media, it’s just a shame he found out right after :( you could imagine the guilt he probably felt considering how heartbreaking the situation is.
If he’s telling the truth, you’d think that for a Disney movie like this that would require so many moving parts, that SOMEBODY would’ve brought it up along the way. Either some people in charge did know but they kept silent or they don’t know their own history.
I absolutely HATED Rescue Rangers because of its absolute insistence on self-awareness to the point like it felt like it was making a desperate excuse to be allowed to exist. It was like a really unconfident person whose whole relationship with you is uncomfortably making fun of themselves as a defense mechanism, doing it to themselves before anyone else can. "Everything we're doing here is tasteless, shallow, and profit-focused, but everyone else does it too, and since we're admitting it out loud, that makes it okay!"
So... if being meta is now unpopular, what now? I mean, we can't really go back to being non-meta anymore, given how the internet has made practically everyone overly self-aware of everything.
@@geoffreyrichards6079 The difference is that the internet is willing to poke fun at themselves and others. Disney straight up insults other animations with zero self awareness, which isn't how meta commentary works.
The Chip being cel-shaded could have been an interesting plot point. What if instead of him never getting a makeover, at one point he actually did try to get a 3d makeover then changed his mind before the process finished? Now he's stuck in this halfway point where he's not fully 2d but doesn't have all the characteristics of 3d. Him calling himself 2d could be him coping with an identity crisis via denial. This is the only interesting excuse for having Chip be also CGI without insulting the audience.
The Disney bootleg plot sounded like a funny idea, but outside of clippable references this movie is an absolute drag. I could go on about why Roger Rabbit will always be the far better execution of a cartoon/human co-existence.
While watching it with friends there were many moments where I wanted to press the skip button and skip forward cuz I kinda knew what tropes they were going for.
I feel like the C&D movie completely glossed over the whole "CGI surgery" plot bit, which to me would've been a far more interesting premise to focus on. Animated characters from the 90's feel compelled to go "3D" in the wake of the new Live Action Disney Movies, being cajolled by bad faith agents and studio execs to reinvent the story for a new generation, and in so doing ruin everything interesting about themselves in service of a soulless corporate product. ...Of course, Disney would never in a million years approve it, but fuck man at least it would be *something*.
Idk, I just do. I can't control what I like or don't like, what makes me smile and what doesn't. It made me laugh. It gave me a nice time with my partner.
The fact that people are even trying to compare Chip n Dale to Who Framed Roger Rabbit is pretty insulting and infuriating. Like I guess in the most surface level way they are similar but if you actually pay attention to the actual writing and film making at hand, Chip n Dale is a fucking joke. I feel like people only liked the movie because they understood all the references and that made them feel smart. That's the only reason I can think of why someone would like this piece of shit
I’ve heard it’s better than most people expected, but all the reviews agree you’re pretty much just watching for the references, and a lot of why it’s fun to watch for references is because a decent chunk of them aren’t Disney animation stuff
Wtf lol the movies obviously an imitation of Roger Rabbit, and even has him in it, so why wouldnt people compare them? Calm down a bit, it's just a movie
@@gunluva exactly lol. It wasn't a masterpiece or anything but yeesh. Not everything needs to be groundbreaking. I watched it with my gf and we enjoyed it for what it was, it got a few laughs out of us. Some people are just so anal about film and they look down on people for simply enjoying something
@@inyrui this sentiment is why while I will watch YMS from time to time, I don’t really enjoy Adum as much as I feel I used to. Like a lot of mainstream media is kinda garbage, but most of the time it’s not so garbage it deserves all the cynicism that seems to come up when he reviews mainstream stuff
THANK YOU! I've been seeing people praise the Chip n Dale film all over tiktok and to me it's just gross. It's not a modern day Rodger Rabbit like everyone is trying to claim, it's crap. If they wanted a modern day Rodger Rabbit /they have the actual funds to do it/. Will they? NO. Because they can be crappy, not bother, and reference 'parodies' to skirt the copyright laws. I'm sick of Disney. I'm tired of them being praised when all they did was reference other BETTER media and then again parody things to bully it...when they didn't even fucking try.
@Compass Rose I agree. This movie literally included characters, EVEN THE CHARACTERS THAT AREN’T OWNED BY DISNEY! They used characters that were owned Dreamworks and Paramount. Disney just put other company’s characters in this movie as if they owned them but they DON’T. It’s like that this movie was only made to exploit nostalgia, they’re not giving people what they really want to see! After everything Disney is doing I can’t even give Disney a chance anymore. Like seriously, I bet Disney doesn’t even care about people’s entertainment nor the animation, all they care about is the money. I can’t give this movie nor Disney any credit anymore… And all of that is just freaking obnoxious and UTTERLY DISGUSTING.
Even the worst writing in the show is better than all of the combined writing in any of the bungie games, so that's a huge win I think. The video game fanboys should be applauding
I saw something making the case that Halo was originally meant to be the Mass Effect television series before it was hastily reworked for another IP because hey, one sci-fi shooter game is pretty much like any other, right? And I haven't stopped thinking about it, because it explains why the show feels so much like it's had the serial number filed off of it.
I saw the same thing too, and when _that moment_ came onscreen, I was like "Wait a minute, this feels like something Shepard would do, not Chief." If true, yeah, that would explain _much_ about the show's odd tone. Halo and Mass Effect are good settings in their own way, but each has a different style and tone. However, as you said, these writing teams cannot tell said difference to save their own lives.
My roommate and I watched Chip & Dale the other night and, while we thought it was fine to start, by the end we both thoroughly despised it. The biggest thing that irritated both of us was how inconsistent the movie was. For example, the movie clearly characterizes Dale as an overcompinsating narcissist who always wants the spotlight, always wants to be the showoff, always wants to be the center of attention, yet is incredibly dumb and impulsive - causing these actions to blow up in his face. We are SHOWN THIS over, and over, and over throughout the movie. Then, midway through, Dale says he quit the Rescue Rangers show because he "wanted to feel wanted" by Chip. The problem with this is that THE MOVIE CLEARLY SHOWED US CHIP DID. When they had their argument at the beginning of the movie, Chip expressed how hurt and betrayed he felt, brought up how they were always a team, and expressed fear that Dale leaving could potentially cause the show to be canceled with would hurt ALL of them including their other friends. Chip did EXACTLY what Dale was baiting him to do, yet he acted like an unselfaware callus asshole the entire time, actively BRUSHING ASIDE Chip's words - WHICH WERE WHAT DALE WANTED. The WHOLE MOVIE was absolutely FILLED with these contradictions from character development, to the plot, to the world building. With so many conflicting elements, you're sat wondering why ANYTHING is happening. Here's a few other massive contradictions the movie pulls: * Peter Pan was fired for going through puberty - as shown by acne and facial hair. A) you have erasers that remove any feature you want, this shouldn't be an issue, B) hand drawn characters can be changed willy nilly - why not just redraw him to be younger? C) we later see one of the lost boys who is STILL A CHILD despite the passage of time. Why did he age but Peter didn't? * A major threat is the fact that characters can have elements of them erased. This is completely undone by the fact that, by putting his thumb in his mouth and blowing, Chip was able to regrow an ear cut off by the bootleg machine. What are the limits of this? Can toons just mind magic their features back? The movie never tells us. * Peter Pan gets zapped by the bootleg machine to have a bunch of random parts (let's ignore the fact the BOOTLEG machine gave him features of COPYRIGHTED CHARACTERs) and those parts make him act like the characters those parts are from and that's how Chip and Dale defeat him. However, Chip had his ear accidentally replaced with a Snoopy ear earlier on. He at no point acts like Snoopy (laying down like Snoopy does on his doghouse, chasing the Red Barron, etc). There are about a billion more I could rattle off. THIS. MOVIE. BLOWS.
Huh, I never even considered or thought about the stuff you pointed out. Dale is incredibly emotionally manipulative the whole movie, but the writers never realized this at all. This movie was worse than I thought.
@@mikedacoolnerd788 it's not that bad... and not like it was a huge Hollywood blockbuster. Kind of just a film that appeared randomly out of nowhere on a streaming service that I watched, enjoyed and moved on. Much like the Rangers cartoons themselves, haha. I always preferred the old Donald Chip n' Dale anyway.
Seeing how Chip and Dale turned out makes me so much more appreciative of Disney's own "Wreck-It Ralph" which could have easily have devolved into the same nonsense of putting references and meta jokes above the characters. There was a time many were hoping it was gonna be the "Roger Rabbit" of video game films and now, at least personally, I really appreciate those references didn't drag the story down and at the end of the day, you remember it's about Ralph and his journey of self-reflection above all. It really is telling how Ugly Sonic is getting more traction about the film than the actual content about the titular characters and show.
I agree, roger rabbit and wreck-it ralph are in abt the same league of "crossover films" bc they understand the movie should be abt their own characters, story etc. while references are to add to the setting and comedy. sadly ralph breaks the internet leaned into the "look at all the stuff disney owns, tho!!" angle. this movie could've worked too ig they just were rlly dependent on the references to existing properties
Wreck-It Ralph was mostly references, and even that was enough for me to shut it off before the 15 minute mark. Disney is a joke of a company, and yet, also holds a large share of the entertainment world. Mass appeal entertainment is the death of art. Only recognizable or established IPs are given any marketing budget because it's about making more money. The Northman is arguably the best movie I've seen in at least a year and it struggled to make back its budget ($60 million) after a month and a half... but Spiderman: The Nostalgia Movie makes a billion $$ in a week, and that movie is literally just references and stale Disney approved humour.
@@heavydfunk At least the first movie focuses on the characters and story for most of the time. The sequel however... No. Just. No. But Roger rabbit is leagues above these two anyways.
People comparing this to Roger Rabbit clearly have no fucking eyes or just reduce the movie to "cartoons and live action together". The amount of effort done in Roger Rabbit to blend the footage together, the coordination of props and actors and the animators having to work around that as well, the intricate detail of something like Judge Doom holding Roger's neck or the sink scene or so much of the finale is so impressive. And it saddens me that people are buying into this. People are literally just becoming okay with references and colors as a selling point. It's insulting to the medium.
Not to mention that the majority of the 2D animation is puppeted anyway, because nobody can be arsed to do frame-by-frame animation anymore (at least not high quality)
I think the reason people are drawing the similarities to "Roger Rabbit" is that it's the closest to its general premise. The rest are either "Space Jam", "Back in Action" or the "Rocky and Bullwinkle" film - films that also don't match the caliber set by "Roger Rabbit". And to be fair, "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" was also stuffed full of references and cameos that didn't add anything. I mean, the only famous cameo that contributed to the film's plot was Betty Boop, showing that Eddie still had a soft spot for Toons despite his prejudice. The rest were only there to make the audience point and go "I know them". If people don't mind it there, it shouldn't be a problem here.
I got bribed into watching Chip n' Dale with the promise of free food and the food wasn't worth the slog of having to sit through this heartless production. You take out all the "jokes" and self-referential shit, and there is barely any character in a movie filled with characters! There are parts where I was out loud asking my friends "Are we supposed to be taking this seriously?"
The worst part about the whole thing with the Bobby Driscoll thing is that in an early draft the antagonist was going to be Pluto, which means that somebody down at Disney went "Hey! You know what we should do? Base our antagonist off of an actor that this company used and then threw away because he hit puberty, who then died at a young age from drug abuse because he couldn't find work." and I hope whoever made that choice goes to Hell no matter what.
I'm more annoyed that more and more Disney movies are trying to be meta versions of themselves like they're better than the stuff that the company used to make in the past.
I knew people would say this, but it’s wrong because Disney owns very little of the characters they represent in this film. So of all the other flaws it has, there’s very little “bragging of properties” in this movie.
I CLAPPED WHEN I SAW THE THING I RECOGNIZED!!! Seriously though, I was waiting for this YMS review because I knew everyone that was giving Chip and Dale good reviews were just doing that on the meta and reference "humor". I was surprised Adam didn't get more upset at the fact that Disney dared to put Rodger Rabbit in this movie, as if Disney thought this movie could even compare to Who Framed Rodger Rabbit.
Bad writers have learned that they can reskin their original stories as adaptations, sequels, and reboots to get their projects blindly greenlit by people unfamiliar with the original IPs. It happened with Star Trek, it happened with Halo, and it's going to happen with Lord of the Rings later this year.
Chip & Dale is actually another example. If you watch the movie you can tell the plot is so barebones and substanceless that there is nothing in it that screams Chip n Dale. I mean they're literally not their characters from Rescue Rangers, they're actors who played the characters. That could be fine if you made them characters in their own right but again the actual writing is so NOTHING that it's clear it was only greenlit because Disney ad revenue
Hell, Nickelodeon Jr. Studios just sounds really weird in my head - like, just call it *NICK JR! YOU PAID FOR NICKELODEON CHARACTERS, WHAT, LIKE, YOU CAN'T SCAR KIDS MORE THAN YOU ALREADY DID WITH THE PLOT!?*
"I don't know if they were trying to comment on the original voice actor of Peter Pan--" Nothing can convince me that it wasn't at all an intentional "dig" (if you can even ca it that) at what happened to him. If it's supposed to be a sort of "dedication", like, "look at what Disney did to this poor child actor! Weren't they SO scummy to do that?!" despite the fact that they used some poor guy's misfortune to create some shitty, generic villain years later is so back-handed and insulting. What a way to present a man's debilitating and heartbreaking legacy. (And if you still aren't convinced that it's actually supposed to be commentary on Driscoll; the fact that they included a shot of a younger Peter Pan lamenting his acne, which was the begining to the end of Driscoll's Disney career, the fact that he ends up as a washed up, belligerent alcoholic? The fact that he had a hard time getting roles after the fact? There's no excuse.)
I feel like Halo would have been best as an anthology. That way, you can have less action-oriented episodes (ONI stuff or scientists researching the Covenant) or episodes focused around the Insurrection (Kwan Ha, Soren) without breaking the overall flow of the series. If an individual episode in an anthology is bad, it doesn't necessarily detract from the other compartmentalized episodes, but as it stands now, a bad episode in the Halo TV show sours all the others since the series is oriented around an overarching plot line.
I liked most of the show, even as a fairly hardcore Halo fan, but there are a few really bad episodes and it is a bummer that they're kind of inseparable from the rest of the show. I'm not sure that it would've been better as an anthology, but it certainly would've been better if they had written swaths of it to actually be good.
They could have even just lifted some of the short stories from 'Halo: Evolutions' 1:1 for TV and it would have been fine. The Mona Lisa, Dirt, Headhunters and more are perfect for a 1 hour adaptations, and Headhunters specifically might even *benefit* from being shown rather than told via a novel.
@@sagewaterdragon Even the worst writing in the show is better than all of the combined writing in any of the bungie games, so that's a huge win I think. The video game fanboys should be applauding
The Halsey clone is actually bungie cannon, every smart (and maybe dumb?) AI is made from a person's brain in Halo, and it's typically people donating their body to science. Halsey wanted some smart AI based on herself because reasons, and the clone thing did happen. However the detail they got wrong is that they only made clones of Halsey's brain, via stem cells i guess, and not full sentient people. They had to make a dozen brains before one was successful and that one was cortana, not just poof a person into existence to delete them. An attempt was made, I guess.
It was definitely only done just to show how evil Halsey is in this show which is dumb cause she is evil in the just not really caring about people not the I wanna basically make robot slaves thing this shows starts pulling
But Adam how can you not like Chip n Dale I personally jumped up and down and spit and clapped and clicked my heels together in joy when I saw ugly sonic (I know what that is!)
This and Spacejam 2 are basically Friedberg and Seltzer movies but without the early 2000s sex humour and with legal permission to use the characters. Disgraceful
I like how Adam gets progressively angrier while talking about Chip 'n Dale, like he starts mellow and just works himself up to a rage.
That was pretty much my exact reaction to the movie 😂
And I love that it mainly happens when Lion King 2019 is acknowledged
@@demisagoat To be fair, everything about it's existence is justifiably rage-inducing
At least it's better than Space Jam 2.
@@harrypotteryescaillouno45 Lion King 2019 at least had lions and kings in it.
It's honestly sad that Gumball, a made for TV cartoon, does mixing of styles better than a big budget Disney movie
A show that started like a decade ago no less
Mr Robinson is a 3D animated puppet that they animate to move and talk exactly like a muppet, to the point that I thought he was an actual physical puppet! Even in season 1!! TEN YEARS AGO. Aaaaaaaaaahhhhhh
It's because they actually put effort into Gumball
It's not demoralization fuel
Also Chowder did a better job of using different animation styles on the same characters and the humor of Chowder just slaps compared to Chip & Dale Rescue Rangers. Meta humor done right is how Chowder does it and Chowder is like a 10 minute episodes TV show made on a much lower budget.
“With the exception of JK Simmons, the voice acting in this film is utterly atrocious” is a sentence I hear a lot for some reason
Because nowadays companies want their animated characters to be voiced by famous hollywood stars, but good voice actors never get famous and hollywood stars almost never have voice acting experience and suck at it. JK Simmons is a rare exception(Mark Hamill is the only other I can think of) who is both a famous hollywood star and an experienced voice actor
@@geng6443 Robin Williams was another rare example of a Hollywood celebrity with genuine voice acting talent. RIP king 😔
I honestly liked Eric Bana as Monty, but that's only because at first I thought it was the original actor playing him. He did it really well, and I've heard him in other animated movies
@@geng6443 Samuel L Jackson is pretty good as well. John Goodman too, and Bryan Cranston in Batman Year One is 👌🏿.
@@geng6443 You would think that voice acting would fall under the umbrella of things that good actors should be good at. Like how a lot of actors are very proficient at doing impersonnations or singing.
One of the things that pissed me off the most about the Chip 'n' Dale movie was that Disney is pretending they're taking a crack at the entire industry for exploiting their properties: remakes, reboots, sequels, prequels, spin-offs, etc. Yet the problem is that Disney not only actively participates in this, they were some of the earliest adopters with their cartoon series and straight-to-VHS movies that only got worse as time went on, and now they're the biggest hypocrites. In addition, Sweet Pete blames the people that abandoned him, yet I don't believe Disney is ever mentioned by name in the whole series, so rather than Disney owning up to its past and current behavior they just get to blame the entire industry as a whole while avoiding responsibility. Also, satire doesn't really work when you're the biggest fish in the pond punching down and taking shots at smaller studios for trying. It just feels like you're making fun of them for not being you.
Finally , the whole premise of the series was that Chip 'n' Dale hadn't seen each other in 30 years after Rescue Rangers but they sure were together in Kingdom Hearts, House of Mouse, and Disney released a Chip 'n' Dale: Park Life series on D+ last year. I know they're separate "universe" characters but it deflates the reunion aspect when they've been together the whole time in other projects.
I agree, but I will say that Hollywood as a whole *is* guilty of every trend mocked in the film, and Disney - as its largest studio - is, by default, *the ultimate avatar of each and every one of them.*
It feels like the tinsel mill popped out this film *explicitly* to reassure a skeptical public that Hollywood is aware enough of its own sins to make their mockery an important plot-point of a nostalgic romp - itself designed to lure in and lull as many moviegoers as possible. It’s a goddamn Venus flytrap.
Yea, this whole movie doesn't fit in with the universe that Chip n Dale inhabit, which is the Mickey Mouse series.
You know, the Animaniacs does this better, both the original and current versions were very clever, particularly when teasing Hollywood, laughing at the expense of celebrities, and how the film industry undermines its own art. The reboot song from the current Animaniacs is very funny, it even makes fun of the "Oldboy" re-interpretation.
Your comment really sums up what's wrong with this movie and Disney in general.
Does Mickey Mouse even appear in that movie? I doubt it since he's become an image, drained from his character long ago.
I guess “movie that tries to be like the Lego movie but ends up being more like foodfight” is a genre now and we’re getting one every year
Yup, gotta have the "Oh hey, I remember that, I now have to love this!" movie at least once a year, sometimes more
and it's gonna rule
Genre NOSTALGIA CROSSOVER
The difference is that The Lego Movie is a genuinely well written, funny and interesting movie that just happens to have a lot of nostalgic references. All of these movies do the references first and the writing later
Also known as the *"I KNOW WHAT THAT IS!"* Genre.
what's also disgusting is that disney killed imagemovers, the robert zemeckis animation studio, leaving hundreds without jobs. then disney just makes fun of the studio 11 years later saying they were shit like wtf.
I'd rather watch a Zemeckis than anything Disney has come up with in the last 5 years.
That's what I was gonna say! Disney really needs to be put in its place for how shitty and insulting they are.
The films were incredibly expensive for the time and didn't make money. The only one that's remembered fondly is Polar Express, and part of that is because of how weird the visuals look now. Disney's done a lot of shitty things, but I don't see how shutting down an unprofitable subsidiary that made creepy hyper realistic movies is really a sin.
the "creepiness" of the animation is subjective. I don't find them creepy at all but I know thats like rare for someone to say that. what is a fact though is that 450 artists and individuals lost jobs because disney wasn't willing to put in the work to make them profitable. before the disney acquisition they made profits, when disney bought them they had no idea how to handle the studio and dropped them before they even had a chance. hate the studio or not, they made what they wanted to make and that's a rare thing now.
@@skookathing Hot take but I sometimes wish studios over here are more like studios in Japan or even indie studios like Cartoon Saloon who take risks and do what they want. I love studios that are willing to do that.
I think what really makes me mad about all the Ugly Sonic jokes is that Disney would never make fun of there poorly designed charaters for live action remakes. The joke with Pumba being an example of that and it just show how hypocritical this movie and Disney as a company is.
Also I recently read an article saying that orginal when the film was first being developed it was going to be a joke about Jar-Jar Binks instead of Sonic, showing that a some point they were going to make some type of self-deprecating humor but were forced to change it by higher ups when it got picked up for Disney plus.
Exactly. Ugly Sonic, a Paramount creation, is shown as an example of bad design while Pumba gets to mock someone for their "dead eyes".
The biggest middle finger from Disney about Sonic is that Paramount actually _listened_ to the fans and, for once, made some decent video game based movies. Meanwhile, _this_ just takes a dump all over its audience. It's petty and spiteful
@ 7:15 : Was that Catra?
This seems to be a Prime Example of trying to be self-aware about their Bad CGI and Remakes that had no business being made. Only, they proceeded to shoot themselves in the foot by exposing their hubris.
This Is Not what I expect in adapting an old show from 30 years ago.
Oh, and something to do with Cortana being injected into MC's brain.
@@Chud_Bud_Supreme This is exactly what I am talking about. Remember all the memes making fun of how bad the Genie looked in the Aladin live action remake. No one though it looked good but they didn't change it. Remember all the people that made redesigns for the "Live action" Lion King. But did they listen? Of course not. Even right now when Chip and Dale was released people are upset with how bad the She-Hulk CGI looks. Do you think that they are going to change it? I highly doubt it. Paramount listened to the fans and made a better design and even changed things people didn't like about the first movie when they made a sequel so it would actually be a better film. Chip and Dale is just the embodiment of Hypocrisy.
@@QJ89 No, the character at the spot you highlighted is Tigra as seen in one of the 2000s Marvel cartoons.
The Bobby Driscoll thing is just so tasteless. Disney is pointing and laughing at the child stars that THEY chewed up and spat out. There is no way they didn't know about it and I'm calling BS if they claim that's the case.
Disney does a lot of awful stuff, but this is just SO on the nose.
Guilt by association with *Song of the South,* his first film for Disney.
Oh no that’s so terrible 😢
Grow tf up, this movie isn’t meant to be taken seriously in the slightest. Candy ass liberals
@@Attmay fuck that, how's a child resposible for the roles he gets, even if he very much wanted it, he was a Child in the 40's
its so fucking disgusting. i dont understand how anyone can even ATTEMPT to support disney after that shit. might as well show a picture of him and point and laugh on screen tbh
I had no idea about this, but it's like really atrocious. In the age of Disney pretending to be progressive at every turn, I'm really flabbergasted.
For anyone out of the loop, Bobby Driscoll was Disney's first ever contract actor. Like a lot of actors at the time, he was drastically underpaid and overworked - he did like 20 movies between 10 and 14 and only made enough to get by (plus his parents took all that money). He was sent to an acting boarding school so he could work for Disney full time.
As soon as he hit puberty they canned him. They hadn't paid or credited him well enough for him to survive or get other roles, and he ended up in a downward spiral that ended in suicide.
Like, Disney did that to him. Those kinds of workers' rights abuses in Disney's history are well known. Why in God's name would they joke about that?
Disney had the nerve to poke fun at Sonic's design, but came out with some of the worst CGI I've seen in a modern movie. At least Paramount fixed the design BEFORE release, the lack of self awareness is mindboggling.
The reason the animation in Roger Rabbit worked so well is because the lighting of the scenes fit both the humans and cartoons. Rescue Rangers on the other hand decides to not have lighting on the 2D characters at all which makes them look like they're not in the world at all.
don't forget that theatrical american hand drawn animation is practically dead. i think that recent mary poppins film is the only example where professional animator were brought back to do it again while less experienced animators were used for moe recent stuff like this. you can probably tell with how lesser it feels compared to the amount of effort out into Who Framed Roger Rabbit
This is the best.
Bobby Driscoll died homeless and all alone at only the age of 31. For Disney to portray HIS character this way is sick and disrespectful. They don't give a shit about anything but money.
Really sad, he worked with andy warhol in the factory and i would love to see more his collages.
Thats cruel, mean and even nihilistic coming from Disney.
I love it.
@@McRonald2010 Watch out guys, the edgy teenager that likes "dark humor" is here, what a bad boy, soooo cool
@@antonioc.5778 hey dark humour is still pretty good. The man child just doesnt understand when to use it
@@antonioc.5778 I just love it cause thats something Brett Easton Ellis would do it if he had the money. Nihilism and cruelty to dead and gae people its hilarious.
no Adam you see, if the muppet were an actual puppet and handled by a real actor, costume designer, set and lighting etc production team, Disney would have to pay them and respect their union rules. Its much cheaper and easier to send it to a 3D farm where theres no union, to save a billion dollar company money!!! so practical, amirite?
LMAO. Exactly. That shit is unionized why do that when we can pay animators pennies
Created by AKIVA SCHAFFER ABSOLUTE UNIT INTO mediocrity...😐
He was has some life action movie than animation so here we goes...
Another reason to hate all these computerized eyesores.
I didn't realize the muppet wasn't real and now I'm so pissed.
“Oh hey, ugly sonic is here”
*ugly sonic waves*
End of scene
That’s it, that’s all you need
There was more than that but yeah
@@Santoryu90 yeah, they dragged a 2 second long joke out for several minutes.
Or even a background gag that they didn’t even call attention to. That would have been pretty funny
@@rudeboyspodcast It was more than just a gag, they made fucking Ugly Sonic an instrumental part of the plot by making him a key player in the ending of the movie.
Absolutely disgusting.
Like Randy Marsh.
I’ve heard people call Chip and Dale a ‘Love letter to animation,’ and I find the claim unbelievable and frankly ridiculous. Because this is Disney and Disney doesn’t care about art but about making money.
More like a “dear John“ letter to animation.
@@Attmay with Doctor's handwriting.
A love letter that makes a classic cartoon character the villain and constantly makes cheap shots at everything animated
@@roberthosford1658 If that’s a love letter then I would hate to see what hate mail looks like to them.
I rather sit though Godzilla's Revenge instead.
It would have been so easy to cushion the peter pan backlash by redeeming the character by the end and giving him a happy ending. Still tasteless, you could argue they're trying to paint over bad history, but at least they would have given them some humanity. But no, the film actually ends with Peter Pan in a padded cell, labelled criminally insane, literally a monster forever. They didn't even turn him back to normal.
And btw? I haven't seen anyone mention this yet, but the whole thing doesn't even make sense. None of the other cartoons age. There's a black and white toon at one point, he would be well into his 100s by now. You can even see one of the lost boys from his movie, he directly says hi to Peter, and he is clearly still a little boy with a childish voice and personality. If specifically targeting Peter Pan for his actor's backstory wasn't the case, then why would they not have aged up all the lost boys and made them his gang members? That's really sus to me.
Yep, they kept Cubby as a boy, even though his voice isn't supposed to be kid sounding even if they did give him a ki voice in Return To Neverland.
While his backstory is similar, I doubt Peter was intended to be Driscoll himself. What he does in the film seems more like what the animated character he played would’ve done.
@@geoffreyrichards6079 Then the film has no self awareness then, since it's suppose to reference how child actors are chewed up and spat out by the industry and Disney being a big contributor of this didn't even take into account to at least look up if this mirrors anything they have done
@@wardenunknown A ton of films produced by film companies have addressed the cruel practices of Hollywood, whether the studios were aware of them or not. “Sunset Boulevard” is probably one of the more famous examples of this; much of it was pretty much calling out Paramount for their treatment of former stars who lost their relevance, but they still produced it anyhow.
@@geoffreyrichards6079 This excuse doesn't work in a movie that'd trying to be self aware and claim to call out the bad choices Disney makes in regards to animation
Schrodinger's Movie: The movie only collapses into a satire or non-satire state after the producer has had the opportunity to see the reception. Until then, it is simultaneously satire and non-satire.
Kinda like how Tommy Wiseau only declared The Room an intentional dark comedy after people started making fun of it?
@@ElFreakinCid Exactly.
Even in the shittiest roles, J. K. Simmons can never give a bad performance.
You can tell he had fun with the role during the one fight scene he’s in.
I'm so glad people are agreeing he was the best part.
@@theflickchick9850 It helps that Putty was one of the few characters who wasn't an in-your-face reference (he's an obvious parody of Gumby, but they're subtle about it), and the CGI pseudo-claymation still looked more convincing than the rest of the CG in the film.
Even in the new Netflix Marmaduke?
@@alecfoisy58 I wish that every other animated character had the same level of attention to detail Captain Putty had. It looked so good whenever he was on screen.
As a 2D animator, the "2D" animation in Chip and Dale really saddens me. Not only because it looks shitty, but they make jokes about how Dale doesn't "stretch", but neither does Chip. And they could have used the fluidness of 2D animation for some really good jokes, like how Roger Rabbit can easily remove himself from handcuffs.
Yeah that’s the biggest problem with 3d it’s so stiff and rigid any animation fan can tell right away. They pulled this stunt with there recent short film with the raccoons. I’m so tired
@@skitterly the hotel transylvania does a great job giving their 3D characters squash and stretch techniques, they did a great job. That's the only good 3D animation I have seen in that regard
@@divine5328 If you count video games there's Overwatch and all of Arcsys's 2D-HD fighting games (Guilty Gear and Dragonball Fighterz), it's amazing how Disney fails at doing something a Japanese fighting games studio nailed over 8 years ago.
@@divine5328 The Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs movies also have great squash and stretch CG animation. I love the energy it has!
It's a shame, since 3D and 2D animation have been blended together for such great effect before. For example, miHoYo has made amazing animated shorts like Shattered Samsara and Everlasting Flames for their Honkai Impact 3rd game. They truly showcase how the two animation types can work in tandem, yet much bigger studios fail to do the same for some reason.
Can we talk about how Chip 'n Dale compares everything from fanfiction to parodies as equivalent to kidnapping, human-trafficking and *mutilation?* That's a moral only a company like Disney would agree with.
Do they seriously say that in the movie? If so, that's fucked up, and rich coming from a company that literally holds IPs and copyrights hostage for decades, even stealing content from the public domain and placing it under their brand to make it harder for others to use
@@tabithaalphess2115 Oh yeah, the plot is that Peter Pan runs a crime ring where cartoon characters (and also Sora from Kingdom Hearts for some reason) are kidnapped, mutilated and forced to take part in bootleg movies.
@@Hawkatana Where do they say fanfic falls into that category?
@@eatatjoes6751 They basically folded every use of a character by someone who isn't the owner of said character's copyright under the nebulous umbrella of "bootlegs".
@@tabithaalphess2115 They don't actually say that in the movie. Bootlegging within the context of the movie is someone kidnapping a cartoon character, physically altering their appearance through what is effectively plastic surgery, and forcing them to start in legal distinct bootleg videos that are on the level of videos that'd be featured on IHE's search for the worse, like "The Amazing Bulk" or "The little Panda Fighter."
The only way parodies and fanfiction can be rolled up into that umbrella is if the movie implied that the character we see on the show is the same persona that they are IRL, which clearly isn't the case considering that the major plot point was how Sweet Pete couldn't find work after he grew up until he started staring in bootlegs.
The difference between Chip-n-Dale and Roger Rabbit is one was made with love while the other was made out of spite. Roger Rabbit is filled to the brim with adoration for the old cartoons of the 30s and 40s, it created something that honestly elevated itself above its source material.
I was genuinely shocked to find out that Chip-n-Dale wasn't written by Seth Rogan, since its basically one of his films in a PG glaze. Its cynicism and contempt for the subject its based on, the meta-commentary on animation quality is honestly contemptible when it comes to filmmaking. Its why scream and most of those parody movies in the 00s are trash. Making a godzilla parody and putting a zipper on his back doesn't make me laugh, it makes me think you did only one draft of the script.
It reminds me of something I once read on /a/ before: "to make something original is to love. love is an earnest and timid emotion easily chased away by irony and its cousin, contempt."
Roger rabbit also had a actual point to make about race profiling with its premise
@@En_Joshi-Godrez that makes me concede that as much as I love the film, it has not changed much regarding how the industry perceives animation. Before that movie, they left it for dead and treated it as a gimmick or something used to sell sugar and plastic on Saturday Morning TV. Now, they treat it as a cash grab.
scream features some meta commentary on the genre but it’s also a genuinely good film and addition to the genre. say whatever you want about the trends it set but scream is a great film, and holds no contempt for the genre.
@@obscure.reference to each his own. I think its dawsons creek/90210 angle was far more anjoying and Wes Cravens directing style sans scream deteriorated imo.
I don't hate it anywhere as much as the other "see, we know the joke" movies but I'm not the biggest fan.
Good satire comes from a place of genuine understanding and love. One of my favorite satires is actually a completely non-comedic horror film: John Carpenter's In The Mouth Of Madness. Sutter Kane, the fictional horror author around whom the plot revolves is pretty clearly signalled to be an analogue for Stephen King, from the plots and cover designs of his books to his fictional town of Hobb's End right down to his name. The entire thing is full of pastiches of the sorts of mass market horror that had come to dominate the scene in the seventies and eighties after the likes of King and Carpenter helped to take the genre mainstream. The movie even throws jabs at itself, with one character at the beginning complaining about The Carpenters being played on the hospital soundsystem. It's horror media about horror media that pokes fun at horror media, but made by and for people who love horror and never lose sight of the fact that horror is intended first and foremost to scare people. In many ways it's almost the perfect send off to that era of the genre.
It's actually heartbreaking that they couldn't just do a light-hearted, fun, Rescue Rangers adventure movie, updated with modern 3D animation. Instead they had to do this edgy, meta, self-referential thing. I guess we really are headed toward a Ready Player One future, where pop culture is distilled down into one big, amorphous, all-encompassing universe where the joke or the meaning is literally always just "here's a thing from another thing you remember!".
I SAW THE THING FROM THE THING I REMEMBER SEEING AND I CLAPPED!!
Ready Player One sucked balls, but it made a sh*t ton of money so I guess Hollywood execs just decided that it was going to be the blueprint for all future low effort "movies" that solely exist to be dumped on streaming services and be instantly forgotten
So in other words, Hell.
Ready Player One, Ralph Breaks the Internet, Emoji Movie, Free Guy, the new Space Jam, a lot of Marvel and Star Wars, they're all apart of this awful new trend
Sad well never get a decent thing based on the old show again. At least not till the stench of this one has gone away. The old cartoon was worthy of being adapted straight rather than with pop culture references every two seconds.
In regards to everyone taking off their helmets, someone on Reddit posted an excerpt from one of the books where one of the Spartans had thrown up in her helmet but didn't dare to take it off while they were in a Covenant controlled area.
What the fuck, lmao.
Holly in Ghosts of Onyx
Spartans are not stupid
Not to mention Chief just literally never takes his off, that's part of his struggle with his own humanity. By giving him that humanising element they ruined the entire point of his character development across the first four core games.
It's so fucked up that they have John (if he's even called that in the show) take it off CONSTANTLY. That's the point??? He doesn't take it off because he sees himself as a walking piece of armor and weaponry in addition to keeping it on for safety. Just destroy the main thrust of his character, why don't you.
That dead eyes joke with Pumbaa has to be the least amount of self awareness I've ever seen, in a film that's whole shtick is supposedly being self aware. Wow.
Fucking thank you!! I can't understand why so many people are saying Chip n Dale is good. I could tell just from the trailers and small clips it was hot garbage. What's funny is that they could have used Chip and Dale to uncover Disney's dirty little secrets, like what they did to Bobby Driscoll, or Adriana Caselotti, to other awful decision, but doing that would paint Disney in a bad light and we can't have that.
Seriously, why didn't they just make an hour long version of Rescue Rangers? If it did well then they can reboot it like they did with Duck Tales.
it’s super cheap on the nose and bad but disney has been grooming audiences into accepting content like this since they first started releasing their “live action” reboots. most of those movies sustain themselves on references and meta commentary on the original, chip and dale is exactly that but on a mind numbingly large scale. it’s dumb but if u know enough references it’s an enjoyable dumb. it’s sad though, instead of this company working to push the limits of animation it insults every medium of it that doesn’t reap the most profits and then convinces audiences that they’re correct for disrespecting these characters and art forms. rescue rangers on its own wouldnt bring in enough cash so fuck it throw everyone in! they’ve proven with this movie to not even really care about their own properties
@@cocothedino_2901 "enjoyable dumb" That's why they will never stop churning out garbage like this. People thinking that.
You really can't understand other people having a different opinion than yours?
@@delvagus honestly. I liked the movie, it's not perfect at all but I have a good time.
@@ihatetheheat4524 I liked it too, and I understand if people didn't like it. It's just weird to me that people are confused by different opinions.
"This was made for people who still watch cable television" is the most vicious burn I've heard in quite a while. Damn.
I fucking loved this review.
I love you....boop
I love your videos petey!
The new Middle Earth show will be bad as well.
I fucked loving this review!
Are you sure you did ? Or do you just think you did cause it reminded you of other YMS reviews ?
Why does every normal human character in Halo look like they are bad CGI? Seriously just looking at these scenes make my brain go full uncanny valley mode.
Yea I got uncanny vibes in the beginning of the first episode, must of been the lightning and film effects, because they were just regular people sitting at a table 😂😂
It reminded me of that scene in Law and Order where a repressed gay man and Ice T are talking and they look like GTA characters.
It’s lazy color grading. In a program like Davinci Resolve you can track “windows” to objects/faces/etc and then independently adjust the color/exposure of just that object or of everything except that object. Done well it’s seamless. Done poorly you get people with faces that are brighter than the rest of the overall scene.
Fr Love, Death, & Robots puts this to shame and I’m assuming Halo is working with a bigger budget
Some shows are now doing a simple face smooth pass on everyone to make them look a little "better"
Disney referencing old things that exist has been 90% of their output the past 3 years. It's actually exhausting to watch any Marvel or Star Wars stuff with how much they just bring back old characters to tick nostalgia boxes instead of trying anything new
How is the mcu anything like that???? It adds new concepts and characters every movie. The mcu itself is a little over decade old so it’s not exactly riding off any nostalgic coat tails?
@@Soniman001 eh, maybe not riding off direct nostalgia, but all marvel movies rely a little on you watching movies that come before it. And it’s started to feel like the majority of their movies are feeling sorta samey as of late. Of course, I’ll take marvel’s offering over Sony’s attempt to make a sinister six movie in multiple parts
@@Soniman001 They had a television show exploring the"what ifs" of previous scenarios for the heroes. The last Spider-man film brought together the casts of the two other live action versions. The Dr. Strange film brought together disparate aspects of the MCU allowing them to reference whatever they wanted. And every single film has been based off a pre-existing property and if the story is even slightly original it's a sequel.
Nostalgia doesn't have a fixed lifetime, it just relies upon people thinking more fondly of something in the past. There's a reason why with the exception of Black Panther and Captain Marvel the MCU's top 15 films in box office sales are all sequels.
Sounds like a WB issue as well
If I see the “Movie character you recognize shows up old and decrepit and a bit of an old movie’s theme song plays when they appear” trope one more time I am going to lose my marbles😌
You know what's funny? Gumball did what Rescue Rangers tried to do, only better.
And on a TV budget too 😭
Gumball sucks
@@salarzx62090 So does your life and your profile pic
Not like its hard to appreciate how amazing Roger Rabbit was, but stuff like this REALLY makes you appreciate how amazing Roger Rabbit was
The writers of this film clearly knew who Bobby Driscoll was, and the fact Disney allowed it to pass through just really shows how much they clearly don't care. They can literally sod off.
To me, Peter Pan's villainy should've been a comment on Disney suppressing the racism in the film and therefore, suppressing Peter as a character. But I gave Disney WAY too much credit, thinking they'd do something as ridiculous as acknowledge their racism.
@@theflickchick9850 Oh, no they only do that in very quick text that nobody reads at the start of Dumb (it doesn't get to be called Dumbo)
@@theflickchick9850 they continue to be racist, in 20 years I guarantee this era of ham fisted Disney "inclusion" will be looked on as some kind of Michael Scott-esque clownish racism.
ive heard the suggestion that this movie is intentionally as awful and immoral as possible, and knows that. and with the business suited character in the film making a joke along the lines of "lol, we should reboot that, but make it worse," this is the writer themself speaking through the character. the movie isn't just being tone deaf, it knows the tone exactly, and is actually crying for help, please stop disney from making shit like this.
but that's a little too heady for this seth rogen-ass movie.
@@theflickchick9850 Do you think everyone who works at Disney is some kind single-minded entity? Different people work on different products, so it's possible that the writers were trying to comment on how Disney executives treated Driscoll in the past?
Weird for them to insult Robert Zemeckis when he directed Who Framed Roger Rabbit a movie which did this exact live action/mixed animation thing 1000x better
Roger Rabbit aged like fine wine. This aged like cheese in a car trunk in Georgia in the dead heat of summer!!!
OH SHIT I DIDNT THINK ABOUT THAT
He did????? Omg that makes it even worse!😬
Zemeckis has some duds, but that's because he's actually taken risks in his career. He has 1000X the balls anyone at modern Disney does
@@blaisetelfer8499 tbf, he hasn't made anything decent in 20 years
I don't know how insulting it is if the Rescue Rangers directors truly thought that anyone above the age of 3 would confuse cel-shaded 3D with 2D
I guess it did end up working on some people?
@@666slateran666 No.
I mean not everyone is a film snob so most people just don't give a shit
@@inyrui One doesn't need to be a film snob to say that a VR-chat looking turd isn't hand drawn animated.
@@DeepEye1994 I'm not saying people don't notice, I'm saying most people don't give a shit
If the team found animation so difficult, why in the world did they try to emulate every single animation style they could think of? What's the point?
Is it a sacrificial work, intended to make other films look better by comparison? That's all I can imagine.
The "uncanny" viking guy looks better than the "good" animation
The horrible thing about nostalgia-bait movies is that unlike, say, westerns or romcoms, they're not a genre that people can eventually get tired of or companies can run out of stories to tell through. They're literally nothing more than a lazy way to generate guaranteed monetary success through dangling people's childhoods in front of them and going "remeber this? Well, here's some more of it, give us money", very often not even delivering on anything other than brand recognition. People who demand nothing from their entertainment, don't want to think about or be challenged by any piece of media ever and blindly accept lazily made knockoffs of things they used to like when they were in elemantary school as the genuine article are just as much, if not more, at fault for this constant barrage of nostalgia-bullshit as the soulless executives greenlighting them.
Be the change you wanna see, guys. This isn't "dumb fun" or a "popcorn movie". It's just *bad* , for cinema, for culture and for you.
It's worse than that, money means nothing to those Luciferians, you're still thinking small Janny!
At some point they'll run out of classic properties to reference and they'll start doing nostalgia-bait movies referencing older nostalgia-bait movies referencing classic properties, thus producing an endless recurring stream of shitty meta humor.
I think the well will get poisoned with too much irony in the coming years, and companies will stop seeing returns on endless nostalgia. People will start craving new and sincere ideas again.
@@someguy1478 The era of post-postmodernism
The only "challenge" I've seen in most counterculture media trying to go against the popular trends mostly consists of stories whose themes are dealing with nihilism and how trash people are. It's nothing challenging, it's just depression.
Disney can be downright Orwellian with their marketing sometimes.
"This version of The Lion King is live action because we used realistic character designs for our computer models." "These characters are 2D because we slowed the frame rate and cel-shaded their 3D models."
That Chip n Dale movie didn't fill me with as much rage as it did Adum, but the background gags like the billboard ads got more of a response out of me than any of the actual jokes in the movie.
ET vs Batman…
@@BMVfilms Lego Miserables got a slight chuckle out of me too.
Indeed. I was laughing more at the background jokes than I did the actual jokes. Made me realize the credit here is for, as usual, the animators and background artist as opposed to the writing and cast.
@@motherplayer I wanted a Doug movie explaining how he went from a cartoonist to legal work with his dog after I saw that billboard.
2 + 2 = live-action
I'll save you a curiosity google search. Bobby Driscoll was signed on to Disney as a child actor because he was a cute kid, and dropped by Disney after his Peter Pan Performance at age 16 because he wasn't a cute kid anymore, his director found him annoying, and his acne from puberty got bad. He got no serious roles from other companies because people still saw him as the cute child actor despite not being cute or a child anymore. He went to school instead but got bullied because his peers saw him as a cute child actor despite not being cute or a child anymore. Because of his Disneybucks he had the capital to buy heroin and other drugs, and thus did, and got addicted.
The rest of his life is basically a whirlwind of small crimes, small roles on radio and television, art at some point with Andy Warhol, and an attempt at a Broadway career that never took off, until two kids found him dead in an abandoned home at age 31 in New York, surrounded by empty beer bottles and religious pamphlets. Artery failure due to his drug habits.
Disgusting, Disney. Disgusting.
@TunaCats No of course not, I'd say it's the industry as a whole that should fundementally change how child actors are treated. The one thing Disney can be blamed for is dropping him like a brick when his cuteness was gone, leaving a child star that knows no other lifestyle or lifeskills, aged out of his only asset, without guidance, and with enough cash to properly ruin his life forever.
HOWEVER
To then take that very sad story and, cast a pseudo-Robert-Driscoll-after-being-spat-out as a villain in your "HeY rEmEmBeR aLl ThEsE tHiNgS fRoM tHe PaSt?!"-movie, as the company that kicked him out in the first place, is nothing short of disgusting.
@TunaCats "I don't believe the world works this way but can simultaneously not be bothered to actually do some digging into it." only slightly more embarrassing than "I didn't know Peter Pan's voice-actor or his story, thus, it must be obscure knowledge the average person doesn't know, least of all the Disney Writers whose job it was to research characters and animation styles from the past in order to make jokes and references about them in the first place."
@TunaCats Peter Pan? Or Chip and Dale 2022? Or some parts of the Chip and Dale TV series? Because yes, yes, and yes. Now go ahead, what's your gotcha?
@@quentinmcwimberton6797 I'm just here to note this it's honestly amazing to see someone trying to say the situation with Bobby Driscoll wasn't that bad, while also for some reason admitting they don't know much about the situation at all.
Not you if that's anything, the person you're talking with. Just felt like saying that since this is the youtube comments section and all.
@@imverytired1164 yeah holy fucking shit, it's almost like Disney knew what they were doing referencing someone like that and making fun of something horrible that only happened because of them
Also you gotta love how only Disney would have the gall and the legal/financial strength to openly use IP’s that don’t belong to them and make fun of them. If this situation was reversed, Disney would fall on anyone mocking them with the full might of USA Copyright Laws long before the film even began production. Sure Disney can make fun of “Ugly” Sonic, but can Paramount Pictures make fun of ANYTHING Disney has made? Nope! It’s all one-sided and it’s made even uglier as a result of this simple fact.
And to complete this hypocrisy, the movie shows the act of copying Disney characters as mutilation and slavery.
I have felt CRAZY this past week after watching CnD saying basically everything Adam has said while so many people have been telling me that I’m wrong or “edgy” for not liking it. Finally, some sweet justification.
Me too.
Never feel wrong for being smarter then Disney consumers.
The word edgy has lost its meaning years ago
It's just having a different opinion, is all. No one is wrong or right for enjoying or not enjoying any media.
what do you mean by justification it's just an opinion like any other and no fact, that it's a bad movie
Headcanon: The only reason this movie exists is to show how Ugly Sonic would look on the big screen
And I can see why it won’t work.
If I needed a washed up sonic character that’s being a legitmate lowlife asshole unlike the games I’ll just rewatch Sonic for hire. They’re basically the same character but ones funnier
I mean, they obviously made him even more ugly, taller and made his character different. So you don't really get to see how it "would have been".
I thought Tim Robinson was really funny.
@@Fibah Yeah basically. Ugly Sonic was ugly because he was ugly AND uncanny.
I absolutely despise everything about that Chip and Dale film, so thank you for putting that hatred into words
Good to see you Shoocharu, I love your stuff. And yeah the film was an abomination.
I can only imagine how painful it must be to be an animator watching that movie
i looked once at the thumbnail on disney+ _-during my attempt to definetly not record the entirety of the lion king oh nononono-_ and i immediately cringed
Just gonna hide now...I enjoyed the movie a lot
Only saw the trailer and it stunk of people that could care less about the original cartoon. I mean, what's wrong with the Rescue Rangers having an actual full blown adventure/mystery movie like in the show?
It's amazing to me that's 2022 and there's still not a single movie that has even made an honest attempt to reach the quality of Who framed roger rabbit
Well, WFRR was pretty unique not only in having toons interact with real humans (and let´s admit it, that animation STILL holds up very well), but also in combining two very different genres, cartoon and noir, into one. Maybe because they are almost direct opposites (with cartoons being cheerful and colorful, while noir being usualy black and white and serious), they play off each other pretty well.
So, it´s just not "normal humans and toons interacting", its two very specific types of setting interacting. In modern movies of this type, they usually just pay attention to the toon part, the "human world" is just presumed to be "reality". Here, they took care in BOTH of the settings, and it shows.
The Chip and Dale movie should just be named "´member dis?" Because that´s all it is about.
@@veronikamajerova4564 It also is the fact that it also was working to make sure it wasn't just the references that would stick. There are a lot of solid character that comes out of the live-action cast. The scene of Eddie looking back to pictures of his brother and the slow montage of their history via wordless panning over various pieces of material did absolutely wonders and was something beyond just the amusement of seeing toons act alongside humans.
memba big chungus
@@motherplayer That shot was also really impressive on a technical level. According to the commentary, they had to adjust Bob Hoskins' wardrobe and props and change the lighting from night-time to daylight during the pan, in-camera, without a cut and without any of that activity being visible (via shadow movement or perceptible lighting changes) until the shot finished panning.
That kind of movie is expensive as fuck is why. The 2D animation quality alone is expensive already, but if they're trying to also include multiple licenses you're basically forking out extra and dancing around contracts to some giants like WB or Disney who are way bigger now than they were in the 80's, AND you need to also write it so it's engaging enough too.
Thank god more people are catching on to the way writers write funny dialogue. "Bad joke" "AHAHAHA WHAT A SHIT JOKE" "AHAHAHA UR SO RIGHT" "AHAHAHAH" "AHAHAHA"
I was diagnosed with autism as a child, so i often have to take an extra step to make sure that i understand people's thoughts and feelings correctly.
I refuse to extend that effort to people who liked Chip and Dale.
As someone with Autism, I argee with ya 100%.
Good lord, you weren't joking about the Bobby Driscoll story. Apparently the reason Disney cancelled his contract was because he got a bad case of acne! And things only got worse from there.
What a horrible situation to reference in an unsympathetic Disney villain. And I find it hard to believe that the writers just made a washed up Peter Pan on accident without knowing Driscoll's story.
It may have worked if he was a sympathetic character and the movie meaningfully recognized that Disney failed him, but I guess they aren't allowed to admit to past wrongdoings in any meaningful way. They will just be self-referential to trick people into thinking they are clever and introspective.
Even if they made such plot by mistake, wether in bad faith or not, that just leads me to think they didnt bother doing their homework on the very characters theyre using.
It's likely that someone high up in Disney molested him. Perhaps even big W himself.
I hate Disney just as much(if not more) than the next guy, but all the bad shit regarding Bobby Driscoll happened almost 70 years ago. He was dead long before most of the people that worked on that movie were born, and all the people that were working for Disney when his contract was terminated have either retired or died.
It's not unreasonable for Dan Gregor or Doug Mand(the two writers) to not have known what happened to him, and if you're going to have Peter Pan in a movie like this, making him an washed-up man-child for the sake of irony would be such an obvious thing to do that it borders on laziness.
@@drake1360 You do not get to make light of someone's misfortune if you were the one who caused it. It's like making fun of a retarded baby YOU DROPPED.
@@drake1360 Even if the initial script was not made with the knowledge, SOMEONE at the studio would have known, and should have said "Hey, maybe don't go with this plot, as it mirrors some unfortunate real world events." It's next to impossible that nobody working at disney who supervised this production was aware of a well known hollywood tragedy caused by the very same company
I'm really glad you brought up how poor taste the Peter Pan thing is. More people need to know about that.
Also, is it just me, or does a lot of the Chip 'n Dale movie give anyone else Food Fight vibes?
Yeah I got lots of "this is just product placement: the movie" vibes from it, as well
It felt like reference/soulless garbage like Ralph breaks the internet and space jam: ANL.
Even Christopher Lloyd knew to stay away from this one.
It would’ve been less distasteful for them to try and break Br’er Rabbit out of jail for a crime he didn’t commit.
@@Attmay Honestly, if they just included a disclaimer about the movie being a product of its' time that viewers are made to see anytime they started the film, I think that would cover their asses. I understand it's uncomfortable but I don't think it deserves to be outright banned in the US.
I just watched Who Framed Roger Rabbit for the first time last week and was pleasantly surprised to learn the focus was on the story and characters rather than the concept.
The animation was great and holds up very well, and while there were background cameos now and then the central toon characters were made for the film rather than being preexisting characters that relied on nostalgia.
The new Chip ‘n’ Dale is the opposite.
You could replace all the pop culture/animation references in Roger Rabbit with "Captain Ersatz" stand-ins and it'd still be a good movie. Hell, even Wreck in Ralph would still remain solid even if you know nothing about videogame pop culture.
Do that with this Chip and Dale film, and you'll get just a more pretentious version of Foodfight.
@@DeepEye1994 YES IT IS PRETENTIOUS FOODFIGHT!!! YO
@@DeepEye1994 Hell, you don't even have to do that.
Replace Chip and Dale with literally any other property and you'd get a pretentious, bootlegged version of Foodfight.
What I see in the Chip ‘n’ Dale movie: It's not about the Rescue Rangers, it's about Chip and Dale. It's not about the Chip and Dale we know and love, it's about the "REAL" "behind the scenes" Chip and Dale. The hand-drawn toons aren't hand-drawn, ther're CGI. The Muppet isn't an actual puppet, it's CGI. The classic toons aren't real, they're cardboard cut-outs. THIS MOVIE LIED TO US!!!
You’re absolutely right. Even without getting the specific references, those background characters still serve a narrative purpose.
You don’t have to know who Betty Boop is to understand that she’s a struggling showgirl and a friend of Eddy Valiant. You don’t have to know that Donald and Daffy are mascots of rivaling studios, because in that scene they’re just two duck performers competing on stage. You don’t have to have seen Dumbo, because in the film he’s just a cartoon elephant who’ll ”work for peanuts” in the employ of an antagonist.
They are funny cameos, but they’re used to build up the world and message of the film, establishing the toons as an exploited class. In short, these moments are meant to immerse you into the experience, not take you out of it.
Chip n Dale trying to pass off cel-shaded 3D as 2D is very weird considering the attention brought to other styles, there's a very nicely animated portion of 2D Rescue Rangers footage and then it immediately cuts to them as 3D models. I also pray the Peter Pan thing was just a coincidence.
I keep seeing people say like "Of course the 2D animation is badly animated CGI!! That's part of the joke!!" but like, it isn't. The movie is so ready to poke fun at literally anything else but it just never comes up. It's not some "halfway CGI Surgery" or something. It just looks bad because it looks bad, there's no joke to it. And even if they did make a joke about it, it still looks bad
Finally someone emperor's new clothes the Chip'n Dale movie. Yes, nostalgia is fun, but this movie slathers it all over the massive cracks in a Seltzerberg way to cover that it's just the Happytime Murders with a Disnes license. I mean, their lawyers made deals to include so many different characters from so many different owners... FOR THIS? It's lame beyond comparison.
"Emperor's new clothing" as a verb is something I'm going to incorporate into my life now. Thanks.
Glad I’m not the only one that didn’t think Ugly Sonic was a good joke.
Just referencing something doesn’t make it funny.
It was just the same jokes the internet has been making for 3 years now. We all made fun of his teeth. We all know how ugly he is. Maybe if they had something new to say it would have been alot better
They did the joke three years after it died and when two sonic movies already exist.
@@aviewer774 There's a reason why so much projects that made a by internet personalities are awful despite the fact that the same people relished in success on the internet.
No, worse than that.
It's a three-year-old joke.
Oh my god the whole Peter Pan/Bobby Driscoll thing was driving me crazy!!! I found what they did to Peter Pan in the movie deeply insulting to the real story, but I thought that not a lot of people really knew it. I’m glad you mentioned it!! Driscoll deserved so much better.
I have read many comments defending Chip and Dale with: "It was atleast miles better than Space Jam: A New Legacy!"
How low of a bar is that?
Space jam 2 was better then chip n dale, and I despise space jam 2.
At least Space Jam 2 poked fun at the algorithm Warner Brothers is using for all of their movies instead of plucking some star they flushed down the toilet for their movie's villain. It sucked and didn't work, but it's not creepy or distasteful.
The defending like that above is how I ended arguing with someone on Discord due not appreciating the movie for "actually trying", unlike Space Jam 2. It really shows how complacency hasn't just settled in hard for people watching the schlock entertainment monopolies are pumping out, but are now forcing that complacency down the constructive critics' throats. 🙄
Never seeing either but from what I *have* seen.... Space Jam 2 had at least *one* really funny joke, at least for me.
That bar is so low it’s underground.
People unironically liking the Chip and Dale movie just proves how powerful of a drug nostalgia is. You don't even need a punchline, just show them things they remember and they'll like it.
Just referencing the names of people who were famous when I was a kid is not funny in and of itself. It is just another exercise in corporate media worship.
I was genuienly surprised that the _overwelming majority_ of people in internet and irl circles I run in say that this movie was good and that this movie was so self-aware. I genuienly thought we were past this type of shit. I thought we all wised up and realized that meTa hUmUR isn't a replacement for quality.
it was the same with ready player one... people love those jangling keys
I only watched a handful of episodes of the show during my lifetime and I still found myself enjoying the movie. I guess I'm just more into the whole animation/meta pop-culture thing than others. Plus, I enjoyed the story as well.
@@geoffreyrichards6079
If you had ANY appreciation for animation, this movie should've been a malicious insult to the medium, BECAUSE IT IS.
It is incredible to me that Who Framed Roger Rabbit, a film from 1988, better executed an extremely technical concept like this.
Two things I would've never watched if you didn't do a watch-a-long.
Is there going to be a highlights video of the watch a long
@@NoConsistency No promises.
@@NoConsistency better be 😠 lol
That does sound enticing.
@@YMSHighlights just the video to watch along with would be enough. Highlights are a ton of work
Self-awareness often implies self-critique. Disney cannot critique itself no matter how "self-aware" it is. Their brand won't allow it.
"Heh heh, Disney princess singing is ridiculous"
[proceeds to sing without a shred of irony]
Those self-aware jokes come off as a thinly veiled attempt to still try to promote them to you. They can laugh about it, but nothing that can't be shrugged off. I'm reminded how it was once said that Kylo Ren was going to be in "Ralph Breaks The Internet" as a cameo until Disney was somehow not happy that he would be portrayed as a spoil child because he was a "villain", which is clearly shorthand for "Stop being so harsh to our product, it's hurting it's marketability". Thin skin that a large majority market share can't handle.
But guys, I ironically robbed that bank and shot three people. Yes I know I spent the money and hid out for eight months, but come on it was just IRONIC! I Didn't REALLY mean it. Irony is doing something unironically then sayings its irony right? Please don't send me to jail. Its just a joke. "IT WAS MY OPINION IT WAS IRONY!"
@@bluespark01 Wow, so ironic that I can't feel my toes. I think I have lead-poisoning.
The singer who sing for character: 😢
Getting real tired of the "it's supposed to be bad lol" excuse people use to justify these obnoxious meta jokes. You can't make fun of how bad Rat Sonic looks when Dale is one of your protagonists and also looks atrocious.
I can kind of respect what Chip n' Dale is trying to do having it be about washed up animated characters adjusting to life after their careers went down the drain but the writing isn't clever enough to do anything with the concept.
Even if it was written well, there's also the issue of Disney being the one making the movie. An idea like this requires genuine commentary on the industry and well...self awareness. And of course Disney isn't going to critique itself in a movie like this. I mean they have a washed up actor who's eerily similar to a real life child star be THE MAIN VILLAIN and from what I've heard an irredeemable villain at that (I refuse to watch this movie idk). The movie reeks of a genuinely critical and compelling story about the entertainment industry trapped behind so much corporate nonsense
I despised the Robert Zemeckis CGI joke because Disney MADE ONE OF THOSE FILMS. They made "A Christmas Carol"! All of the films and styles they criticize for getting reboots AREN'T Disney ones! Mmmm, suspicious.
Also, the evil plan? Really randomly disturbing?! Out of NOWHERE. It worked in Roger Rabbit but it didn't at ALL for this. Listen. Disney. I was JOKING about about basic COP TROPES from a movie I have NOT seen when I said- "Lol what if this randomly became a Silence of the Lambs thing" in the warehouse scene. Disney, didn't have to actually make it- EW- and then make an ACTUAL reference to it- Please. STOP.
Holy shit, hearing about that Chip and Dale movie makes me actaully angry. honestly it really goes to show how Disney in particular does not actually care about the art of animation at all and sees it purely as a means of making a quick buck
That was obvious after that Garry Marshall poultry movie.
That was obvious after that Garry Marshall poultry movie.
The Chip n Dale movie just further cements that there will never ever EVER be a live action/animated movie as good as Who Framed Roger Rabbit
I mean... we COULD... but that would require EFFORT and TALENT and if Disney has taught us anything with the majority of its output the last few years it's that even all the money in the world can't by those, especially if it's not in the interests of your current stock holders and focus groups.
And professionals god sake!!!
And not some AKIVA SCHAFFER
The only one that comes close to matching the execution is that weird Ralph Bakshi one about the dude who bangs a cartoon
@@BlakeGat788 Yes, but far less ambitious, even with all the Bond and Sci-Fi stuff.
@@MichaelHeide Also, as well-animated as it is (especially the Louvre sequence), _Back in Action_ isn’t as iconic as _Space Jam._
My friend saw Chip and Dale at a theatrical release, and their was a talk back with the director afterwards. When asked if he included the similarities between Peter Pan and Bobby Driscoll on purpose, the director sweared he didn’t know about what happened to Bobby Driscoll until AFTER the movie was released. So! This movie is in no way self-aware.
yeah I was thinking he might’ve not known about the whole situation, Akiva has always been a guy who’s shown a lot of respect to others in media, it’s just a shame he found out right after :( you could imagine the guilt he probably felt considering how heartbreaking the situation is.
If he’s telling the truth, you’d think that for a Disney movie like this that would require so many moving parts, that SOMEBODY would’ve brought it up along the way. Either some people in charge did know but they kept silent or they don’t know their own history.
I absolutely HATED Rescue Rangers because of its absolute insistence on self-awareness to the point like it felt like it was making a desperate excuse to be allowed to exist. It was like a really unconfident person whose whole relationship with you is uncomfortably making fun of themselves as a defense mechanism, doing it to themselves before anyone else can. "Everything we're doing here is tasteless, shallow, and profit-focused, but everyone else does it too, and since we're admitting it out loud, that makes it okay!"
“Everybody does it“ is the same excuse Max Devlin used in Hell.
Yeah, I hate how people think a bad joke or doing something bad is suddenly okay as long as yourself self aware or constantly saying "its satire bro"
Self-deprecation is often one big cope
So... if being meta is now unpopular, what now? I mean, we can't really go back to being non-meta anymore, given how the internet has made practically everyone overly self-aware of everything.
@@geoffreyrichards6079 The difference is that the internet is willing to poke fun at themselves and others. Disney straight up insults other animations with zero self awareness, which isn't how meta commentary works.
The Chip being cel-shaded could have been an interesting plot point. What if instead of him never getting a makeover, at one point he actually did try to get a 3d makeover then changed his mind before the process finished? Now he's stuck in this halfway point where he's not fully 2d but doesn't have all the characteristics of 3d. Him calling himself 2d could be him coping with an identity crisis via denial. This is the only interesting excuse for having Chip be also CGI without insulting the audience.
The Disney bootleg plot sounded like a funny idea, but outside of clippable references this movie is an absolute drag. I could go on about why Roger Rabbit will always be the far better execution of a cartoon/human co-existence.
While watching it with friends there were many moments where I wanted to press the skip button and skip forward cuz I kinda knew what tropes they were going for.
Bootleg isn’t really the right term, I think the writers meant “mock buster”.
I feel like the C&D movie completely glossed over the whole "CGI surgery" plot bit, which to me would've been a far more interesting premise to focus on.
Animated characters from the 90's feel compelled to go "3D" in the wake of the new Live Action Disney Movies, being cajolled by bad faith agents and studio execs to reinvent the story for a new generation, and in so doing ruin everything interesting about themselves in service of a soulless corporate product.
...Of course, Disney would never in a million years approve it, but fuck man at least it would be *something*.
back when the trailers came out i thought this was going to be the plot, lol :'y
That’s what got me excited for this movie when I saw the trailer. Such a let down.
Seriously, I'm annoyed they never made that the plot instead of "copyright infringement bad!"
How can anyone who likes animation, be it american cartoons, anime or 3d stuff look at this and go "yep, this is fine"
If you raise someone from birth to eat only vomit, they will grow to enjoy the taste of vomit.
im not a nerd
Because not everyone is pretentious about animation
Idk, I just do. I can't control what I like or don't like, what makes me smile and what doesn't. It made me laugh. It gave me a nice time with my partner.
Wow there are lots of losers innthe comment section. Their going to defend chip and dale to death.
The fact that people are even trying to compare Chip n Dale to Who Framed Roger Rabbit is pretty insulting and infuriating. Like I guess in the most surface level way they are similar but if you actually pay attention to the actual writing and film making at hand, Chip n Dale is a fucking joke. I feel like people only liked the movie because they understood all the references and that made them feel smart. That's the only reason I can think of why someone would like this piece of shit
I liked it because it made me laugh. *shrug* It's not a deep film, but I dunno, I had fun.
I’ve heard it’s better than most people expected, but all the reviews agree you’re pretty much just watching for the references, and a lot of why it’s fun to watch for references is because a decent chunk of them aren’t Disney animation stuff
Wtf lol the movies obviously an imitation of Roger Rabbit, and even has him in it, so why wouldnt people compare them? Calm down a bit, it's just a movie
@@gunluva exactly lol. It wasn't a masterpiece or anything but yeesh. Not everything needs to be groundbreaking. I watched it with my gf and we enjoyed it for what it was, it got a few laughs out of us. Some people are just so anal about film and they look down on people for simply enjoying something
@@inyrui this sentiment is why while I will watch YMS from time to time, I don’t really enjoy Adum as much as I feel I used to. Like a lot of mainstream media is kinda garbage, but most of the time it’s not so garbage it deserves all the cynicism that seems to come up when he reviews mainstream stuff
The Lion King 2019 is supposed to look bad. It's meta-commentary on how Disney doesn't care
THANK YOU! I've been seeing people praise the Chip n Dale film all over tiktok and to me it's just gross. It's not a modern day Rodger Rabbit like everyone is trying to claim, it's crap. If they wanted a modern day Rodger Rabbit /they have the actual funds to do it/. Will they? NO. Because they can be crappy, not bother, and reference 'parodies' to skirt the copyright laws. I'm sick of Disney. I'm tired of them being praised when all they did was reference other BETTER media and then again parody things to bully it...when they didn't even fucking try.
@Compass Rose I agree. This movie literally included characters, EVEN THE CHARACTERS THAT AREN’T OWNED BY DISNEY! They used characters that were owned Dreamworks and Paramount. Disney just put other company’s characters in this movie as if they owned them but they DON’T. It’s like that this movie was only made to exploit nostalgia, they’re not giving people what they really want to see! After everything Disney is doing I can’t even give Disney a chance anymore. Like seriously, I bet Disney doesn’t even care about people’s entertainment nor the animation, all they care about is the money. I can’t give this movie nor Disney any credit anymore… And all of that is just freaking obnoxious and UTTERLY DISGUSTING.
I mean, its TikTok.
Would you be surprised they like garbage?
Why are you on tiktok
why in the ever loving *fuck* would Disney ever want to reference the life of Bobby Driscoll
The Halo show is literally the "John Halo, space marine" joke.
Your mission: remove helmet.
Master Cheeks reporting for booty
Even the worst writing in the show is better than all of the combined writing in any of the bungie games, so that's a huge win I think. The video game fanboys should be applauding
@@amazin7006 Do you have brain dawgs or something?
@@Maddin1313 tf is a brain dawg? do you have brain damage?
I saw something making the case that Halo was originally meant to be the Mass Effect television series before it was hastily reworked for another IP because hey, one sci-fi shooter game is pretty much like any other, right? And I haven't stopped thinking about it, because it explains why the show feels so much like it's had the serial number filed off of it.
That would make a lot of sense. The drama seems like it belongs in mass effect rather than halo.
I saw the same thing too, and when _that moment_ came onscreen, I was like "Wait a minute, this feels like something Shepard would do, not Chief." If true, yeah, that would explain _much_ about the show's odd tone. Halo and Mass Effect are good settings in their own way, but each has a different style and tone. However, as you said, these writing teams cannot tell said difference to save their own lives.
@@jimmyseaver3647 No wonder Master Cheeks has sex. That was probably supposed to be Shepard instead lol
My roommate and I watched Chip & Dale the other night and, while we thought it was fine to start, by the end we both thoroughly despised it.
The biggest thing that irritated both of us was how inconsistent the movie was. For example, the movie clearly characterizes Dale as an overcompinsating narcissist who always wants the spotlight, always wants to be the showoff, always wants to be the center of attention, yet is incredibly dumb and impulsive - causing these actions to blow up in his face. We are SHOWN THIS over, and over, and over throughout the movie. Then, midway through, Dale says he quit the Rescue Rangers show because he "wanted to feel wanted" by Chip. The problem with this is that THE MOVIE CLEARLY SHOWED US CHIP DID. When they had their argument at the beginning of the movie, Chip expressed how hurt and betrayed he felt, brought up how they were always a team, and expressed fear that Dale leaving could potentially cause the show to be canceled with would hurt ALL of them including their other friends. Chip did EXACTLY what Dale was baiting him to do, yet he acted like an unselfaware callus asshole the entire time, actively BRUSHING ASIDE Chip's words - WHICH WERE WHAT DALE WANTED. The WHOLE MOVIE was absolutely FILLED with these contradictions from character development, to the plot, to the world building. With so many conflicting elements, you're sat wondering why ANYTHING is happening.
Here's a few other massive contradictions the movie pulls:
* Peter Pan was fired for going through puberty - as shown by acne and facial hair. A) you have erasers that remove any feature you want, this shouldn't be an issue, B) hand drawn characters can be changed willy nilly - why not just redraw him to be younger? C) we later see one of the lost boys who is STILL A CHILD despite the passage of time. Why did he age but Peter didn't?
* A major threat is the fact that characters can have elements of them erased. This is completely undone by the fact that, by putting his thumb in his mouth and blowing, Chip was able to regrow an ear cut off by the bootleg machine. What are the limits of this? Can toons just mind magic their features back? The movie never tells us.
* Peter Pan gets zapped by the bootleg machine to have a bunch of random parts (let's ignore the fact the BOOTLEG machine gave him features of COPYRIGHTED CHARACTERs) and those parts make him act like the characters those parts are from and that's how Chip and Dale defeat him. However, Chip had his ear accidentally replaced with a Snoopy ear earlier on. He at no point acts like Snoopy (laying down like Snoopy does on his doghouse, chasing the Red Barron, etc).
There are about a billion more I could rattle off.
THIS. MOVIE. BLOWS.
Huh, I never even considered or thought about the stuff you pointed out. Dale is incredibly emotionally manipulative the whole movie, but the writers never realized this at all. This movie was worse than I thought.
JK Simons' voice acting is almost always top tier and stands out.
Guys I think the Chip 'n Dale movie broke him at the end XD
Disney did my boys Chip and Dale dirty.
Almost as much as Space Jam 2 did
That was so YMS video that YMS made wasn't it?
@@mikedacoolnerd788 it's not that bad... and not like it was a huge Hollywood blockbuster. Kind of just a film that appeared randomly out of nowhere on a streaming service that I watched, enjoyed and moved on. Much like the Rangers cartoons themselves, haha. I always preferred the old Donald Chip n' Dale anyway.
Chip and Dale 2022 SUCKS video when?
Seeing how Chip and Dale turned out makes me so much more appreciative of Disney's own "Wreck-It Ralph" which could have easily have devolved into the same nonsense of putting references and meta jokes above the characters. There was a time many were hoping it was gonna be the "Roger Rabbit" of video game films and now, at least personally, I really appreciate those references didn't drag the story down and at the end of the day, you remember it's about Ralph and his journey of self-reflection above all. It really is telling how Ugly Sonic is getting more traction about the film than the actual content about the titular characters and show.
I agree, roger rabbit and wreck-it ralph are in abt the same league of "crossover films" bc they understand the movie should be abt their own characters, story etc. while references are to add to the setting and comedy. sadly ralph breaks the internet leaned into the "look at all the stuff disney owns, tho!!" angle.
this movie could've worked too ig they just were rlly dependent on the references to existing properties
Wreck-It Ralph was mostly references, and even that was enough for me to shut it off before the 15 minute mark. Disney is a joke of a company, and yet, also holds a large share of the entertainment world.
Mass appeal entertainment is the death of art. Only recognizable or established IPs are given any marketing budget because it's about making more money.
The Northman is arguably the best movie I've seen in at least a year and it struggled to make back its budget ($60 million) after a month and a half... but Spiderman: The Nostalgia Movie makes a billion $$ in a week, and that movie is literally just references and stale Disney approved humour.
Too bad the sequel exists
@@shawklan27 That's why I just mentioned the first film and not the second. Sad to say, but it doesn't hold up nearly as well.
@@heavydfunk At least the first movie focuses on the characters and story for most of the time.
The sequel however... No. Just. No.
But Roger rabbit is leagues above these two anyways.
People comparing this to Roger Rabbit clearly have no fucking eyes or just reduce the movie to "cartoons and live action together".
The amount of effort done in Roger Rabbit to blend the footage together, the coordination of props and actors and the animators having to work around that as well, the intricate detail of something like Judge Doom holding Roger's neck or the sink scene or so much of the finale is so impressive.
And it saddens me that people are buying into this. People are literally just becoming okay with references and colors as a selling point. It's insulting to the medium.
Not just eyes, they're like the Scarecrow from Wizard of Oz, they haven't got 🧠.
Not to mention that the majority of the 2D animation is puppeted anyway, because nobody can be arsed to do frame-by-frame animation anymore (at least not high quality)
@@Chiwowza What's wrong with puppet animation? I think it's great when done right.
I think the reason people are drawing the similarities to "Roger Rabbit" is that it's the closest to its general premise. The rest are either "Space Jam", "Back in Action" or the "Rocky and Bullwinkle" film - films that also don't match the caliber set by "Roger Rabbit".
And to be fair, "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" was also stuffed full of references and cameos that didn't add anything. I mean, the only famous cameo that contributed to the film's plot was Betty Boop, showing that Eddie still had a soft spot for Toons despite his prejudice. The rest were only there to make the audience point and go "I know them". If people don't mind it there, it shouldn't be a problem here.
@@goosegas2087
BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IT ISN'T DONE RIGHT 99 PERCENT OF THE TIME!
I got bribed into watching Chip n' Dale with the promise of free food and the food wasn't worth the slog of having to sit through this heartless production. You take out all the "jokes" and self-referential shit, and there is barely any character in a movie filled with characters! There are parts where I was out loud asking my friends "Are we supposed to be taking this seriously?"
"This film has interesting plot"- Patric star
I don't think you are supposed to take it seriously to be fair.
The worst part about the whole thing with the Bobby Driscoll thing is that in an early draft the antagonist was going to be Pluto, which means that somebody down at Disney went "Hey! You know what we should do? Base our antagonist off of an actor that this company used and then threw away because he hit puberty, who then died at a young age from drug abuse because he couldn't find work." and I hope whoever made that choice goes to Hell no matter what.
That's it guys, after Kimba and 2019 Lion King Adum has snapped and I'm loving it.
I snapped first after Disney unrestored *Bedknobs and Broomsticks.*
Seeing so much positive reception for the new chip and dale movie was melting my brain. I needed this.
@@Mattcai2004 why? For me it felt of luck self awareness and lack of care for quality!
@@Mattcai2004 The movie was hypocritical and lacked care or polish.
Oh god if Chip 'n Dale does well enough we might see a whole wave of "I got the reference and I clapped" movies.
Seeing how there's a lotta idiots in them comments defending the movie... Yeah.
Unless they're trolling, then they're just a waste of life
We did? Its called the star wars sequel trilogy
Ready Player One, Space Jam 2, Ralph Breaks The Internet, Free Guy...
@@benedictcucumberbatch4447 🤣🤣🤣 yeahhh okay
We've been on this wave for at least half a decade.
It's so annoying that disney bought everything, just so they could brag about owning it and not do anything else with it.
I'm more annoyed that more and more Disney movies are trying to be meta versions of themselves like they're better than the stuff that the company used to make in the past.
Jesus christ - Disney's treating the stuff the bought the same way crypto bros treat NFTs. 😶
I knew people would say this, but it’s wrong because Disney owns very little of the characters they represent in this film. So of all the other flaws it has, there’s very little “bragging of properties” in this movie.
I CLAPPED WHEN I SAW THE THING I RECOGNIZED!!!
Seriously though, I was waiting for this YMS review because I knew everyone that was giving Chip and Dale good reviews were just doing that on the meta and reference "humor". I was surprised Adam didn't get more upset at the fact that Disney dared to put Rodger Rabbit in this movie, as if Disney thought this movie could even compare to Who Framed Rodger Rabbit.
I felt so alone for not enjoying that chip and dale film._. The acting and pacing were the worst things I've ever seen...
Chip and Dale is disney’s take on Disaster Movie
Bad writers have learned that they can reskin their original stories as adaptations, sequels, and reboots to get their projects blindly greenlit by people unfamiliar with the original IPs. It happened with Star Trek, it happened with Halo, and it's going to happen with Lord of the Rings later this year.
Chip & Dale is actually another example. If you watch the movie you can tell the plot is so barebones and substanceless that there is nothing in it that screams Chip n Dale. I mean they're literally not their characters from Rescue Rangers, they're actors who played the characters. That could be fine if you made them characters in their own right but again the actual writing is so NOTHING that it's clear it was only greenlit because Disney ad revenue
I couldn't believe so many people were giving ANY credit to the Chip 'n Dale movie. Thank you and the comments for giving me hope in the world.
Having a character call out in universe a bad joke or an exhausted trope is the comedy equivalent of saying something like "I'm not racist, but..."
Hell, Nickelodeon Jr. Studios just sounds really weird in my head - like, just call it *NICK JR! YOU PAID FOR NICKELODEON CHARACTERS, WHAT, LIKE, YOU CAN'T SCAR KIDS MORE THAN YOU ALREADY DID WITH THE PLOT!?*
That Indiana Jones "reference" in Chip n Dale is the first time I've said "Oh fuck off!" at a movie in a while.
By the very end of the movie, I actually screamed with rage at the Hannibal joke.
This movie for Russian population is gone nutz in the Rage !!!
@@heropath34.vaselisc.35 I hope that Gadget cult gets so pissed they fly over here and kick the writers ass.
"I don't know if they were trying to comment on the original voice actor of Peter Pan--" Nothing can convince me that it wasn't at all an intentional "dig" (if you can even ca it that) at what happened to him. If it's supposed to be a sort of "dedication", like, "look at what Disney did to this poor child actor! Weren't they SO scummy to do that?!" despite the fact that they used some poor guy's misfortune to create some shitty, generic villain years later is so back-handed and insulting. What a way to present a man's debilitating and heartbreaking legacy.
(And if you still aren't convinced that it's actually supposed to be commentary on Driscoll; the fact that they included a shot of a younger Peter Pan lamenting his acne, which was the begining to the end of Driscoll's Disney career, the fact that he ends up as a washed up, belligerent alcoholic? The fact that he had a hard time getting roles after the fact? There's no excuse.)
Who would have thought a billion dollar company would be shitty.
I'll have you know I'm personally friends with Mickey rat and he said all of Disney's practices are 100% ethical
THEY LITERALLY IN ALL Sense MASACARED BOY LIKE VOICE ACTOR AND CHARACTER!!! AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
I feel like Halo would have been best as an anthology. That way, you can have less action-oriented episodes (ONI stuff or scientists researching the Covenant) or episodes focused around the Insurrection (Kwan Ha, Soren) without breaking the overall flow of the series. If an individual episode in an anthology is bad, it doesn't necessarily detract from the other compartmentalized episodes, but as it stands now, a bad episode in the Halo TV show sours all the others since the series is oriented around an overarching plot line.
I liked most of the show, even as a fairly hardcore Halo fan, but there are a few really bad episodes and it is a bummer that they're kind of inseparable from the rest of the show. I'm not sure that it would've been better as an anthology, but it certainly would've been better if they had written swaths of it to actually be good.
They could have even just lifted some of the short stories from 'Halo: Evolutions' 1:1 for TV and it would have been fine. The Mona Lisa, Dirt, Headhunters and more are perfect for a 1 hour adaptations, and Headhunters specifically might even *benefit* from being shown rather than told via a novel.
@@sagewaterdragon Even the worst writing in the show is better than all of the combined writing in any of the bungie games, so that's a huge win I think. The video game fanboys should be applauding
Should have been a show about the ODST.
@@amazin7006 I see you're not familiar with the Marathon trilogy.
I thought I would like Chip n Dale but ended up hating it with a passion. I’m shocked by the positive reception it’s been getting.
Bots and paid shills
13:00 if only disney had the balls to also include Seth Rogen's sausage character from sausage party
The Halsey clone is actually bungie cannon, every smart (and maybe dumb?) AI is made from a person's brain in Halo, and it's typically people donating their body to science. Halsey wanted some smart AI based on herself because reasons, and the clone thing did happen. However the detail they got wrong is that they only made clones of Halsey's brain, via stem cells i guess, and not full sentient people. They had to make a dozen brains before one was successful and that one was cortana, not just poof a person into existence to delete them.
An attempt was made, I guess.
It was definitely only done just to show how evil Halsey is in this show which is dumb cause she is evil in the just not really caring about people not the I wanna basically make robot slaves thing this shows starts pulling
Idk about dumb AIs. I thought they were made as traditional AIs, via computer codes
The mental breakdown at the end really brought it all together 6/10
But Adam how can you not like Chip n Dale I personally jumped up and down and spit and clapped and clicked my heels together in joy when I saw ugly sonic (I know what that is!)
he's just mad there was no Synecdoche, New York reference
These "reference = humor" movies feel like we're getting Friedberg&Seltzer aftershocks.
This and Spacejam 2 are basically Friedberg and Seltzer movies but without the early 2000s sex humour and with legal permission to use the characters.
Disgraceful
Finally, an honest and fair review of Chip 'n Dale.
@KittyLover Aaliyah 2 they are patting themselves on the back for getting the references.
@KittyLover Aaliyah 2 sonic funny laughed. Remember when we bullied a company into going extinct? L. M. A. O. X. D. !!!!