What's this? Another Garfield movie?? Oh geez, well I guess this should be better seeing as it's an animated flick. Oh wait it's CGI, so that's a no then. Yep, if you're looking for a generic kid's movie to simply plop your little spawns in front of for a few hours then voila! This will definitely do the job, and if you're up for some torture you could watch it with them.
So in the most generic move you could possibly make Garfield discovers his lost long dad (Vic, Vic?? what kind of name is that for a cat?) and has to work with him in order to steal some milk for another fat female cat (Jinx) who is trying to blackmail Garfield's dad. You see long ago, Garfield's dad accidentally got Jinx locked up in the cat pound so she wants revenge (ugh!). So Garfield, Odie, Vic, and another generic animal character (a bull), must break into a farm/factory to steal a load of milk blah blah blah who cares.
Seriously, how generic can something be? This was the most genericy generic waste of time and money I've seen in years, and I only watched it because I do like Garfield as a character. Yes the CGI is fine, it's nothing special but it absolutely does the generic job. They did try to emulate the style of Jim Davis but it isn't really overly obvious and merely comes across as bog standard CGI toon guff. They also crowbarred in a small section showcasing some classic Davis comic strip antics but unless you've read the actual comic strip you wouldn't know and it isn't important to the movie anyway.
The whole 'Mission: Impossible' spy aspect is also such a tired genre to spin these days. Writer 1: What can we do in the middle of this movie to make it more exciting? Espionage spin? Everyone likes that right? Writer 2: Perfect! Writer 1: Hey, we could get Ving Rhames and make him a character that's just like his character from the actual M:I movies? Writer 2: Genius!!
All the non-Davis universe characters created solely for this movie are bland and boring, although the other cat designs did fit in nicely with the Davis style. But why not include or base the story around Nermal? Or Binky? Or Liz? Or Jon's family? And the voice-casting decisions were atrocious! Have these Hollywood types not heard of shows like 'The Simpsons'? The best voice actors for gigs like this are NOT big Hollywood stars. The casting of people like Samuel L. Jackson and Snoop Dog etc...just makes me wanna roll my eyes out of my head. Don't even get me started on the casting of Chris Pratt, this guy is in the dictionary under generic Hollywood star. So Garfield and Mario sound like Chris Pratt, who would have thought it (UGH!!!!).
And here's another thing that bugs me about certain flicks like this, off-the-wall absurdity. Take a classic CGI animated flick like 'Toy Story'. Yes the characters are unrealistic and yes the idea is fantastical, but the situations, or moments of adventure, are generally relatively grounded or potentially possible in terms of physics. When Woody and Buzz chase Andy's car on the back of RC (a battery operated buggy), yes of course its all high fantasy but the actual idea behind it works. Action figure toys riding on the back of a remote control buggy at speed? You could actually do that with real toys. Folks of a certain age could probably relate to doing things like that with their toys. But in this Garfield movie, all the action is just insane nonsense.
We already know how awesome animated Garfield projects can be from the classic TV specials, so it amazes me that in the present day they just can't get anything right. Yeah the kids will probably like it and that's the main objective I guess. But to any older folk who might be curious because they grew up with Garfield, watch out! This couldn't be more safe and generic if they tried. The only way they could have achieved that would be making the plot about Garfield losing Pooky and going off on some over-the-top adventure to find him (there's your sequel).
3/10
No comments:
Post a Comment