Sorry for the interruption, but we'd really appreciate it if you watched some of our videos!
All videos are written, performed, and edited by the Agony Booth staff, so they're just like the
recaps you know and love, only without all that annoying reading!
1/14/2013 3:19:19 AM
I wouldn't as far to say Drake Bell killed Spider-Man, but he didn't do the character justice.
1/17/2013 12:01:48 AM
It was more or less a joke... though as a whole I'm not crazy :)
12/18/2012 12:52:30 AM
I was something of a fan of the show in its first few seasons - as you say, it revelled in its sheer loopy imagination and freedom to do things that live-action couldn't usually do. Timmy's Dad, in particular, was an inspired comedy character (and by the way, the chap who voices him also voices Cosmo, which may be why Jason Alexander got the gig - to prevent an awkward dual role). But, once Poof (as you point out, not totally hateful but supremely pointless) was introduced, and once Hartmann set up Billionfold Inc, the whole show just became ever more tired and self-satisified, coasting on past glories. Given how profoundly "meh" Billionfold's Tuff Puppy has turned out to be, it sadly seems that the mediocrity is here to stay. On a sidenote, I really don't like the CGI Cosmo, Wanda and Poof. It's a mix of "uncanny valley" with just-plain-doesn't-work, as even the earlier Jimmy Neutron crossovers showed.
12/18/2012 3:04:21 AM
I agree, its always weird seeing them in CG but I kind of accept it. I guess since I liked the Jimmy-Timmy Power Hours I didn't mind it so much. Then it's also a compare and contrast to CG made-for-tv models like Scooby Doo: Curse of the Lake Monster that makes it look passable.Also, my biggest problem with being a "fan" of the show was a personal bias I had. For me growing up, I expected it to be my replacement for "Dexters Lab." For me, I found that Butch Hartman played a big role with creating the look of the characters as well as Genndy Tartakovsky. However the humor and tone is apples to oranges, which is why I still favor Dexter over The Fairly Oddparents!
12/17/2012 10:30:25 PM
That´s DANIELLA MONET as the girlfriend. She´s hilarious.The only thing worth watching about VICTORIOUS. (Well, Ariana Grande isn´t bad either. Or Leon Thomas. Or Matt Bennet.)Anyway, always nice seeing Monet getting work.
12/17/2012 11:06:15 PM
I know, but she reminded me of Noomi Rapace (aka the person I confused Rooney Mara for :P).
12/17/2012 8:00:39 AM
Drake doing this. While Josh is getting trap in A.T.M.s and fighting Russians. Funny contrast:).
12/17/2012 3:37:42 PM
The way I see it, Drake Bell is to Kel Mitchell what Josh Peck was to Keenan Thompson... :P
1/17/2013 4:48:32 AM
Dude....this statement blew my mind. It's so obvious.
12/16/2012 6:32:53 PM
This review reminds me a bit about your Popeye movie discussion a couple weeks back. It seems like directors are always trying to make live action adaptations of cartoons that aren't really suited to it (i.e. The Grinch, Cat In The Hat, Garfield etc.). Is it because it is a bad idea overall or is it simply the execution? Are there any good live adaptations?Where Popeye is concerned, I remember seeing it when I was a kid (a double feature with Airplane. Oh, if my parents had only known what they were getting into. To this day I don't think they air the joke where the ten year old white girl says she takes her coffee black; like her men.) and thought it did not suck but to this day is it regarded largely as a, I dunno, a curiosity?
12/16/2012 9:12:58 PM
Yeah Thomas, that's a good point. Why is it that the cartoons the studios choose for live action at best doesn't compare to their animated counterpoint. Hell, even some properties that should work as LA (like Masters of the Universe anymore) just fail completely. I dunno, but I would love to find out.
12/16/2012 10:09:51 PM
To me, turning a cartoon into live action setting restricts what animation aims to do; make unimaginable things happen. Just think of cartoon physics, aka no physics! In live action, things fall, bounce, etc. in ways that it's supposed to move and not how we want it to move.I think Ted is a good adaptation of "insert seth macfarlane show here." Mainly because his shows have characters that work better in live action as opposed to animation... but that's just me :)
12/17/2012 12:14:25 AM
That is pretty close to the answer Joe. If not the answer, a damn big factor.
12/17/2012 7:11:29 AM
There are a ton of cartoon properties that would look great as live action movies, that also have nostalgic memories. Pirates of Dark Water, MASK, Centurions, Jem, Gargoyles (If that movie was directed by Guillermo del Toro in a Hellboy style, it would be amazing), etc. So yeah, the decisions they make about what cartoon properties to adapt is puzzling. I bet we'd get a Calvin and Hobbes live action movie before a Wonder Woman movie though.
12/17/2012 7:46:46 AM
I wouldn't count on the nostalgia factor too much if I were you; they made Josie & The Pussycats into a live action movie and I don't think anyone showed. :)Now if Gargoyles were in the right hands that movie would rock. It was one of the best television series ever made. Not just cartoon series: television series.
12/17/2012 8:21:34 AM
Josie and the Pussycats tied into a different generation, the 70s. 80s are still a lot more fondly remembered, at least in my opinion in my generation than the 70s for the baby boomers. The best way for a Gargoyles movie to work would be to condense the story (and I agree it was one of the best TV series of all time) into the key plot points or maybe make it a trilogy. Even though the voice actors for that are well known, finding different actors to play Goliath, Demona, Brooklyn, Hudson and the rest would be a better option. Also, practical effects for the Gargoyles would be better than CGI, and with a talented director I'm sure it would be a very good movie.
12/17/2012 3:48:28 PM
I would love to see a Gargoyles movie! I may be in the minority of people that would like to see motion-capture as opposed to men in costumes. I think a plasticine mask would take away a lot of expressions for characters like Brooklyn and Lexington whose faces are full of it. When I look at character animation on Gollum or Ceasar from Planet of the Apes; I think it's worth seeing the Gargoyles worked on by WETA.Also, the shows you mentioned above always worked more like live action shows in their present form. They always seemed like shows executives made into cartoons due to costs and such (coming from an ungrateful 90s' kid). I mean, the majority of the casts of those shows were humans doing human things. The only thing that lends itself to being animated are the special effects, monsters and backdrops.Let's be honest, if someone would tell you years before that there's going to be a movie; we would imagine live action being the suitable medium.
12/17/2012 4:07:18 PM
Well there's been some life action adaptations that went down pretty well hasn't there? Teenage Mutant ninja turtles seems to be a very beloved movie all the way up till this day. urhh...... okay i'm out. Honestly the way I see it.. animation is animation! and when a animations show is really good it's part of its very identification that it's animation and takes place in another univers which plays on other rules, the animation rules it sat up, which wont work in a real world. Samurai Jack! a show which lifes and breaths because of the way it uses animation as a medium! if you got a prober director wanting to play with visuels and so on... it could be an interesting movie, but it wouldn't be the same! it would be an entirely new thing merely based on some-thing else, it can't be the same, and that's some-thing I think needs acknowledgement when you adapt. Don't try to make your movie as faithful as possible.. make your movie be its own standing movie as good as you can. And if you are a fan and want the movie to be a tribute to that fandomn, all the more power to ya, that's how you make the fans happy to, but it'll still just be a new interpretation. I do also believe, any-thing can make a good movie, if you are smart about it! You don't have to stick nazi like to source material, be free! be free! Avatar the Last airbender, that had the potential to be a fantastic movie! if the movie had been what that teaster trailer had promised! That teaser trailer, with all the fire nation boats.. which was created especially to be a teaser trailer, which means that amazing shot that left me in awe at cinema WASN'T EVEN IN THE MOVIE! .... i'm okay i'm okay. Thing is, could have been a great movie if you had been smart and re-written it into a solid three-act story arch to start off a franchise and made beautiful fight sequences.. but it isn't, it's a dumb movie! Why? Because it took a great idea and turned it into a dumb script plus took a fighting style with endless of visual oppertunities and made it boring. Just.. get good movie folks to make your movie, then it will be at least on some level entertaining
12/17/2012 4:22:25 PM
I did mention that animation is a medium that can be used to create unimaginable things 5 comments above in this thread. :)I'm in full favor to artistic licensing over being faithful to the source material, but only if it adds to the flavor of the story. This is why I'm not worried about the new superman movie as other people are.
12/18/2012 11:36:39 AM
Oh I am looking so much forward to that one.. mostly because I am in a complete blank, some-how I just know that I am either going to love it or hate it, but I don't know which one it is! So yeah, going into a movie, not even knowing or having any idea. That's going to be fun! Movies I think I am going to love next year; Iron Man 3, Pacific Rim, The Hobbit 2, kick ass 2, the worlds end, thor 2. Movies I think will dissapoint next year; Monsters inc 2, the lone ranger, the hunger games 2. Movies I just don't know about yet!; Oz the great and powerful, Evil dead, Star Trek 2, Sin City 2 aaaand Superman man of steel. I could be wrong about any of these movies, these are just me premunistions. But yeah, Superman man of steel, definetely in the gray area zone, which is kind of the most interesting zone to me, because it could so very well ge either way there!
12/16/2012 1:05:55 AM
The "Rooney Mara's younger sister" joke went over my head... You showed a picture of Noomi Rapace who played the same role as Mara in the original "Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" film which I assumed was an intentional joke (pretending to get them mixed up), but what was the connection to the actress in this Fairly Odd Parents movie? Not asking to be critical, only because I am puzzled and want to get this joke!
12/16/2012 2:02:20 AM
I thought Tootie looked like a younger Noomi Rapace, who I confused for Rooney Mara. Hope that clears things out :)
12/16/2012 2:23:32 AM
Yes! I feel internally purged! Thanks.
12/16/2012 2:38:55 AM
You're welcome :D
12/16/2012 2:33:06 AM
wait wait wait.....THAT was Tootie? Da hells? This LA movie was we-i-rd.
12/16/2012 2:42:13 AM
I know, it's ten levels of "unnecessary" and "baffling" at once!
Popular Right Now
All articles posted to the agony booth are the sole property of the author(s). Please do not copy/reproduce entire articles without permission. Screencaps from movies and TV shows are used for non-profit, fair use purposes of parody and commentary.
Star Trek and all related images and trademarks are the property of CBS Studios, Inc.
Reviewer icon artwork provided by Tai Porto, Aaron “McKnackus” Rivera, and Magdalen O’Reilly.