Page 10 of 14
Posted: Sun Apr 04, 2004 5:24 pm
by Squirrel
Jake Lipson wrote:Anyone else notice the brief aspect ratio switch to 2.35:1 for just Buck's fantasy? Hope this is kept intact on DVD, but they shouldn't need two transfers like BB because it only lasts a few minutes at most. Just tell the famalies to bear with it, Disney.
Yeah, I noticed that. It was a neat touch ...
I just saw it (for the second time), and I liked it more this time. It was fun, the animation colorful, and Alan Menken's score is a perfect fit. My favorite character is Lucky Jack (will have to get that plush, next time I go to Disney Store!). Fast-paced and entertaining. And I liked all the farm animals, coming from a farm myself.
Though, for me, it's not as good as Lilo & Stitch, or Brother Bear (or Fantasia 2000), as far as other Disneys of this decade go ... it's still good. Yeah, still good (as Stitch would say).
Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2004 10:07 am
by Joshua Clinard
From a Box Office point of view this movie did much better than Brother Bear. Home on the Range made 14 million opening weekend. Brother Bear didn't even make a million. We'll see how much staying power. For comparison, Lilo and Stitch made 35 million opening weekend.
Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2004 10:13 am
by PublicEnemy#1
Joshua Clinard wrote:From a Box Office point of view this movie did much better than Brother Bear. Home on the Range made 14 million opening weekend. Brother Bear didn't even make a million. We'll see how much staying power. For comparison, Lilo and Stitch made 35 million opening weekend.
Brother Bear made less than a million because it was in 2 theatres.
It made 18 million the next weekend in 2 days, pretty good. I was going to see Home On The Range but instead we saw Hellboy (which was a great movie).
Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2004 10:21 am
by quiden
Jack wrote:I honestly think the reason for the PG rating was just the slapstick violence.
I agree with that. My wife and I took our girls (4 & 5) to go see it on Friday and they absolutely loved it. I was actually watching it and thinking, "it's rated PG for burping?" but I honestly think that the violence in Tarzan was worse than this one because it was more realistic. This was done in such a funny way. I don't think that it was PG because of the bulls because I thought that the amorous bears in Brother Bear were just as bad or worse, plus the comment of "get a cave".
Ultimately I have to agree with whoever said that the MPAA is a little out of whack. I don't think it deserved a PG rating.
Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2004 11:55 am
by Joshua Clinard
Actually, it made 19 million the next weekend. It kind of sucks that Home made even less than Brother Bear. I am hoping that this movie will make a lot more than Disney expects it to, and that it would prompt them to change their mind and not stop making traditional animated movies.
Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2004 2:52 pm
by goofystitch
Well, now that people have seen it, it is up to everybody to spread the word of mouth, one of the greatest forms of advertising. Parents waiting with other parents to pick their kids up from school can tell them how good it was. Tell your co-workers with kids. Tell anybody who will listen. If you liked the movie, tell people.
Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2004 3:09 pm
by goofystitch
quiden Wrote:
Ultimately I have to agree with whoever said that the MPAA is a little out of whack. I don't think it deserved a PG rating.
That was me who said that. Ebert and Ropert are furious with the MPAA. I read in Entertainment Weekley that two films coming out this summer where unreasonably given a NC-17 rating. One of the films stars Ewen McGregor and the studio, 20th Century Fox, decided that the sex scene in which only breasts are shown wasn't bad enough to be edited out, even though it was the reason for the rating. I guess critics are upset about this as well, saying that this should be R and not NC-17. I am sorry that I don't remember the name of the film.
Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2004 3:14 pm
by 2099net
goofystitch wrote:One of the films stars Ewen McGregor and the studio, 20th Century Fox, decided that the sex scene in which only breasts are shown wasn't bad enough to be edited out, even though it was the reason for the rating. I guess critics are upset about this as well, saying that this should be R and not NC-17. I am sorry that I don't remember the name of the film.
It's Young Adam, and it's a lot more explicit than that (at least the UK release is - perhaps it was already edited down for the US market?). Sadly, it's not much of a film either. It starts well then ends up being a whole series of meaningful glances and long silences. We've still got about 1/2 hour to see, but unless there's a really good ending it's very disappointing.
Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2004 3:21 pm
by goofystitch
Thanks for the info, 2099net. I only know what I have read, but from what you say, it sounds like it deserved it's rating. Entertainment Weekly sounded like it wasn't that bad, so it must be edited here.
Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2004 7:51 am
by mitch_evers
Just a thought, but is there a McDonald's tie-in with this one?
You've seen the film, now eat the burger!
Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2004 9:51 am
by Jack
mitch_evers wrote:Just a thought, but is there a McDonald's tie-in with this one?
You've seen the film, now eat the burger!
There's no McDonalds tie-in if you're referring to toys. However, the burgers are made from Maggie, Mrs. Calloway, and Grace, so in a way, there is one.
Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2004 4:54 am
by 2099net
from IMDB.com
Discouraging Words About 'Home'
Home on the Range may have seemed like a firing range to some Disney studio executives after weekend box-office returns showed that the $100-million animated feature had grossed only $13.9 million in its first week, putting it in fourth place behind the second week of Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed. Today's (Tuesday) Los Angeles Times indicated that the studio may be forced to take a write-down on the film and quoted analyst Jordan Rohan of Schwab SoundView as describing the performance as "very disappointing." The result also increases the pressure on CEO Michael Eisner and his cohorts, who have promised prodigious earnings growth this year. Two other recent Disney releases, Hidalgo and The Ladykillers, also showed mediocre returns. However, several other analysts have observed that other animated features from Disney have opened poorly in the past but have gone on to become profitable -- largely as a result of strong home video sales and overseas performance
See this is why I think the actual "story" is, initially at least, unimportant. At the opening weekend, nobody knows what the story or the characters are like. They just go, or don't go, based on a general feeling about the film.
I mean Scooby Doo 2 did OK (not as well as the first, thank goodness) but can anybody here say, in all honestly, Scooby Doo 2 has a better story than HotR? Does Scooby Doo 2 have better characters? (Not if they've butchered them like in the first film...)
Like it are not, the story of Home on the Range has very little to do with the opening weekend takings. The fact that it's 2D does have something to do with it. The big test is how well Chicken Little does for it's opening weekend.
Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2004 5:05 am
by Matty-Mouse
Again James you've hit the nail on the head with this one.
Hopefully HOTR should do quite well over the easter since there's no other animated movie for it to compete.
Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2004 9:49 am
by Jack
Netty, I have to say that you've really gotten to agree with you on the matter of the public preferring CGI over traditional animation. Initially, I thought it was just the stories, but after watching the performances in 2003, and now HOTR, I agree - the public is definately not drawn to hand-as drawn features anymore, regardless of their content. That's too bad.
Still, it's too early to write off HOTR. They mentioned that DVD sales and overseas gross could make it more profitable, but I'd say it still has juice to go in domestic theaters. It seems the reaction is quite good, and I think it'll have strong legs. It might make more than Disney is expecting. It can gross anywhere between $50-$70 million.
Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2004 4:54 pm
by MickeyMousePal
I just saw Disney's Home on the Range. I thought it was all right it was a comedy with action. It reminded me of Disney's Emperor's New Groove, because Maggie and Mrs. Calloway always didn't get along with each other. Maggie and Mrs. Calloway are very smart cows but let their intelligent get in the way of not agreeing. Grace is the funniest cow and is also not so smart. Buck is the kind of character you love or you hate because, of his attitude.
Alameda Slim and Rico are the evil villains and one of them pretended to be a good guy. I really like to see Slim's nephews they were so dumb and funny. The songs were ok not that good. This movie should had made more money I guess people thought if they watch it they might get mad cow disease. I really enjoyed this movie it's better since Disney had Atlantis: The Lost Empire and Treasure Planet.
I really thought the little pigs; the jackrabbit and chicks were so cute and silly.
If you haven't seen Home on the Range I recommend you to watch it.
You will enjoy it.
Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2004 10:47 pm
by JaYDiSNeY
i saw this movie 2nite....I LOVED IT...it was very comedic and thats what i needed....very enjoyable
Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2004 8:05 am
by goofystitch
I made my whole family of five go see it last night. They all loved it, and I thought it was even better the second time. I even spotted a hidden Mickey. I don't remember where in the film it is, but keep looking at the sunsets. There is a time where clouds cover the top of the sun and the top of the clouds form two small balls, creating a perfect hidden Mickey. I also noticed a cameo by a character from "Fantasia 2000." To tell you where he is, I have to spoil the movie, so I will white it: When Rico meets up with three men after Slim steals the cows and sings his yodel song, look closely at the black man. He was in the segment of "Fantasia 2000" where all of the people are miserable in New York. The same scene with the cute little girl who wants to play and the man who's wife is the boss. I also remembered another "Seinfeld" reference. The chicken is voiced by George Castanza's mom. And all of the "Batman" fans out there will recognize a line said by the Jocker in the first film. "You wanna get nuts? Let's get nuts!"
Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2004 9:48 pm
by Joe Carioca
I'm shocked!!
According to the Box Office Mojo predictions, "Home on the Range" was #1 at the box office last Monday!!
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/daily/char ... -12&p=.htm
Maybe this film will have legs after all!
Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2004 9:11 am
by Jack
It'll have some legs, but not as good as you may think. The reason for the good monday (not just for HOTR, but for other films) is because some schools have off that day for Easter.
Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2004 4:35 pm
by Joe Carioca
