web
counter
 

Three Demo-Friendly Children Offer Mini-Reviews of Happy Feet Two

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Film Reviews | Comments (22)



Happy-Feet2-krill.jpg

Typically, I don’t see children’s films. I can watch Adam Sandler and Tyler Perry movies all year long with few lasting scars, but I don’t have the patience for family flicks. (God bless Agent Bedhead, who normally covers them. I have no idea how she musters the energy to sit through one after another after another). In the limited experience I have with kid’s films outside of the Pixar universe, I find them to be insufferably selfish: They try to hard to please adults without giving concern to the target audience, and I feel like if you’re going to make a movie for children then make a goddamn movie for children. not a movie that panders to adults with lame pop culture references that either go over the child’s head or, worse, that the parent has to attempt to explain during the course of the film. It’s one thing if you can work them seamlessly into the plot, as Pixar does, and as the first two Shrek movies managed, but, more often than not, we take our children — and I’m speaking of those under the age of 10 — to the movies for their sake, not ours. We’re going to suffer whether you play a shitty 90’s pop song or not, so you may as well make it as enjoyable for the kids as possible.

It’d also be nice if studios were thoughtful about their audience, as well. Happy Feet Two is certainly more palatable than the original one (which was decent, if not heavy handed with an environmental message that went over most kids’ heads, although the foreboding tone did not). However, there was a “Sylvester and Tweety” short before Happy Feet Two that was exceedingly violent, and while I’m all about exposing my kid to the horror classics at an appropriate age, four years old is not that age. To a young child, there’s not a huge difference between real violence and cartoon violence; in the end, someone still gets their guts filleted, and most kids have more sympathy for a cartoon cat than a real person anyway, so it’s even more unsettling. I understand that 50 percent of America’s four years old are already desensitized to onscreen violence, but those of us who haven’t exposed our preschoolers to the Final Destination series already chose Happy Feet instead of Sociopath Cat and Sadistic Bird exactly because we didn’t want them to grow up to serial killers

That is to say: If you decide to take your younger children to see Happy Feet Two, go in late. After the “Sylvester and Tweety” short and after the trailers for half a dozen other films you plan to keep your children away from because you’re a decent goddamn parent. (Please excuse the tone; when it comes to parenting, I’m a humorless prude, particularly where entertainment options are concerned. I know firsthand what early exposure to sex and violence can do to a child, and growing up to be a two-bit online movie critic will not pay my goddamn nursing home bills.)

And how was the film? The three kids I saw it with — 4, 7, and 9 — liked it well enough (the parents were mostly bored, but again, who gives a shit about the parents where a movie targeted at children is concerned?) What this movie had over the original — and the big crowd-pleaser — was a B-plot concerning two krill, voiced by Brad Pitt and Matt Damon. They were both fantastic, easily the highlight of the films for both the parents and the kids. The rest of it? Robin Williams was grating (and not particularly memorable), the A-plot languished, the musical numbers were lackluster (save for the rousing “Under Pressure” finale), and the supporting characters weren’t very engaging with the exception of Sven, a puffin voiced by Hank Azaria who was a big hit with the kids. The great thing about kids, however, is that — at the end of it — they don’t remember the dull parts. Mostly, they remember the highlights (or the scary parts). So, if you want to take your kids to see Happy Feet Two, the reviews you’re likely to trust the most come from other kids, so I’ve collected three below, from my son and the two girls of friends of mine who came along. As you can see, though they were a minor part of the film, the krill were scene stealing highlights (I will note, too, that the brilliant 7 and 9-year-old girls typed their reviews themselves):


“The krill live in the Antarctic, and I know that krills live in the Antarctic because penguins live in the Antarctic because Momma told me that. Polar bears live in the Arctic. The krill were funny. A lot funny. The krill had little claws just like the lobsters. I liked that the puffin almost ate the krill, but he got away. I liked the penguins singing. I learned that if we’re scared, we just (*dance motion*) to scare the thing away. That’s important. I like the elephant seals because they helped the penguins. I like this Happy Feet better than the other Happy Feet because there are krills in it. Nothing for me in Happy Feet was scary.

I didn’t like the cat and the bird [The “Sylvester and Tweety” short] because the cat tried to get the bird and eat it. I didn’t like that because the bird didn’t want to be eaten. I thought the cat was scary.

Can we do a list of things I like and don’t like about Winnie the Pooh now?”

— D, 4 years old

“I liked the part when the krill danced his feet on the ice to break it at the end. The elephant seal acted differently in this movie from the first movie. I liked when the krill was singing a song. It was really funny.”

— E, 7 years old

I liked when the krill did the final push to get the penguins free. I also liked the krill in general. I liked the krill named Will and Bill. Eric the baby penguin was very funny when he sung to the elephant seals.”

— L, 9 years old

*****

So, yes: Happy Feet Two is moderately entertaining for kids, harmless (except for the short in the beginning), and the krill played by Brad Pitt and Matt Damon owned this film. It’s recommended for children four through ten, but if you can manage it, coerce someone else’s parents to take them.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



Demi And Ashton Get Divorced. Aw, I Guess Douchebags Aren't Forever. | Last Night on "Saturday Night Live": Needs More Muppets









Comments

Thanks for the heads up.
My spinoff script- Krill Bill- should be finished tomorrow.

Posted by: clocker at November 19, 2011 1:11 PM

I grew up watching the old Warner and Avery cartoons. My parents allowed me to watch them. The cartoons were ultraviolent, misogynistic, and at times downright racist.

I loved every one of them.

As an older child, I watched Property Damage Cinema when it was on the local TV channel. Cheesy Japanese kaiju films with guys in goofy rubber outfits smashing models. Not high art, but still quite good.

I recently passed the half-century mark, and have never been in prison or jail, and have a clean criminal record. In sum, I think my parents were decent ones, and I turned out okay.

Posted by: The Wanderer at November 19, 2011 1:34 PM

Thanks for the heads up.
My spinoff script- Krill Bill- should be finished tomorrow.

I heard a rumor that comments on movie reviews are not eligible for EE. That's unfortunate, because clocker's comment would be a shoo-in.

Posted by: MM at November 19, 2011 1:40 PM

I saw this last night with one of my best friends. I have not seen the first, so I had no idea what to expect. (I went to be a good friend, not because of any interest in the movie itself.) The review is spot on - the krill were the highlight; the rest of the movie was dull. I forced a laugh when she occasionally looked at me, because I know I could do a lot worse in the 'friends and their movies' department... at least she's not trying to get me to see Twilight.

Posted by: Gabs at November 19, 2011 2:31 PM

So, now I'm curious...what does D like and dislike about Winnie the Pooh?

Posted by: Iris at November 19, 2011 2:31 PM

I'd like to see more comments in the future from the young reviewers, please. Also, I want a bigger photo of that header pic so I can used it as my wallpaper at work.

Posted by: snapnhiss at November 19, 2011 2:59 PM

Aw, I like having kids' reviews being supplementary to the adults reviewing the movies. It is interesting what kids latch onto as the best and worst parts of the movie.

Posted by: Sara H at November 19, 2011 5:01 PM

Saw this with my 4 year old this morning - I thought it was kind of depressing. **Spoilers** 2 different parents are faced with almost dying. But it looked beautiful! the bright blue and whites were awesoem!

Posted by: jenniferk525 at November 19, 2011 7:56 PM

I learned that if we’re scared, we just (*dance motion*) to scare the thing away. That’s important

It just kills me when kids say stuff like this. It's them throwing us a parenting bone, which lord knows makes all the difference at times. My kids are still theater virgins so we'll catch this in streaming form. Glad to hear it meets expectations.

Posted by: katy at November 19, 2011 8:13 PM

It's a shame the Warner Bros. forgot WHO the Bugs Bunny/Sly and Tweety/Pepe LePew cartoons were originally aimed at..ADULTS.

These cartoons were so violent because they played at the beginning of movies for a WAY older audience back in the 40's and 50's.

Posted by: Horace at November 20, 2011 4:17 AM

“I liked the part when the krill danced his feet on the ice to break it at the end...”

— E, 7 years old


um, SPOILERS, ASSHOLE

Posted by: gp at November 20, 2011 10:16 AM

If the younguns are going to be reviewing movies here in Pajibaland, please add these films to their list:

The Muppets
Arthur Christmas
The Adventures of Tintin
A Dangerous Method
Hugo

Whoops! One of those movies does not belong in there. Kids should NOT be allowed to see Hugo.

Make it happen, Rowles.

Posted by: greer at November 20, 2011 1:13 PM

Violent Warner Brother's cartoons, the Marx Brothers, the Three Stooges, and Monty Python fueled my childhood. I didn't grow up to become a lawyer and/or criminal and/or psychotic.

Posted by: Adam C at November 20, 2011 2:00 PM


Violent Warner Brother's cartoons, the Marx Brothers, the Three Stooges, and Monty Python fueled my childhood. I didn't grow up to become a lawyer and/or criminal and/or psychotic.

Posted by: Adam C at November 20, 2011 2:00 PM

But you did end up here with us. And that could be worse.

Posted by: greer at November 20, 2011 2:18 PM

“I liked the part when the krill danced his feet on the ice to break it at the end...” — E, 7 years old

um, SPOILERS, ASSHOLE
Posted by: gp at November 20, 2011 10:16 AM

I think I just burst a lung from guffawing.

Posted by: HookedonBass at November 20, 2011 6:44 PM

Oh, Geeps. You are a delight.

Also, so, wait, Spawn of Rowles is already FOUR??? Man, I've been reading this site for way too long.

Posted by: Jelinas at November 20, 2011 8:23 PM

KRILL!

Posted by: Bob's your Uncle at November 20, 2011 9:06 PM

I was in fact the child whose parents did not allow scary or violent movies, didn't get to go to haunted houses because they were "too violent", didn't get to play withtoy guns and had strict limits on TV at all times, with the exception of PBS in the 70s (A fate worse than death). First of all, thank God for books so I could get my violence quota, and second, balance people, balance. Also if you don't let your kids owntoy guns, they get last choice in the neighborhood games. Kid next to me has a bazooka, I've got a stick. A stick people.

Posted by: Mrcreosote at November 20, 2011 10:31 PM

"two krill, voiced by Brad Pitt and Matt Damon."
---
You rail about pop culture references that go over kids' heads but the voices of Brad Pitt and Matt Damon are the best part of the movie? I see the kid reviewers mention the krill but NOT ONE OF THEM mentions what a great job Brad Pitt and Matt Damon did, or indicated he/she/it even knows who Matt Damn and Brad Pitt are, much less what they sound like.

I've pitched this bitch before but as far as I'm concerned I can never pitch it enough: If they REALLY wanted to make kids' movies family friendly, they would use unknown voice actors who could tell the same jokes with just as much animation and thereby reduce the budget enough to cut the price of a fucking ticket in half. Name voice talent is just a way to sucker you into paying the same price for your 4-year-old's ticket to see a cartoon as you will pay for "The Descendants."

Posted by: , at November 21, 2011 1:13 AM

I'd correct it but I kinda like "Matt Damn."

Posted by: , at November 21, 2011 1:18 AM

That must have been one hell of a Sylvester and Tweety cartoon.

Posted by: Qualtinger at November 21, 2011 4:31 AM

Are Sylvester and Tweety now ACTUALLY Itchy and Scratchy? Because that's what you described.

Look, I'm all for keeping the violence in a child's life to a minimum. As a kid I wasn't allowed to see scary movies, and those that I did were either with my parents, or with their permission and then we'd talk about what I found scary/upsetting and why. You know what I watched all the time and never had to discuss? Looney Toons. All of them. I've seen Daffy be shot in the face, I've seen all the horrible things that happen to Coyote while he tries to kill and eat Road Runner, all of it. And I don't think any of that is harmful, nor do I think that you can relate cartoon violence as being on the same level as regular violence. There are levels, obviously, but unless Looney Toons have changed in a big way, then I just can't see it being objectionable. Hell, those guys were my intro to opera! I'm really curious what was in this Sylvester and Tweety cartoon now, cause I just can't imagine them doing anything that I would object to like that.

Posted by: KatSings at November 21, 2011 8:55 AM