Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium

[Loren]

I caught a sneak preview of this film last night, and I thought I'd pass along that there's a Muppet cameo in the movie. And if you want spoilers:


In the opening montage of people shopping at the Emporium, one of the shoppers is Kermit. Some kids react to his presence, and he has a couple of lines of dialogue in response.

[D'Snowth]

Don't see that movie! I'm tellin' ya! They got rid of Kathy Greenwood like she was a kleenex full of snot!

[BobThePizzaBoy]

Are you freaking serious? I wasn't going to go see this movie, but now I have an excuse, too! This is :) 's first time in a theatrical film since MFS, right?

[maniacal muppet]

YEA! SOUNDS AWESOME! My Mom has been buggin me to go and see it with her, and now, I'm definitley goin! :)

So what is his appearance like exactly?

[BeakerSqueedom]

KERMIT HAS A ROLE? YAAAY!
I am gonna see it!

[heralde]

Wow, that is unexpected!

[D'Snowth]

Noooooooo! Don't see it! It's not worth it!

BOYCOT THIS MOVIE! BOYCOT THIS MOVIE!

[TheJimHensonHour]

I never planed to see this Willy Wonka rip off movie but now I'm sort of tempted.

[heralde]

Noooooooo! Don't see it! It's not worth it!

BOYCOT THIS MOVIE! BOYCOT THIS MOVIE!

Ok ok, calm down ;). Now what exactly happened with Kathy Greenwood?

[frogboy4]

"Originally signed on to play the character of Eric's mother in Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium, but due to scheduling conflicts, she wasn't able to attend filming, and her character was re-cast with Rebecca Northan playing the part."

This sort of thing happens all the time. I thought that the D'snowth statement was implying that a writer or creator in the enterprise has been pushed aside. It appears to be simple recasting. That's no reason to boycott a film. Does the actress report feeling slighted by the action? If it has Hoffman, I'll see it! Sat through mediocre films like "Meet the Falkers" and "Hero" for him. Considering there's a Muppet cameo, this is a no-brainer. And yes, a Muppet performer is credited at IMDB as well (at # 8 probably due to order of appearance).

[heralde]

"If it has Hoffman, I'll see it! Sat through mediocre films like "Meet the Falkers" and "Hero" for him.

Wow, now THAT'S loyalty! lol

Considering there's a Muppet cameo, this is a no-brainer. And yes, a Muppet performer is credited at IMDB as well (at # 8 probably due to order of appearance).

Well I really do hope it's a good one. But I'll probably end up renting it, movies are expensive. :)

[D'Snowth]

"Originally signed on to play the character of Eric's mother in Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium, but due to scheduling conflicts, she wasn't able to attend filming, and her character was re-cast with Rebecca Northan playing the part."

This sort of thing happens all the time. I thought that the D'snowth statement was implying that a writer or creator in the enterprise has been pushed aside. It appears to be simple recasting. That's no reason to boycott a film. Does the actress report feeling slighted by the action? If it has Hoffman, I'll see it! Sat through mediocre films like "Meet the Falkers" and "Hero" for him. Considering there's a Muppet cameo, this is a no-brainer. And yes, a Muppet performer is credited at IMDB as well (at # 8 probably due to order of appearance).
Well, they didn't even TRY to work it out... when she said she couldn't do it, they just dropped her like a hot tamale!

[heralde]

Well I do understand how you feel. If she were a "big time" star, they would have fought harder.

[D'Snowth]

Well, don't worry, I've got plans to incorporate her into an episode of the new sitcom I'm working on.

Aaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnnnnnd, go ahead, carry on with the original conversation...

[frogboy4]

Well, they didn't even TRY to work it out... when she said she couldn't do it, they just dropped her like a hot tamale!

I get whatcha mean. These days films are arranged and shot so quickly - and a lot times it shows. I don't think Kathy was treated like a boogered tissue, but she wasn't treated like a priority either. I'm certain the talented Ms. Greenwood will have many other opportunities. And because of this I will seek out her other works. ;)

Ooh! By the way, Yahoo Movies still mistakenly lists Kathy Greenwood in the credits as Nancy. Maybe other fans will be upset after seeing it for her when she's not in it.

[D'Snowth]

I get whatcha mean. These days films are arranged and shot so quickly - and a lot times it shows. I don't think Kathy was treated like a boogered tissue, but she wasn't treated like a priority either. I'm certain the talented Ms. Greenwood will have many other opportunities. And because of this I will seek out her other works. ;)Make it easy on herself, visit my website (http://www.freewebs.com/newgreenwoodsite/)!
Ooh! By the way, Yahoo Movies still mistakenly lists Kathy Greenwood in the credits as Nancy. Maybe other fans will be upset after seeing it for her when she's not in it.What other fans?

[frogboy4]

:eek: I remember her bits in QAF and Wonderfalls (a very underrated show). She'll be back in something. Now I see what you're saying - this was to be some sort of big break for her in a big budget movie with A list actors. I wonder what the conflict was? I would have dropped everything. Something seems amiss.

I'm still seeing the film. Just know that she is already in my home DVD collection with Wonderfalls! ;) That was such a funky little show! I still have a crush on the bartender character in WF, but that's another conversation entirely. :flirt:

[D'Snowth]

Yeah, I enjoyed those two bits as well for the same reason: they both featured sides of her I hadn't seen before (before I saw these that is), especially in Wonderfalls because I never knew she act like such a ***** like she did there. Queer as Folk... yeah, I liked that she was... um... a little... slightly... "revealing"...:halo:

[TheJimHensonHour]

funny you guys bring up queer as folk my mother just started watching the first season with me as i got it for 20.00 as a used store (can't beet a deal like that!) and now she's hooked she can't stop watching lol.
I could never think ever in my life would my mother watch such a show with me it brings tears to my eyes at how much she's changed.
And yes omg Wonder Falls my x and I loved that show it's such a shame it got such a bad time slot and wasn't given a chance.

[frogboy4]

Might I add that only a handful of Wonderfalls (http://imdb.com/gallery/ss/0361256/Ss/0361256/6446700_2_20.jpg.html?hint=tt0361256) eps ever aired, but there are quite a few more on the DVD set. (I know the link goes to my favorite Wonderfalls actor) ;)

QAF was great for a couple seasons, but lost me after that. Niche projects of that sort often fall to self-indulgence. I did, however, like the last episode ever. Won't give it away, but it was fitting. Anything else would have been trite. The UK version is still my favorite. If given the chance you might want to check that out.

I just watched the Magorium trailer over at Muppet Newsflash (http://muppetnewsflash.blogspot.com/). Guess the cat's out of the bag from the description in the article. Didn't see any Muppets in the trailer, of course. Does seem a little bit Wonkaesque. It's like Willy Wonka meets Night at the Museum. I'm sure that's how it was pitched. Is it me or has Natalie Portman become beyond-the-stratosphere pretty? :excited:

[minor muppetz]

I wasn't really planning on seeing this movie, but now I may have to. It's a shame that I recently got fired from my job as an usher. @*&#:grouchy:

[Psammeadboi]

Why is there so much oppostition to seeing this film? I'm not quite sure I understand the justification to advise someone not to see this film. Afterall, Kermit has a cameo, which should hopefully be some motivation for a small vote of confidence in this film.

I guess I should clarify my hasty generalization, but earlier in this thread there seemed to be a few people who advise not seeing Magorium.

[Drtooth]

Unbeleivable. Kermit having a cameo in another film that does not feature Muppets in anyway? And not like a TV appearance, or like what they did in Rocky 3 (showing a clip redubbed to say "Rocky Balboa") This is quite amazing. And it isn't even a Disney film. This has got to be a first.

[minor muppetz]

Yep, the first time that a Muppet made a real cameo (not counting Kermit's redubbed lines in Rocky III, or Kermit and Miss Piggy being credited in An American Werewolf in London) in a non-Muppet film. The Looney Tunes characters have occassionally made cameos in mostly live-action films, such as Two Guys from Texas, My Dream is Yours, and Gremlins II (I'm not gonna count Who Framed Roger Rabbit).

[Kuriboh Man]

I never thought I see Kermit the Frog in a non-Muppet movie as a cameo appearence......that is AWSOME! :) :) :)

[Barry Lee]

Don't see that movie! I'm tellin' ya! They got rid of Kathy Greenwood like she was a kleenex full of snot!

Just because KG isnt in the movie doesnt mean you need to tell people not to see it. But the movie hasnt been given the best reviews, so im not waising money to see about a minute of kermit on the big screen, sorry.

[Mr.Penguin]

Unbeleivable. Kermit having a cameo in another film that does not feature Muppets in anyway? And not like a TV appearance, or like what they did in Rocky 3 (showing a clip redubbed to say "Rocky Balboa") This is quite amazing. And it isn't even a Disney film. This has got to be a first.

Yeah, this sound really cool. Unfortunately, this movie doesn't look that good. None of the trailers look good and the special effects suck. I may see it when it comes to the theater my friend works at (after it's out of real theaters) just to see that part. That way I don't have to pay! :p How long is the part and is it worth it? (Don't tell me what happens, just if it's funny or not)

[heralde]

Actually I thought the movie looked cute, I'm not sure why people aren't interested in seeing it. ::shrugs:: :)

[frogboy4]

...None of the trailers look good and the special effects suck.

:eek: What's wrong with the special effects? They look fine to me from the trailers. In fact it appears to be the main selling point of the film. I think today's consumers have become jaded. I can understand content criticism, but could you elaborate just what about the effects is sub-par in your opinion? :confused:

[TheJimHensonHour]

or they could be sick of everything always being computer animated these days..

[frogboy4]

or they could be sick of everything always being computer animated these days..

I'm with you there. Effects should facilitate the story, not be the inspiration to write a story around. And there is too much CG in regular and animated films these days. Look for a resurgence of classic hand drawn animation a few years down the line. A good story will come along that will utilize classic animation techniques. There's nothing wrong with CG, but variety is more fun! :flirt:

[Luke]

This sounds like a great christmas family film, i'm glad Kermit has associated himself with it! :)

[frogboy4]

Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium received the number five spot with a projected $10M opening weekend. That does not bode well for the film. With all the talent and effects, you'd think they could drum-up a better opening. It's either the writer and/or director. This holiday season really is lacking in films compared to the wad of them this summer. :eek:

[Luke]

I think it will do steady business over time, what with families over the holiday season, but i can see why the plot looks thin. They usually do with these kinda movies - i was a bit dissapointed with how they handled Willy Wonka too. There needs to be a better variety of warm fuzzy family movies over the holidays for sure. Most have completely bombed over the last few years.

[frogboy4]

I think it will do steady business over time, what with families over the holiday season, but i can see why the plot looks thin. They usually do with these kinda movies - i was a bit dissapointed with how they handled Willy Wonka too. There needs to be a better variety of warm fuzzy family movies over the holidays for sure. Most have completely bombed over the last few years.

Willy Wonka was good due to Tim Burton's imagination, but was also lacking due to his ego. There was something missing with that film. I understood they wanted to go by-the-book, but the original film has enough fans that Burton needed to incorporate at least a few subtle nods to it.

I liked that Burton used the book's Oompa-Loompa lyrics, but needed to also include at least one of the past songs somewhere in the background or credit sequence. I don't know a pop band alive that wouldn't want to cover World of Imagination to carpet the credits of a Tim Burton film. Instead they just hacked up bits of orchestration. With Wonka and (the much better film) Corpse Bride, Danny Elfman seems to have been phoning it in. It's about time! His work seemed to be perpetually brilliant to that point.

Wonka was a film that almost got there, but fell a few feet short of the goal. But these days, films are made for the DVD market. Heck, some FX are withheld until DVD release! DVDs are what makes the studios most of their entertainment division dollar these days (and it's partly why the writers are striking).

The problem with the lack of family films is that most youth-aimed projects are straight-to-video and neglect to include parental appeal. There’s a lot of kiddie fare out there, but very few good film experiences that families can share together. You are so right!

[BobThePizzaBoy]

What ever happened to talking about Kermit being in Mr. Magorium's?

[Luke]

Willy Wonka was good due to Tim Burton's imagination, but was also lacking due to his ego. There was something missing with that film. I understood they wanted to go by-the-book, but the original film has enough fans that Burton needed to incorporate at least a few subtle nods to it.

What did it for me with Wonka was the whole Dentist thing, with the dad and returning to him at the end. Not in the book, not in the original film, and kinda unnecassary idea. Everything else was ok for me Burton wise, but yes a few more nods to the film would have been nice.

I think it's great they are putting Kermit out there to even be in these things, it shows they are trying to get the Muppets back in the mainstream at least and it seems like a very relevant film to put him in. I hope they still retain a bit of edge at least, but (with the Disney XD mini movies as well) i don't see anything bad about them promoting the Muppets as traditional family fare. I just hope the kids actually want to see them!

[Mr.Penguin]

:eek: What's wrong with the special effects? They look fine to me from the trailers. In fact it appears to be the main selling point of the film. I think today's consumers have become jaded. I can understand content criticism, but could you elaborate just what about the effects is sub-par in your opinion? :confused:

I doubt your going to see it my way, but I never liked those obviously-fake over-the-top cartoony effects, like that one scene with the ouside of the store, the stretchy arm thing and the squid tentacles coming out of the book. When it's too rubbery smooth and it doesn't fit in with the live action all that well. I want to be an artist in film and TV when I grow up, so my standards are a bit high for CG effects and especially animation. I can spot mistakes that no one else may find and stuff that's "not as good as it could be." It's not that I'm "jaded" and just don't want to like it because it's not LOTR or King Kong. It's not HORRIBLE, it's just that I personally don't like it, and for a movie that's mostly special effects I kind of expect more. The wood dinousar scene was kind of cool looking. It looks like a cute family movie, it's just that it could've looked better and it looks too kiddie for me to see.

It's fine for the story....It's just my opinion. I don't know why it would offend you so badly, that you need to pick on me....anyway that wasn't the point of my post. I wanted to know if Kermit's scene was good/long enough reason to see it; because I might want to see it either way whenever I can.

Sheesh.:(

[frogboy4]

I doubt your going to see it my way, but I never liked those obviously-fake over-the-top cartoony effects, like that one scene with the ouside of the store, the stretchy arm thing and the squid tentacles coming out of the book. When it's too rubbery smooth and it doesn't fit in with the live action all that well. I want to be an artist in film and TV when I grow up, so my standards are a bit high for CG effects and especially animation. I can spot mistakes that no one else may find and stuff that's "not as good as it could be." It's not that I'm "jaded" and just don't want to like it because it's not LOTR or King Kong. It's not HORRIBLE, it's just that I personally don't like it, and for a movie that's mostly special effects I kind of expect more. The wood dinousar scene was kind of cool looking. It looks like a cute family movie, it's just that it could've looked better and it looks too kiddie for me to see.

It's fine for the story....It's just my opinion. I don't know why it would offend you so badly, that you need to pick on me....anyway that wasn't the point of my post. I wanted to know if Kermit's scene was good/long enough reason to see it; because I might want to see it either way whenever I can.

Sheesh.(

When you said the effects "sucked", I pretty much took that statement to mean you thought they were "horrible" as well. There could be a fine line between those two descriptions that I can't see. No picking - just inquiring, discussing, which is what people do on forums. I see that you're a little sensitive, so I'll try to craft my words thoughtfully.

It was a dramatic statement you put out there, but of course you are entitled to your opinion. I merely wanted clarification on what exactly was poorly done. Even the best effects can be better - and it appears that these problably aren't the best. Audiences certainly didn’t seem to favor them enough this opening weekend. Only 5 on the charts at 10M. Sheesh! :rolleyes:

CG is often over-used just for the sake that the technology is available. That can water down the best results and cause audience apathy toward them. We have mighty high expectation these days. I do too. That’s what I meant by jaded. It’s this, “Okay, we’ve seen that before. What else have you got?” sort of feeling that’s growing lately when in my youth the original ET didn't need computer work done to him to make for a believable/enjoyable experience. :sympathy:

I agree with you on much of today's CG rubbery quality. I see it too. Sometimes it's a creative choice, other times it has to do with just who is manning the tools. Movies need more artists with keen eyes. Glad to hear you plan on being such an artist. And with all the computer mapping, I guess my teachers were right - math is more important that I thought it would be! :excited:

[frogboy4]

Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium: An Actual Review

Most films of this sort are books attempting to become movies. In this case, Mr. Magorium’s Wonder Emporium is a movie desperately trying to be like a book. Chapters are illustrated on screen with the standard flipping pages and announced titles. I thought it had been a book, but the only literature on the subject is a novelization adapted from the film. As for a movie, it falls short.

If not for the A list casting of Dustin Hoffman (Mr. Magorium) and Natalie Portman (Molly Mahoney), along with Jason Bateman’s fun performance as the Emporium’s accountant, this is a television special with a slightly larger budget.

Portman is sweet and brings the level of excellence she always does no matter the part (yes, that’s a dig at George Lucas’ stale dialog in some of her other work). Dustin Hoffman is a little over-the-top. His performance is touching, but could have done without the dramatically goofy voice.

The character of Eric (Zachary Mills) especially connected with me. He reminded me of a few years I spent feeling out of touch and misunderstood by kids my own age who had the ‘standard’ interests. Eric sees things differently and I appreciate that. I think most kids can relate to something similar. :zany:

Most of the effects hit and are there to serve the story. There weren’t as many obvious special effects shots as I had expected. It was actually rather refreshing. There are also a few less than stellar shots, but they don’t take away from the story.

I enjoyed the slower-moving plot. This is a film that doesn’t talk down to kids or connect directly to adults. Magorium speaks a language of its own. I applaud the effort, but that approach will not sell tickets. But, hey, I’m not their Jason Bateman accountant, so on to other things.

There was a time when kids would have sat through this film and been engaged. Unfortunately, that time has passed. Most kids in the theater were crawling the walls in boredom. This movie appreciates the impact of a silent moment here and there, but that only creates the opportunity for kids in the theater to squeal for more gummy snacks!

A filmmaker just can’t blame today’s youth for not getting it if they are marketing to them. Not if they intend to make money. There should have been more of a sugary polish, more popular music and relatable stars to their generation. To my surprise, every kid in the audience was delighted to see Kermit’s very brief cameo. By the way, he was not a toy, just a shopper. “Just shopping, just shopping!” :)

Some reviewers have exaggerated the somber note the story takes. It is clearly set up at the beginning of the picture and follows through to the end. I see no problem with it. In fact, I think kid gloves shouldn’t have been used at all. The film is about life and possibilities. I just wish they’d made this for television. It would have fared better and reached more people.

C :o

[BeakerSqueedom]

That was a very informative critique'!
I'll rent it when it comes out, so that I may see
his cameo.

:P A good excuse to see Kermit!

[DannyRWW]

I saw the movie last night and loved it. Personally I think the whole point of the cameo was the fact that they wanted to show this was a magical place (come on isn't Kermit the first thing most of us here think of when we think of magic). I took my one year old daughter and she behaved and stayed awake (two things that have never happenned before when it comes to movies at home or in theaters.... though I've only taken her before when they do kids movies during the summer...the whole place is filled with screaming children and she slept most of the time anyways).
okay I'm rambling a bit but my point is the movie was good...it did not rely on toilet humor or explosions to make a point...in fact the special effects were not to over the top and provided just the right amount of magic the film needed. Also the relience on puppeteers for this film was nice to see as well (some special effects like an adorable sock monkey were done the old fashioned way). I think a lot of people will pass this movie up because it is too kiddie (including the kids of the world who would rather watch a sports competition instead of enjoying the magic of childhood. I encourage all of you to just forget your an adult for a little while and let the magic in the world back into your life. Thats what the purpose of this movie is. To see the magic inside each of us and in the world. Sometimes we become so jaded that we tend to only want to see the darker parts of life in a movie or a story. We become cynical about family films that have no swearing or violence or sex in them. I've wanted to see this movie since I heard about it and my expectations were met (not like when I read Great Expectations which was nowhere as good as I thought it would be). Anyways I do enbcourage all of you to see this movie. Give it a try. I mean if Kermit thinks its good enough to be in then we really should support the little fabricated Green guy right :)

[Drtooth]

As far as Tim Burton's Charlie and the Chocolate factory goes, I am kinda glad that they didn't have any call backs to the previous film. The only place call backs belong in is a remake of something (i.e. hiring a cast member of the original to have a cameo, having an at the moment musician cover a song, or reference the film in any way). I felt this was just making another movie based on the same source, just a little more accurately. It would be as if someone made a Wizard of Oz movie based entirely off the book, and not to be related to the Judy garland 1930's film. Everyone would expect a remake, but it would be completely different. And some fans of the book would want it that way.

AS for Magorium? Well, Kermit or not, I am not sure I really want to see it. I would be able to sneak into that one and leave as soon as our Frog in cheif has his cameo. But that's sorta dishonest. Plus, they time the movies so they all start in a fashion that you can't leave one at the end and immediately see another.

[frogboy4]

I'm glad to see somebody got many of the same things out of that film as I did. Like the film - you have to want to believe and enjoy your time spent at Magoriums or you probably won't be pleased with it. And if you're seeing it just for Kermit then you might want to wait for the DVD. I'm glad to have supported the film - for the movie's sake and for Kermit! :)

About Burton's Charlie - remake or not I don’t believe in hard and fast rules for anything. Any good creative decision making should be done on a case-by-case basis. I just wanted to hear that one song in it - somewhere, anywhere. I enjoy Tim Burton's work, but the movie was missing an extra spark here and there. Depp's performance was amazing, as always. I tend to forget just how good he is until seeing another film performance. I have never seen an actor more dedicated to a director! :cool:

Back to Magorium’s, I liked the sock-puppet performance too. That simple bit of puppetry was one of the things that related to the audience the most. :cry:

[TheJimHensonHour]

It would be as if someone made a Wizard of Oz movie based entirely off the book, and not to be related to the Judy garland 1930's film. Everyone would expect a remake, but it would be completely different. And some fans of the book would want it that way.
I'm in a minority and would not want it based off the old movie which I don't care for because I'm a fan of the books and don't think it does them justice while Return to Oz did. which btw did poorly because of the exact reasons you listed.:sympathy:

[Luke]

I really didn't think Burton's Wonka stuck anymore to the book than the original movie. Infact i thought it went further off. I enjoyed it but was expecting more -effects and casting were good though. The original seemed more in the style of what i would expect from a movie based on that book.

[heralde]

As far as the Wonka films, I don't judge the new one by close it is or isn't to the book. As a movie, it was cute, but just not particularly deep. And actually I think the original film (which I love lol) perhaps made a wise decision to stay away from the classic book and stake its own territory as a film. :)

[TheJimHensonHour]

How is the new wonka film not deep? I loved the think and I usually don't like Tim Burten.
Have you guys forgot about wonkas dad...or maybe I'm the only person who had tears in his eyes over all that..man did it choke me up.
But perhaps thats all part of knowing what its like having a father like that.
*shruggs*

[heralde]

Well that's a good point, I probably am unable to fully identify with the film's situation. And I think it's great that some people were moved by it; perhaps I am missing something. :)
I just think the emotions and message were pretty obvious and not multi layered. It wasn't bad; I could see where they were going with it and Johnny Deep and Christopher Lee are good actors. But it could have been further developed, in my opinion.

I thought the old movie was more mature in the end. But then, perhaps I identified with Wonka's disenchantment with the world. :)

[frogboy4]

I feel Burton's Wonka was missing something too. I felt at arm's length - more viewer than immersed participant. That's the opposite I felt with Edward Scissorhands. That film reached me on many levels. I'd say Burton's best. We'll see what Sweeney Todd offers. :concern:

I saw Bee Movie yesterday and have to say that I enjoyed Mr. Magorium more. Bee wasn't a bad film, but all over the place and not particularly interesting. Beeeautiful animation and a few good performances. I liked Seinfeld's Bee expressions. :D

:attitude: I admit, Magorium is a theatrically released TV movie, but it is better than some of the stuff out there...well, until today. Expect Enchanted to take off in a huge way. That film's going to hit all green lights all the way to the bank! Magorium will vanish quickly and likely unnoticed.

[TheJimHensonHour]

I feel Burton's Wonka was missing something too. I felt at arm's length - more viewer than immersed participant. That's the opposite I felt with Edward Scissorhands. That film reached me on many levels. I'd say Burton's best. We'll see what Sweeney Todd offers. :concern:

I saw Bee Movie yesterday and have to say that I enjoyed Mr. Magorium more. Bee wasn't a bad film, but all over the place and not particularly interesting. Beeeautiful animation and a few good performances. I liked Seinfeld's Bee expressions. :D

:attitude: I admit, Magorium is a theatrically released TV movie, but it is better than some of the stuff out there...well, until today. Expect Enchanted to take off in a huge way. That film's going to hit all green lights all the way to the bank! Magorium will vanish quickly and likely unnoticed.
It's funny all those movies coming out are pretty much ripp offs of other movies...That one with the polarbears looks like such a Narnia ripp off.

[BobThePizzaBoy]

I just got back from Enchanted (great movie!) and I snuck into Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium afterward (shhhhh!). Oh my freaking god, what a terrible movie. It just dragged and dragged. :) was the best part of course and that part actually was somewhat funny. But I walked out of that crapfest as soon as the frog came and went. Does he appear at all the film besides the one scene where all the kids are amazed by him and he says "Just shopping"? I walked out right after that. Oy, the things we Muppet fans have to suffer through. :rolleyes:

[frogboy4]

I just got back from Enchanted (great movie!) and I snuck into Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium afterward (shhhhh!). Oh my freaking god, what a terrible movie. It just dragged and dragged. :) was the best part of course and that part actually was somewhat funny. But I walked out of that crapfest as soon as the frog came and went. Does he appear at all the film besides the one scene where all the kids are amazed by him and he says "Just shopping"? I walked out right after that. Oy, the things we Muppet fans have to suffer through.

I saw it too. It wasn't the best film, but I did enjoy the slower pace and less reliance on the usual expected eyeball-grabbing found in such films. You walked out in the first few minutes of the film? That's when Kermit appears. So about ten or twelve minutes of the film dragged and dragged for you or did you sit through the end of one cycle and then the beginning of another?

It's funny all those movies coming out are pretty much ripp offs of other movies...That one with the polarbears looks like such a Narnia ripp off.

Funny you should say that. The author, reportedly, wrote the books as a sort-of anti-Narnia. It's supposedly subtle in the first book of the trilogy, but there is an eventual attack on this particular world's theocratic government. There is a very big movement against it (as you can imagine). The book's sentiment went largely unnoticed until being made into a motion picture. It peeks my interest, but that is in no way an endorsement. I'll see it and report my finding later. :confused:

An original idea in movies and television? And all this celluloid gold was made before the writer's strike. He he. :eek:

[BobThePizzaBoy]

You walked out in the first few minutes of the film? That's when Kermit appears. So about ten or twelve minutes of the film dragged and dragged for you or did you sit through the end of one cycle and then the beginning of another?

Kermit was the only reason I snuck into Magorium's after I saw Enchanted and I left as soon as Kermit's scene was over (I came to see what I wanted to see I didn't need to see anymore), those first ten or twelve minutes felt more like a half hour to me, maybe because it was late at night or me just getting impatient and waiting for Kermit to appear so I could leave, it was just such a painful movie to sit through. It got me to chuckle once when Kermit wasn't on screen (the fish mobile) but I found those 12 minutes very stale and dull. Enchanted's whole 107 minutes were better than the 12 minutes I sat through Mr. Magorium's. Man... :rolleyes:

[heralde]

Funny you should say that. The author, reportedly, wrote the books as a sort-of anti-Narnia.

Are you referring to the Golden Compass? I have been hearing that it's a bit anti-Christian. Which basically equals anti-Narnia. I'm not suprised, the cool thing to be right now is anti-Christian, even if it comprises so much of your viewing audience.

[frogboy4]

Are you referring to the Golden Compass? I have been hearing that it's a bit anti-Christian. Which basically equals anti-Narnia. I'm not suprised, the cool thing to be right now is anti-Christian, even if it comprises so much of your viewing audience.

That's the part I'm uncertain of. There has been a swift knee-jerk reaction to this film while the award-winning books have been around for a while. I have not been exposed to either or actually seen enough about the author's intention in context. So far I am under the impression that the spirit of the book is anti-theocracy rather than anti-theology. I'm reserving judgement.

Christians are seen as the "big fish" in the English-speaking sections of the world and as such by that nature (popularity rather than actual belief) it is often attacked just as the popular kids at school or idolized celebrities in our culture. Such attacks really are unjustified on that criteria and often go unnoticed. That said, I'm still not sure if this is one of them.

I tend to give people and things, such as projects, a fair shake. I like to see things for my own eyes before judgement. That means in their entirety and not just ten minutes after the opening credits. ;) From Passion to Last Temptation. And I see value and potential in even my least favorite things. I see that as a distinct part of being a good artist - to see the beauty in what is ugly and beneath the vaneer in what is considered to be beautiful. :excited:

I really do wonder what will happen once this film comes out. Magorium, Enchanted, Chipmunks, Golden Compass - there really aren't as many family-friendly films this season as their ought to be. :smirk:

[heralde]

Christians are seen as the "big fish" in the English-speaking sections of the world and as such by that nature (popularity rather than actual belief) it is often attacked just as the popular kids at school or idolized celebrities in our culture. Such attacks really are unjustified on that criteria and often go unnoticed. That said, I'm still not sure if this is one of them.

I agree, we naturally want to tear down the big powerful fish. I do understand that. But I think we also need to understand that the world is a complicated place and we should not judge a whole people based on the actions of a few. :)

I tend to give people and things, such as projects, a fair shake.
I know, I do want to be fair and see the film first before judging it. It's just that I've seen these attacks happen so many times, and very few people have spoken up. It's difficult.

[frogboy4]

It appears that more and more these days there are no shades in the spectrum of opinion or debate - only the stark extremes. I tend to pull for the underdog, but I refuse to buy into anything hook, line and sinker. It is so easy to hear a few words, without confirming the accuracy of the source, and reacting to it.

I have many friends who are pulling for the Golden Compass motion picture in taking an (unconfirmed) atheistic stance while other Christians in my life are boycotting. Neither really knows the full story. Heck, I'd see 90% of the films out there if I could. I love movies and the movie-going experience in general. That is not to say I enjoy each individual film, rather that I enjoy giving them a chance. Anyway, here's a link to a thread already out there that I will bump that speaks about the Golden Compass. I'll republish this post there as well.

Link Here to the Golden Compass Thread (http://forum.muppetcentral.com/showthread.php?t=34263&highlight=golden+compass)

[Drtooth]

Now that this is on DVD, you may expect to see the clip on Youtube sometime in the near future.

[The 11th UrRu]

I really enjoyed this, not a 5 star movie but a good, creative family film.

[Muppet Frog]

I loved the Kermit the Frog cameo in Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium. I thought Kermit saying "Oh I'm just shopping." was hillarious.

[Vic Romano]

Just saw this and didn't know when I rented it that he was in it. My wife and I totally freaked out! And it was a really good movie too.

[frogboy4]

It's a fun film idea. Some things worked, others didn't, but it's still fun and interesting. That poor little sock monkey. :o

[G-MAN]

I loved Justin Bateman's character (the "Mutant"), although I originally saw it for Kermit and Hoffman

[Oscarfan]

I thought the movie was okay, but weird. (I mean, he dies because he runs out of shoes?) Kermit's appearence felt kind of awkward to me though. He just says his line in a very odd way.

[Beauregard]

Haha! Oh dear...no, I think you have that the wrong way around. He ran out of shoes, because it was his time to die. When he bought them, he bought enough to last his whole life, already knowing when his time would come.

Kermit's line...I think he says it in an odd way because he has baby-toys in the cart and doesn't want anyone to know he's thinking about having figs.

[Super Scooter]

Kermit's appearence felt kind of awkward to me though. He just says his line in a very odd way.

He seemed to deliver the line the way any celebrity would if they were seen by their fans while out shopping. Kind of, "I'm normal, you don't have to stare at me." At least, that's what I thought of it.

[Redsonga]

Kermit's line...I think he says it in an odd way because he has baby-toys in the cart and doesn't want anyone to know he's thinking about having figs.

*lol* I agree :excited: Little bouncing baby figs:flirt:!
It's sweet if you think about it that way:). I wonder if they would be born with arms and legs though?

[Beauregard]

I would say...if they were figs...they'd be born as tadpoles, and grow slowly into maybe mostly pigs with some frog tendancies (webbed trotters?) or frogs with pig-ish-ness (nostrils?). But I hold fast to the "boys are frogs, girls are pigs" rule. Or visa versa. Or maybe it's not sex-determined, but some are totally frogs and some pigs. Hmm... And maybe Robin.

Bea:zany:{Maybe Robin? What the...}regard

[maniacal muppet]

HA! Hysterical. I never even realized the baby toys. Beau's interpretation seems pretty correct to me :)