Well... The Bill Murray movies can't be called the worst Garfield movies anymore... My Site ► phelous.com Support on Patreon ► / phelous Twitter ► / phelous Instagram ► / phelanporteous Facebook ► / therealphelous
Walt Disney famously said “I don’t make kids ‘ movies. I make movies. Because the kids don’t buy the tickets. The parents do”. The worst movies, like Golden Films or Goodtimes, tend to underestimate kids and make crap like this.
This just felt like this was going to be some generic kids film featuring other animals, but the producers got the rights to Garfield last minute so they edited him into it in post.
I will like to add in the original concept arts, Jinx had tall feline bodyguards instead of henchdogs, Garfield's father was going to be alligator food in an abandoned mall, for not getting the cream for his boss in favour of payment, and Jon's dad was originally going to appear in the film (but they cut him out, meaning that there was no B-plot about Jon finding his missing two pets out in the open) So much wasted potenial, despite those three original drafts tend to have Garfield as his smart mouthed and sardonic self (even if it doesn't work with Chris Pratt during 2023) and the film's shift in tone.
"There's not a whole lot we know about Garfield." ... There's like 40 years worth of daily comics from the original creator. Several Tv shows. Movies. Games.
I guess he meant that we know not much about his Past before he got adopted by John. He could've definitely worded it better if that's what he's actually meant
@Firestar-TV Actually, we do. Off the top of my head, the comic explains he was born in an Italian restaurant, and he meets his mom in the same restaurant later. He loved eating the lasagna there, and his distaste for mice is because of this. His family were stray cats who were mousers, good at catching prey. Garfield is like the opposite, which is why he loves the pampered lazy life at Jon's house. Jon adopts Garfield from a pet shop later. His dad is mentioned as being a mouser, but his only depiction was on merchandise. Yeah, I'd say that technically his father's story was not known much about if that's what he was trying to say, but it's obviously not that important of a point as Garfield has never related to his parents (but loves his mom at least).
The movie has broke Phelous and Allison to the point where they'd rather goof off with the Bootleg Garfield toys than continue to talk about the Garfield 2024 film.
I mean I think 90 minutes of a camera pointed at Allison and Phelous playing with Bootleg Garfield would be a more fun experience than watching any of the actual Garfield movies
The weirdest part is that the whole "orange cat reunites with their long-lost criminal father" thing is taken from... Heathcliff. Yeah. The only one of Garfield's parents I remember being mentioned in the original comic was his mom.
@@ALLINE835I enjoyed it too. Just keep in mind we all have different opinions and technically a lot of the people here are pretty big Garfield fans 😅 which is fine🤷♀️
At least this movie has the ballsy and original storyline of Garfield getting separated from Jon! ...Well, except for these: -Here Comes Garfield -That episode of Garfield and Friends where he gets kicked out of the house and goes with a little girl -Garfield On The Town -That comic arc where Garfield and Odie get lost and end up in the circus -The first Garfield movie -Garfield Gets Real -Garfield's Fun Fest
In the original drafts, it was intended as a RU-vid spoof, for Odie controlling the remote, making Garfield claim it's voice operated and says some words like a detective, and it only lasts a minute. I guess Petflix sounds more clever.
The worst promo they did for this movie was a whole Jeopardy category, hosted by Chris Pratt, about US President James Garfield. You could just feel how flimsy the justification for this every time Pratt read out a clue.
Chris Pratt probably doesn’t know a goddamn thing about Garfield. Like how he doesn’t know a single damn thing about Mario. He just probably read a wiki article on both.
From the description, it’s like making a Peanuts movie, except Snoopy is a regular dog, Lucy is nice to everyone and Charlie Brown never worries about anything.
That sounds like an alternative universe. I’d say the animated Tintin movie from Spielberg and Blue Sky’s Peanuts Movie are more faithful to the comic source material. RIP Blue Sky Studios.
Nobody, but suppose the writers forced to work on this with a tight deadline couldn't think of anything better. Or they simply didn't give a crap, that's another possibility *shrug*
How did they get it THIS WRONG? How did they misunderstand the point of the character THIS BADLY? Like, the Bill Murray movies are Oscar worthy by comparison, and they were not that great to begin with.
Fun Fact: it took them YEARS before they FINALLY gave Garfield an Olive Garden ad! Like, HOW?! GARFIELD AND LESGUANA GOES WELL TOGETHER! HOWS WE NEVER HAD AN PROMOTION OF GARFIELD WITH OLIVIA GARDEN UNTIL NOW?! 🍝
@@ShadyRK9 Probably because the director was apparently a huge fan of Wendy's, so Wendy's won the tie in. Wendy's was plugged yet again in one of the director's other films, Zoom, except even more blatantly.
Mario's father didn't abandon his son; he didn't believed in him at first THEN realised how brave Mario is and saw him saving the town. Vic the cat left his son ALONE in an alley while he could search food with him. Also, him observing Garfield everyday is more creepy than cute. It's what a stalker would do, not a father 😠
Chris Pratt would have played a better John than Garfield, but the most insulting casting choice to me is Odie not being voiced by Gregg Berger and instead yet another big celebrity name. That would've been a nice cameo for the diehard fans and it really shows where their priorities where while making this film.
@williamgregory7887 no worries! Only other thing I can recall seeing Harvey Guillen in was the dog in Puss in Boots The Last Wish, which he played well...doesn't mean he should play every animated dog role though!
From watching this movie and especially seeing you play with the garfield plushies, I essentially just realized that Wabuu was basically a character variant of Garfield all along.
Real sad day when the live-action Bill Murray movies appear to be more faithful to the source material than an animated adaptation released 20 years after the fact.
The worst part, to me, is that I KNOW Chris Pratt knows better. He grew up with the Lorenzo Music version of Garfield! He knows what Garfield is supposed to be. Like, he doesn't have to be Frank Welker and do a Lorenzo Music impression, but he has to know the character. And I know he can do voices. He did voices in The LEGO Movies and Super Mario Bros. Say what you will about the performances, but they weren't just Chris Pratt walking into a booth and talking as himself. Maybe THAT is him being Garfield: Not giving a single fuck about his performance...
@@NebLlebI agree, his super generic voice acting suits a character like Emmett, who is supposed to be a regular Lego construction worker. Honestly if they made Pratt be the voice of John, that would actually make sense! But nahh
I'm of the opinion that if you have a story to tell with an established franchise, then there shouldn't be a problem with making it. But soulless movies like this, The Smurfs and Alvin and the Chipmunks, have no story to tell. They're just a recognizable IP that the studio can try to cash in on.
The only thing interesting about this movie is that it was directed by the same guy who directed Cat's Don't Dance, The Emperor's New Groove, and Chicken Little.
I feel like I committed blasphemy because I bought a Baby Garfield plushie at Walmart. I just couldn't resist how cute it was. He's sitting next to the drunken Garfield knockoff plushie I got from Amazon.
Since the trailer dropped I was basically convinced that maybe I just hated Garfield now, because the people around me were like “oh wow it’s an animated Garfield Movie! Look how cute he is! This is how you do a Garfield movie!” and I thought the trailer was painfully generic and corporate. It had been awhile since I had watched or read anything Garfield, so I remember thinking “was Garfield always like this?” After watching this video I’ve realized that I didn’t actually hate Garfield, I just hate this “new and improved” Garfield that’s barely anything like the actual Garfield.
@@trevingrayek1671 I feel like Illumination's adaptation of Dr.Sues's "The Lorax" started the trend of "Lets make these adaptations bad on PURPOSE.". Because that adaptation went out of its way to water down the source material and then market the shit out of it. As if to say "The kids have spoken! They want ZERO effort!!"
You said it Phelan: Pratt was a terrible choice for Garfield. He was likely only cast because he voiced another famous character last year in the 2nd highest grossing movie of 2023.
Phelan's exasperation over the idea that it is okay for children's entertainment to be garbage means he will be a great father(should he choose to pursue that route). Also, they both have Garfield themed clothes. That is pretty awesome.
I remember once someone said that there was a big missed opportunity with this movie, where instead of Chris Pratt it should’ve been Jon H. Benjamin as Garfield. I never been more upset at such a horrible miscasting and such a missed opportunity…
Jimmy Davis finally had a chance to cast Jack Nicholson as Garfield and he let the opportunity slip through his fingers. What a shame. It will probably never happen now.
"There’s no a lot whole we know about Garfield." -he loves to eat, lasagna is his favorite -he loves to sleep -he hates mondays -he loves his stuffed bear Pookie -he likes to abuse odie -he finds Nermal incredibly annoying -he tends to be nasty to Jon -deep down, he does truly love the above three That's just off the top of my head. I didn’t even go into specific comics or arcs. WE HAVE OVER FORTY YEARS OF COMICS
sounds like they tried copying the Mario Movie with Garfield but missed the plot because they didn't have enough Garfield and likely forget it was supposed to be one
How in the world are we still getting kids movies tarnished by out-of-touch execs when they involve properties more than old enough to have decision-makers who actually grew up with the properties call the shots?
@@ALLINE835 mate, remember: everyone has different opinions and that’s ok. I enjoyed it, you enjoyed; there’s nothing wrong with that but also try to respect other’s’ opinions where possible (as long as they’re not rude about it)
How am I going to reconcile my desire to never know anything about the new Garfield movie out of spite, and my desire to see Allison and Phelan riff on another bad cartoon? Probably by watching the video.
You want to say it's not a trend of "Here's this recognizable thing you loved, only everything you liked about it was actually bad and wrong, and you're wrong for having liked it, now buy this new thing and forget your values", and then they go and make Garfield nice. I was out as soon as he said he and Odie were always best friends, and it wasn't a joke that he's just using him as a stepstool to get food for himself.
The main problem is that studios just don't seem to get the appeal of Garfield. They see that this property is a cartoon, so they try to force Garfield into the "standard kids' movie" box, when Garfield has never really been made strictly for kids. Even the most iconic "I hate Mondays, I love lasagna," jokes were more aimed at eliciting chuckles from adults than appealing to children. Also, the Garfield strips have never been particularly plot-driven; their character-based humor has always been about one-liners and quick sight gags. The setting almost never leaves Jon's house, and the humor is found in simple day-to-day interactions, not wacky adventures. Also also, it seems they want to avoid the fact that Garfield is, actually, kind of a jerk. I mean, he is basically a self-centered, egotistical character at heart. And if they don't understand how a character can be lovable while also being kind of a jerk... Well then, it's clear that they've never had a cat like Garfield.
"Eeeeven laaazier" isn't going to be as memetic as "stomping.... koopas," but its more versatile. We'll definitely see it in all subsequent Chris Pratt movie reviews.
If it's not Lorenzo Music voicing him, it's not Garfield. Sad thing is, even if Lorenzo was still with us, Chris Pratt would still get the role because... he's a celebrity. RIP Mr. Lorenzo Music.
Oh, we’re the ants who ruined your movie. We’re always here to mess up any joy. When we’re around everything feels like a cash-grab. Our only motivation is to sell… crappy toys!
My mom still references that ants song 30+ years later, which only goes to show how memorable the old series was. My spouse and I watch the holiday specials every year, and I still have a bunch of the older books. I can't help but wonder at the alternate time line where Touchstone made the Garfield's Judgement Day movie back in the early 90s. He can still be a great character with a charming story around him if you put in the effort. But that requires, y'know, being a little less lazier than Garfield.
The plot of the movie alone didn’t feel like Garfield and I don’t know if they were hoping it will get sequels but it didn’t really seem first movie material.
To this day I still question what is the point of this new Garfield movie in 2024. Like just because you have Chris Pratt voice Garfield does not mean that he fits the character. Seriously at this point I'd rather have either Lorenzo musics when he voiced Garfield or Bill Murray when he voiced Garfield. Hell I'd rather take also that guy who voiced him in that 1 new series that was on TV because at least he did a good job at being Garfield. All I hear from Chris Pratt is literally Star lord and nothing more with this movie just being unneeded.
@@rogue7723 Which by the way considering that you mentioned that this Garfield has daddy issues really remind me of Star lord with what happened in the second guardians of the Galaxy movie. They really did not try.
@@CanIswearinmyhandle Yeah but Garfield? Only VERY hardcore fans would be still talking Garfield and even they would dislike this movie, merchandise or not. Not to say you are not wrong but if that was the case, then whoever greenlit this movie was VERY stupid to not tried this years ago when Garfield was relevant at the time.
I feel the only reason they casted Chris Pratt for this is because he is big right now, so they put him in the Mario movie they put him Garfield. Jim Carrey as Eggman thats good casting.
You can tell because he was just okay as Mario Illumination decided lets get him back for Garfield that'll be great again...but atleast as Mario he TRIED giving us a Brooklyn Italian accent. As Garfield he gave zero fucks 😂
Will Forte sounded nothing like Shaggy in Scoob, almost makes you wonder if the studios are telling these actors to just sound like themselves instead of the character.
He was casted because the director of the film, Mark Dindal, specifically wanted him for the role. Sad that film wasn’t in the same level as his previous films: Cats Don’t Dance and The Emperor’s New Groove.
There was a "we replaced your regular coffee.." reference on "Garfield and Friends." (Roy replaced Lanolin's regular coffee with Fernman's crystals...Fernman's makes soap crystals.)
The animation is the only saving grace for this movie. It actually looks like the comic strip. Too bad this movie was "even lazier" than the Bill Murray films.
It's basically like the majority of modern triple ay videogames: all focus on dem graphics, but the rest is garbage. Guess you can consider the advertising and merchandise as the aggressive and intrusive monetization.
Out of all the product placements associated with this movie, the Pop Chips is by far the most bizarre to me. The biggest selling point for Pop Chips is that it has 50% less fat compared to potato chips. And as we all know, Garfield is definitely the kind of character who is very concerned with his calorie intake.
They should have just focused on Jon and Garfield and just how difficult Jon's life really is just like the comic rather than doing another garfield goes missing again. Or they could have just not made a movie 🤷
I got an ad in the middle of this video. For Garfield. The "Number 1 movie in America" (I don't recall if it actually cited any metric as part of that claim). And I'm one of those people who don't get Garfield on most days. But Geeze. Phelan, I am so sorry.
I don’t have an issue with the ”Garfield is jealous about Jon” thing from the 2004 movie, Garfield’s kinda just taking Jon for granted and probably would react that way if Jon started being less attention to him
I think the problem is that the more they try to add to Garfield, the less "Garfield" he becomes, he's not a Snoopy or a Heathcliff type of character. And original cartoon and specials aside, I think he's always been funnier in the flat, 2d comic strip format.
An odd thing thar bugged me was the whole thing they do when even as an adult they will make a character shorter than their parent. Like hey made Garfield way shorter than his dad like how huge is the dad and Garfield in like a middle age cat so he should be the same size as his dad.
The hugeness of Garfield dad really bothers me. Like garfield characters are cartoony but they're kind of the right size and then this cat is almost the size of jon
Took my 9 year old nephew to the movie, as we both love Garfield. Even he was disappointed. Let me repeat. A member of the "target audience" thought this movie was a letdown.
What bothers me the most about generic kids movies is that they don't feel like they were made with today's children in mind. Instead, it's just nostalgia bait for adults like me. Make kid movies for kids dammit! And ffs stop hiring Chris Pratt! He's not the only celebrity in Hollywood. Of course, it would be better if they hired actual voice actors or celebrities with range. But "it's just a kid's movie so we can blow our money on marketing and ads instead of hiring real talent."
While If isn’t a perfect film, I appreciate that it tried to be a throwback to childhood films centering around imagination and imaginary friends. It reminded me of childhood films I grew up with in the early 2000’s.
As a Garfield fan, yeah I'm skipping this movie. The father plot confused me - I thought maybe if they did that kind of story they use the mother instead since she actually made an appearance before. And being told there's a huge lack of Jon in the movie... heck no, this guy is my favorite! There needed to be more Jon and Garfield interactions, those are fun. And while I do like the rare heartwarming bond between the two - yeah, that needs to be done better than making Garfield some happy go lucky, loving cat. I'll stick to Garfield and Friends show...
I feel like Lorenzo Music as Garfield is like Raul Julia as Gomez Addams: it's almost unfair HOW WELL he fits the character and every subsequent performance will be unfairly compared to him. But that is not an excuse to NOT EVEN TRY!
Watching you two sit there playing with plushies and genuinely having a blast is so wholesome. Reminds me a lot of myself and my husband. We sometimes do stupid bits with my plushies, and end up cracking up over our antics. 😆
