The CGI on Clifford is on par with Fluffy from the first Harry Potter movie. Y'know, that movie that came out twenty years ago? / ymshighlights / adumplaze
@@theprofesionalist7927 They aren't offended by it. They're tired by it. There are so many jokes you can make about being gay or trans that are hilarious but you ACTUALLY need to know about the experiences of those people lol. These shows are usually made by disconnected liberals that don't know shit about the queer community.
I thought it was going to be some Q-Anon show. Like a poverty porn documentary about crazy people and back Waters towns that believe in that stuff, like Honey boo boo and duck dynasty, but much sadder
So the animators or creators for Q-Force apparently went ahead and said that the trailer takes the show out of context and it’s way better than it’s presented. But I don’t know how you take that “butthole joke” out of any other context than your bog-standard “lol gays hyper sexualize everything isn’t that cRaZy?!” Like Adum said, there’s a certain portion of the community that eats this shit up… while I just find it really obnoxious.
It's like being in the 90's again, where gays on TV were "Hi! I'm here, I'm Queer, and I'm a stereotype forced in for inclusion but I'm really just a bundle of homophobic gay jokes. Girlfriend."
I mean, he's one character in an ensemble cast. He's clearly not supposed to represent all gay men. Adam's right, the problem is really that none of the jokes they selected for the trailer were actually funny.
@@lnfreeman I appreciate you say he is one character in an ensemble, but the entire trailer was wildly offensive. Let's talk about the "masculine" guy since pointing out how the effeminate one being offensive for some reason isn't ok. None of the gay masculine men I fuck have ever had to perform their masculinity, the joke implied by "wasting all the masculinity." Masculine men are just dudes that happen to fuck dudes, it's not an act. That implication is entirely homophobic.
I love when an extremely sanitized, corporatized show makes fun of pride for being mainstream now. Like this show is the television equivalent of Citibank at pride. "yaaasss queen wurk that hole girl"
@Jeff Fun it was some black chick and she wasn’t even the mother of the baby. The baby was white. Her cheering on for the baby was disgusting and horrific.
as horrible as the show looks like it's going to be, pride HAS TO be made fun of now that it's mainstream, otherwise it'll forever be something that youll get thought-policed for even lightly criticizing. it's an important step in the cultural cycle that being said, the show looks completely fucking disgusting and i wont be watching it
@@yinnyonline The worst thing about it is that I can't tell if it's a Boondocks situation where it's made by gay people making fun of gay people, or if it's made completely unironically.
Sexy Beasts is literally a show taking a bunch of good looking model people and putting masks on them to get the (wow they were so hot) reaction after. . . I agree with Adam they should have went full fur suit and had NORMAL people. The way they have it is so shallow...like "WOW! Josh was a hot dude the whole time and not just a hot bodied dude in a half face mask!" lol good lord. . . .
The whole point of the show is that it's meant to be about judging someone's personality over their looks, but then apparently Netflix went and only hired conventionally attractive people to participate. Kinda defeats the purpose of the masks and makeup.
Even fursuits could potentially muddie one's psychological attachment to someone else. I feel like everyone would have to be in identical black featureless non-form-fitting bodysuits. And that doesn't eliminate the height discrepancy between people.
I don't recall there being a supernatural explaination for Clifford's size before. In the cartoon he was just the runt that she didn't give up on and he got really big
@@HOTD108_ It then cuts to Ralph, in his apartment, where you then hear a faint "release the drone" which prompts an armed drone to fly up to his window and open fire.
@@HOTD108_ It would never work because Charles would reveal his identity by introducing himself with his full name and his show, regardless of whether or not the other person asked. "Charles Styles, Mystery Diners."
If it wasn't a dating show, I'd say the make-up team for Sexy Beasts is incredible. The make-up department did a phenomenal job with their work for what it is and I hope they go on to greater things.
In an ideal universe, Adum would have made that Jan Svankmajer-approved Clifford movie already. However, all the blood and gore would be less terrifying than our own universe's CGI abomination.
My biggest question on Clifford is the scale of the inevitable dog piss/shit joke. It's a dumb kids movie after all, they all have one. Will they go subtle with like, a joke about the poop bag being a giant garbage bag? Or will they go all in and have something like a "he isn't potty trained" joke and smash cut to a flood of piss shooting out of the house?
I know, it's the entire selling point and reason for the show and they literally shy away from it Adam also brings up a good point how they all have conventionally attractive slim bodies too and yet they only cover the faces. So these people know they aren't hooking up with someone fat or short or anything
It's just an incredibly boring dating reality tv show but they've used makeup to create these nightmare fuel looks to generate ironic Internet buzz. It's so depressing and cynical and predictable.
@ConManliness that's sort of subjective, people generally use it to explain the media's potrayal of attractiveness For example, I find the women used in media alot to look sort of bland and find women who dress more alternatively more attractive and interesting (just my personal opinion/taste or whatever though) So I just say "conventionally attractive" because I personally find their looks to be a bit boring
@@AverageInternetButterfly Why new York city too? Why not an island like the one from the books and cartoons? I live here and in legit tired of seeing it in movies
the more distracting part about clifford is that he walks absolutely silent. i mean listen for it in the trailer. his paws connecting to the ground have 0 soundediting going with them. i dont care if a realistig clifford is too scary, make him crush the ground like a friggin TREX!
Adam talking about the Wilhelm scream reminded me of the live action Yogi Bear film, where a pinecone falling on Yogi's eye triggers the aforementioned scream from him, and it was the most unfitting sounding thing ever.
@@j0j0dartiste21 The dogs only talked when talking to each other or other animals. To the humans all the animals made normal animal sounds. Though I will say, Clifford looks downsized in the trailer vs the original cartoon.
the blur in the Clifford trailer shot has me thinking they just either filmed a street without permission or got that bit of video online and then were made to blur the faces out and tried to make it look like a stylistic choice LMAO
Some of the people who work on the show said the trailer was bad on purpose, so who knows, maybe it could end up with the purpose of being The Boondocks but for gay people, but I'm not sure considering a requirement to make something like that is to be self-aware, and the trailer showcased anything but really.
@@trashman3319 lmao it’s gonna be really hard to make another Boondocks, plus the animation of Q Force is shit while Boondocks actually looked pretty good
I'm also sick of it mostly being comedy TV shows as well. I wanna watch more adult animated feature films that are dramatic or horrifying or just beautiful.
As a kindergarten teacher who reads the Clifford books regularly, I am disappointed with this movie. First of all - at least in the original books before it became a major franchise - Clifford wasn't magically large. The story was told from Emily Elizabeth perspective as a very young girl, where her view of the world and bias towards her favorite dog, plus a sense of childish hyperbole regularly exaggerates and sees Clifford as being much larger than he actually is. Norman Bridwell (the original author) even talks about how Emily Elizabeth was based off of his own daughter (including the name. His daughter's name *is* Emily Elizabeth) and their dog and how, to his 4 year old daughter, their dog looked monstrously huge. (source is from the classic Clifford Collection hardback book) Secondly, I am disappointed they even set this movie in the modern era, considering the books were definitely a product of their time, back in the early-mid 60's. I think there is a way more compelling story if they just left Clifford untouched in the era he was written in.
This shouldn't bother me as much but it's very obvious that they put BTS' Dynamite in the Clifford trailer not to portray a theme, not to put the audience into a certain mood. It's just there because it's a popular song that people can recognize and associate their love for the song with the movie trailer. That's it.
This!!! I'm sick and tired of trailers using popular songs just because they're popular. Like how The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard uses Baby One More Time in one ad just because it has the word "hit" in the lyrics. Like, bruh...
Clifford amuses me because it really highlights the difference between people who are comfortable with dogs and those who arent. Dog-loving people say "awww, a huge dog, how cute" and those of us wary of dogs are thinking "holy shit, now the predatory animal with no fear of humans is Tyrannosaurus-sized".
The only problem is that creatives always say that to save face (remember Ghostbusters 2016, when they tried to say the trailer was just cut bad and the final movie would be really good?). It's possible that it's great but the studios butchered the trailer, but we won't know until it comes out.
@@videogamenostalgia 90% of movies/tv shows/video games have ZERO communication between the creative team and the marketing department, which is how we get such misleading advertising so often. What really sucks is how people attack the creative teams for this, when they had nothing to do with the marketing.
If a trailer for a kids show featured a beheading scene, I would be difficult to believe the creators if they insisted it really was family friendly. The fact that there is a single beheading scene in any context would rather contradict this.
it would be a lot more interesting to put a few objectively ugly people in those animal suits and have them de-suit at the end to see if the personality/date was enough to override their physical appearance. can't have unattractive people starring in shows though.
Clifford's red fur would be reflecting around his environment. His shadow would be kinda red. Anyone next to him would be kinda red. He looks fake because they didn't bother thinking about what a giant red object would look like next to other things more than a first-semester art student.
In the post credits scene of Clifford, they'll move to Birdwell Island to have more room to live like in the books. Then Arthur with an eyepatch will come out and say he's assembling a team
i remember the episode where Emily-Elizabeth adopts Clifford. She got him from a litter of normal dogs and he was the smallest one. He also lived in a doghouse, because Emily-Elizabeth just lived in a normal sized house, not a mansion as seems to be the case here..... idk, i just feel like Clifford isn't a story that lends itself to a live action film...
‘We’re making a gay show with primarily gay characters, so we need to make them exceptional and utterly gay, encompassing their entire personality, down to the roots of their dialogue, and we need all the stereotypes, subtly is a foreign concept to us’, I assume was the thought process.
Whats funny is that theres a tumblr post that talks exactly about the government going after clifford and Emily Elizabeth, after a whole thing of the gov fighting the dog and her on birdwell island, joins the Avengers.
How does Clifford get through human sized doors? Does she have to yell at him and get angry at him to love him less so he'll shrink down to fit through?
I feel like every step for every writing process of each of these shows and movies was a joke and the punchline won't happen until at least one person has wasted their time watching them
6:13 - "What if you fall in love with the costume?" Not gonna lie, I just watched every currently released episode, and some of them are actually sexier in their fursona forms.
What's even the point of that dating show hiding people's faces, when it's obvious that anyone in a show like that has to be good looking by default, or they wouldn't even be invited at all?
Q Force I feel like it might be okay, but I'm pretty sure everyone's gonna have a hate on for Twink And Clifford feels like they're scared of the idea of people asking about the realism of a big red dog and were like "we'll add magic to explain why the dog gets big" and have it be a basic story of acceptance
If they made q-force with anthro characters literally no one would be calling for an outcry, they'd probably just go "oh yeah that makes sense" and assume it's just exaggeration for exaggeration's sake, but because they're human, people are taking it more seriously. ...Also I mean any media with anthro characters is just better in my opinion, even if they're not main characters.
This Clifford is more tamed than the Robot Chicken version where he destroy a neighborhood and crush innocent civilians, and at the end he had to be neutered by using a Excavator.
