 85242 |
 35212 |
|
|
||
|
|
|||||||
| Welcome to the Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis. |
|
GFF is a community of gaming and music enthusiasts. We have a team of dedicated moderators, constant member-organized activities, and plenty of custom features, including our unique journal system. If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ or our GFWiki. You will have to register before you can post. Membership is completely free (and gets rid of the pesky advertisement unit underneath this message).
|
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
 Member 1399 Level 25.03 Mar 2006 
|
Point taken. Anyone who knows anything about Underdog would not be interested in this film, period. So why even dig the property's rotting corpse from the grave and slap CGI on it? Why not just make a film about a dog with super powers and call it something like "Mighty Dog" with a pet-food industry tie-in for good measure?
On the other hand, a film like this: http://www.fandango.com/interview_v+...source=bm_cast where Buscemi even uses some of the crew that filmed the original with the original director, is exactly the opposite approach. Jam it back in, in the dark.
Last edited by speculative; Jul 16, 2007 at 12:11 AM.
Reason: Horrible spelling mistakes...
|
Member 1399 Level 25.03 Mar 2006
|
Maybe it's just me, but I don't see that in the original post. Underdog wasn't even from my childhood, it would have been from my parent's generation. But as someone who has seen at least one episode I can tell the schlock they're peddling has zero to do with the original IP. Zero.
Now, on the other hand, in the same set of trailers today I saw a trailer for a new "Get Smart" film starring Steve Carrell. Sure, it's going to be "different" than the original. But did it have the same intent, tone, and feeling? Yes, down to a tee. There's nowhere I can't reach. |
speculative