Police Academy TV Series review

 Time ago I did a review of a re-edit of a beloved television series I never watched. Now I'm going to review a TV adaptation of a beloved film series I never watched. Hear me out, how does it play out for an outsider?

Background

Police Academy The Series was created by Paul Masalansky, a producer on the original Police Academy movies. The quality of the show hits different when it's the conscious effort of someone associated with the initial property. Then again it was the work of the producer, so I guess he saw dollar signs or something, he or the distributor.

Along with Masalansky, the show was co-produced by George Goodman and Barry Rosen, who both had previously produced a television adaptation for Zorro, one of many, back in 1990, which was strangely co-produced by the animation studio behind Doug and The Adventures of TinTin (this was a live-action show by the way.)

Another producer behind this was Steven S. Levitan. Wait, you mean the guy behind Modern Family? No. I mean the guy behind Goosebumps, well, he produced the TV adaptation. Still just as interesting.

Police Academy The Series was produced for syndication, a different ballpark compared to network television. You can get away with a bit more in syndication and are guaranteed more episodes, but you're held back by budget restraints. Many shows like these were outsourced to international units to make use of tax credit programs or cheaper filming. Warner Bros. took advantage of this the most in the 90s, via partnerships with French and German backers. However, this seems to be an exception.

Also interesting fact, Protocol also produced Code Name Eternity, another Warner Bros. syndie show.

Though not that obvious, the show was filmed in Ontario. Because of the cheaper filming and funding, they couldn't afford bigger actors, i.e., those from the movies. They were able to get Michael Winslow, but only for limited commitments. The show featured Matt Borlenghi, who's surprisingly still acting as recently as Cobra Kai, and had a lot of roles before then after this.

There was also Joe Flaherty, Kenneth Mars, Dom DeLuise, Colleen Camp, even some voice actors. One interesting thing about Canadian productions is that some of them actually recruit voice actors to appear in live action roles. It happened once with Tabitha St. Germain in an episode of The Outer Limits.

In the first episode alone, we got appearances from Andrew Kavadas, aka Bruce Banner in Fantastic Four: World's Greatest Heroes... also Simon Belmont from Captain N. There was also Dave Squatch Ward, but he has too distinct of a voice for me to not recognize. I know him from two other roles.

The Show

Whether or not this follows the structure of the original movie is not known to me. All I know is that it's a slap-sticky comedy film taking place in and around the police. I can tell new characters were brought in to mimic those in the films, once more, it would cost a hell of a lot more to get them to commit to 22 episodes.

Of these we have the dumb as dirt but kindhearted giant, the fierce latina, the blonde who seems to be a hazard to the luck of those she loves, two relatives who worship each other, I'm sure there's an allegory in there somewhere, the skeptic sergeant and the goofball commander. Also the smooth talking lead, named Richard Casey.

Casey is brought in as a cadet after separating the roof of a car from a bus driven by two assholes who wrecked his truck, as an ultimatum against prison time. Noble intents brought him in, so fair enough.

One problem people have that I can understand is that the show is trying too hard to be funny, and... true. They lay on a lot of sight gags and slapstick. Is this gonna be like Ninja Turtles The Next Mutation? No, because Next Mutation will always be more idiotic. At least Police Academy lays the gags on harder than crazy sound effects.

To its advantage, most of these gags catch me by surprise. They may be silly, okay stupid, but I never expected the big guy to shoot a lightbulb, nor did I expect Casey to stuff jinx girl's bras with foam rubber to ensure she can pass a swimming test. The show at large isn't that serious to begin with, and the plots lend themselves to that quite well, another advantage against Next Mutation which has ideas that should be taken seriously, but they just fuck it up.

For how corny it is, they wear it by the sleeve, so I guess expectations for non Police Academy viewers could be reasonably low. It's not edgy 90s schlock, it's not in your face with idiotic trends and I have yet to see one skateboard. It's basically a classic.

I'm aware that the original movie had a balance between comedy and more serious bits, yeah that's a letdown... moving on.

Compared to Turbocharged Thunderbirds, I actually managed to sit through one episode of this show in one sitting. Yeah, a marathon of dumb gags with the same commercials repeated managed to hold my interest for that long. I have shit taste.

Final Thoughts

There really isn't much I can really say about this show. It's dumb and a disservice to the movie it's based on, but it's not unwatchable. If you're in the right mood you could get some enjoyment out of some good ol' dumb humor, and be surprised at most of the visual gags. As someone who never saw the original Police Academy, this doesn't impact my opinion on it, I can expect it to be better than the show, but I dunno, this wasn't that bad, it's not good but I've seen worse. There is worse.

In principle, at least they didn't make it a cartoon that went with a trend of adapting adult or R rated franchises and turning them into kids cartoons. If Fred Wolf didn't make Freddy Krueger and the Straight Edge Gang he is no creator I wish to know.

It really is a love it or hate it deal, whether people like it or not.

Episode Review: Casa Paradisio

 I was gonna do a review of the SpongeBob SquarePants episode The Paper, I might still do, if I have the time and energy. Right now, I wanna take whatever time I have to do a little venting.

I've been watching Hey Arnold! again lately, and I maintain it's a good show, but even it has problems, an over-reliance on convenience, characters being used for the sake of a plot, if not to make a bad character look good, Arnold being devolved to a moral guardian, and the crazy thing is is that this wasn't an issue in the later seasons, even Arnold got a bit better around that point.

I feel like around the middle of the show, lesser episodes were quite common. I can understand the purposes of episodes like Helga's Makeover, Door #16, but a lot of episodes around season 3 felt empty. Looking back I realized that Klasky Csupo were like "Bro let me copy your homework." in one or two episodes, but to be fair Hey Arnold did it once with an old sitcom from the 80s, with not much nuance beyond the creepy nature, and they thought no one would notice.

Nickelodeon seems to enjoy recycling a lot of ideas.

Anyhow, Arnold Betrays Iggy is so bad that I actually agree with the sentiments against it. Its B segment was no better either. Two out of every four segments I watch leave me unsatisfied. But anyway, this one somehow made me feel worse.

The Episode

Grandpa Phil is hit with hard times, bickering borders and a building that's basically falling apart, and few are willing to at least suck it up and give him a break, and speaking of convenience, an offer to buy and remove the boarding house just so happens to come up. This leads him to desire a break from it all, a long term break if you will. So what? Is Phil gonna travel to Florida for a nice relaxing retirement but it turns out to be a condominium which is somehow too good to be true and he runs the risk of losing everything for nothing?

Actually that would've been more interesting. How do I put this? Gertie's the least selfish person in the room and she does what she wants. Phil wants to get away from the Borders as he feels he could no longer put up with the rigors of a low quality establishment that may be well out of his hands monetarily, and borders that bicker endlessly, the borders essentially don't want to find a new place to live.

I get the idea behind the conflict, but Ernie and Mr. Hyunh have jobs, and a weeks notice. Oskar has no job but who gives a shit about him? But his wife Suzy does and she wouldn't leave his ass until nearly 19 years later. Nothing is ever easy, or forever. It's pretty shitty to kick people to the curb, but at least for this episode they're asking for it. I could say Phil is nearing the end, but come on, if the family curse doesn't get him he could make it to 150. Hell, he lived 19 years after this episode aired.

(okay, it's wishful thinking that the Jungle Movie would literally take place years after this show, but given how out there the movie was... never mind they were trying to make up for lost time.)

Thing of it is, it's a paradox. Phil is framed as selfish though he has every right to be at the end of his wits, yet the borders are selfish though they are the same as when they started. Who do I root for? There's the moral and ethical concerns of the Borders, but Phil is a funnier character than any of them combined.

Their attempts at dissuading Phil amount to glorified groveling and flattery, and I like how Phil doesn't buy into it even a little, but I'll save that for the end. Think of it like "Here we're being nice, keep patting our asses gramps." Like you have to suck it up every day for the rest of your life because of what path you chose. If this is an attempt at showcasing the dark side to lifetime commitment... no, Helga and the Nanny had better implications.

I wish Lana Vail didn't move out, would've loved to see what she would've said, had she not bowed down to the mob mentality had by the borders, and then I get the idea why she moved out.

So, about the end, for turning down the offer... things return to normal unceremoniously, and to add insult to injury, it's put to words. A hollow promise that's broken almost immediately. What have we learned? You're stuck with the people in your house no matter what so suck it up and bow to their will. I can't even be mad about even signing away the boarding house, because the arguments against it were handled so poorly a scam would've been preferable.

I only technically sided with Phil in this, otherwise I'd just have regrets with nothing to show for it. You go back to relive childhood memories with your favorite shows, only to feel worse when you're old enough to comprehend issues never considered. 

Final Thoughts

I at least know where I stand with Arnold Betrays Iggy, I'd say it had better justification for its plot, but that'd be a lie. I never liked Iggy anyways, it's only good if you hate Arnold and want to see him on the retrieving end for a change. I consider Helga's Makeover to be pretty poor too, but then again that came out earlier and few of the characters were truly defined, and this was meant to play into the girl power schtick, at least that's what it feels like.

It's not an oddity that feels more like a fabrication than an actual episode, it's not horrendous, it's not an issue... it's just nothing, not even a basic nothing, an irritating nothing. It's like an itch you feel on one of your toes. You're wearing tightly laced boots, you're driving for a long trip, squishing your toes together doesn't make it work, stopping to scratch it yourself means losing momentum on the highway, that lingering feeling persists and spreads, it's a lose lose situation.

Wanting to move to Florida but force people out to the street with no consideration, against people wanting to keep the owner from selling the joint while only sacking up just to sell a facade, that's a lose lose situation with nothing to show for it. I heard of episodes going back to the status quo, but never during the episode itself, like a full blown circle.

If it's all about family, it's less "We are family." and more "We're your family, you're stuck with us forever, we will do everything in your power to ensure you stay. Live with it." But it beats the hell out of how I'd handle it. "Why do you keep calling me grandpa? I can't be one. I don't have a grandson." See? It doesn't even fit the show.

If this was an anti-Florida pitch, how about you tell us why it sucks, I mean it can't suck, that's where Cr1Tikal comes from, it's awesome by default, awesomely moist.

Constant humidity? Or regret straight to the grave?

Okay, cutting this short, just gonna keep rambling on.

Miracle in Toyland review

 Yep, jumping right to Christmas again, people certainly favor a biblical holiday over a holiday marked by blood... also the fact that few obscure Thanksgiving specials are out there. The day I cover the Peanuts is the day I sell out.

What'll make this special? My... penchant for detail?

Background

Longtime viewers of Phelous will know the name Golden Films, or Goodtimes Entertainment, or both essentially. If you don't, Golden Films was one of multiple producers of films meant to cash in on the success of more popular ones, in this case, Disney. Though I hate the company and enjoy anyone sticking it to them... they're not that interesting, and it shows that mockbusters aren't just a thing of the 2010s.

You see, what they would do is release their films on VHS around the time Disney did the same for their movies, with the intent of fooling buyers who wouldn't know the difference. There was an attempt at sticking a fork in that practice, but it ended with Disney realizing that they don't own the rights to the fairy tales they base their films on, which is the basis for Golden Films' adaptations. 

It's almost as if Disney's entitled or something.

However, while Golden Films is on a pretty low ebb, only technically being within the right to make what they did, they aren't the worst company of the lot, that honor goes to UAV Corporation, their adaptation of Mulan stands as one of my most hated movies of all time.

Any discussions on Golden Films tend to only go as far as their filmography and status quo, as if the company successfully buried any clues to their foundation. A key figure to the company is Diane Eskenazi, who founded it around 1992.

Their earliest production seems to be King Arthur and the Knights of Justice, a television series that ran in 1992 and has her credited as a producer, so it checks out. What tended to confuse people was that Golden Films was often credited under the American Film Investment Corporation label, whether it acted as a pseudonym or low profile subdivision that got done in after Golden Films reconsidered their business model.

Eskenazi's latest production, and one prominently touted on her more up to date summations is One World, a show so successful... it doesn't even have any ratings or reviews on IMDb. Now that's what I call success.

Golden Films rarely credited their actors, or at the very least they aren't covered on IMDb, but it can be inferred that they hired union actors like Cam Clarke, Debbi Derryberry, Darren Norris (who interestingly starred in a B family movie covered by Brutalmoose), or whoever was looking to be hired.

For anyone curious, the voice of Phelous mainstay Old Man is supposedly Jan Rabson.

The film was released around the time Golden Films sought to produce, supposedly, more original titles. These were executive produced by Robert Halmi Jr., of RHI (acquired Little Rascals and produced Secret World of Alex Mack) fame, but that company wasn't involved in any of these. Would've made things more interesting or gave them more money to work with.

Personally, I would've preferred to cover Little Angels: The Brightest Christmas, but apparently it's not on YouTube, which is why this is on the chopping block.

I may be accused of aping off Phelous, but this is more like me aping off Bobsheaux who aped off Phelous. At least you won't be charged two bucks just to read this review. I'd just charge you for a request.

And finally, on with the show

We begin with a first, a Christmas film that starts with a war. This is meant to establish the main character Jessie Justice (and that's silly even by cheap family movie standards) and his dynamic with his general...? father. I get the idea, but I feel this overstays its welcome, and as this is the first thing we see in the movie, it's bound to lead to some serious whiplash. We do get an otherwise okay opening song, okay as in nothing special and barely blending well with the ongoing action.

All I can say about this is that apparently Clark Kent is in the army, and they had a passive aggressive response to having a female in their troop (yeah we'll take women, but just one.) I'd kill to see an animated movie centered on a female soldier fighting in the army that doesn't involve Chinese mythology otherwise I'd be getting Mulan recommendations up the ass.

By the way, the soldiers are mutually exclusive to this dream, yes this is a dream. At least 15% probably established what Jessie is like and what his conflict was, but we'd get more important details later on. Stop me if you heard this before, a child tries to prove their worth to their father, but the father prioritizes their work over their child.

Never heard that one before.

Anyhow, we get our secondary protagonist, of sorts, at best she's around to establish the conflict. Jessie's cousin Gabriella. Now, I was willing to give it the benefit of the doubt that Phelous was exaggerating their relationship for laughs, but thanks to Folgers I understand implications go a very long way. It's normal for cousins to hold hands... when they're young...er than they are here. Also any hands on action that'd look fine when it's between kids that don't know any better, but incredibly awkward when they're older.

It's family values that make this country creepy. Anyhow, I don't know how old these kids are supposed to be, one of them still enjoys getting toys... hey, my interest goes as far as coin collecting and logos.

I'll go into the animation issues later on.

Here, we see just what Jessie's problem is, his desire to be the best and disregarding others. This shown at a soccer game (even though Gabriella said they were heading to school the first few minutes we saw her.) Would've been a good opportunity to better establish the characters, but that would mean adding more time than.... 50 minutes?

At best, the odds for this are better in favor than those in Little Angels. It's... believable for now. Anyhow, this leads to Jessie breaking all the rules in front of a referee who's either blind or bored out of his skull just to score the winning goal.

So he disregards others out of insecurity for his own self and desire to please his father. Never heard that one before. Neither have I heard about a father having to work on Christmas. I mean this is the same company that made cash-ins on popular Disney titles, not so much the stories but what they include, should I really be surprised they'd use existing ideas here?

Anyhow, he says Jessie will stay at Gabriella's house, but it seems she's just staying with him, as if her parents were scared straight by a coffee commercial, yeah I made the Folgers joke twice.

So, to lift Jessie's spirits, the two go to a toy store, who's perspectives would be gone into in another section. He not only pisses Gabriella off after making her carsick in a go-kart race, but apparently lost the only person that tolerates him. This might be a good time to introduce some fantasy elements, in the form of magical toys. I mean it's implied in the title.

Of our roster we have Super Duper Guy, the five seconds it took to come up with that... a buff dolt, army douche, a pirate, Pochahontas (yeah I couldn't come up with anything else), and something for the men, an elf that doesn't hide much. So what happens next? I'll tell you if I can find a way to sum up nonsense in the form of a long song, a rescue mission that goes nowhere and an incredibly lucky guess on what a Christmas Tree star contained. Also Jessie leaves a toy soldier to die, but you telling me there are no medical doctors in the line of toys? Rather than stay with the man, Jessie could've taken him back to base camp. Just saying.

So, dream ends, if it was one, Gabriella is still present by the store, whether or not her abandonment was just a test, best possible guess. Also apparently Jessie's dad's plane was downed. If there was anything more to it that wasn't covered by Phelous... and nobody else, would mentioning them make any difference? At least I can't make a reference to The Room through text.

Now then, the idea of the toys only existing in Jessie's imagination would be enough to get him in tune with a happier self. This might've been done before, but it's better than just having the toys actually be real living things that ultimately save Jessie's dad and convince him to be a better father.

Did I just discuss the key points to the plot all the way to the end? Whoops... guess that means I gotta wrap things up soon.

Animation (and other stuff)

Let's be real, Golden Films were never known for quality animation, and the low quality is especially noticeable in this, and just as inexcusable for something made in the year 2000. On the surface it looks okay, but it's when you look at the finer details that things are seriously wrong. First up, the scene continuity, like characters just warp into place, scenes are often reused, whole lotta corner cutting. For a good example, the scene at the soccer field had them walk off of it then cut to them back on it somehow.

The audio overlays are also an issue, where the soundtrack tends to drown out the dialog, as well as dialog overlapping on scene transitions. Also the standard and always hilarious outfit swaps, where one scene had Jessie in his PJs and then cut to him with his outfit already on.

At the soccer-field again, I would say they fucked up by using the wrong character model for when Jessie goes to approach a teammate he knocked down, but it could've just been another he hit. But one thing is for sure, they got lazy and reused a model of a character in an opposing team.

Jessie is standing up crying in one scene, to establish the proper introduction between him and the toys then the next time we cut to him he is asleep.

The toystore is the hardest to ignore, thanks to its ridiculous size proportions, giant toys on shelves towering over the customers. Was this meant to capture a child's imagination and wonderment in a toy shop? I could use an answer here. 

I won't go into Jessie's supposed bipolarism since that could've been owed to Phelous missing continuity cues, but I will question how Jessie knew about the rules of a go-kart challenge even though it's within the first minute he got into one. An overlong gospel leads to a sudden segue into a conflict that goes nowhere.

I question if the music was made before the animation given how it only barely fits what's going on in its scenes.

I will give it this, the one thing that kept me from shutting this off was keeping an eye out for continuity errors, so I'll give them that. It's a nitpicker's dream.

Final Thoughts

Whether I consider this the worst or just not very good is inconsequential. The film is kept alive only by those who cover it, and it seems even contemporary viewers weren't that fond of it...

Nothing... I have nothing. Bye

I Can't Even Look at the Rugrats Reboot

 Okay, this is a first. How can I go into a show that I can't even look at? I'm pretty open-minded when it comes to shows people deem ugly, I'd defend Mr. Meaty to the bitter end and I do enjoy the art style Klasky-Csupo was once known for. But... this somehow broke me.

Not going into the quality of the show, I'm just gonna go into my overall impressions and why I won't watch it.

I was watching a JordanFringe video about the show, I got to a point I had to scroll down just to not see the footage, something about it gave me a fight or flight reaction, and I couldn't keep going. Keep in mind a glut of videos like Jordan's tend to feature clips of the show covered for a bulk of the video. I'd get an eye-full of the show just through those clips alone.

Now granted, the initial seasons of Rugrats looked... abstract, to say the least. It takes time to get used to it. Either we've seen so much of the original show we've built a tolerance for it, or maybe we've seen worse, who knows? For the strangest reason I always thought Rugrats was for preschoolers, serves my judgmental ass right.

What I know about it

Though I haven't seen an episode proper nor intend to, I've discovered some aspects through word of mouth and whatever I heard from JordanFringe. Based on some clips, it looks like they made Grandpa Lou gay, or just gave him a friend. Now granted I'm not against gay couples, more power to them and it is a nice change, but altering a character just to fit that is just asking for trouble and making people assume they're forcing labels onto people. This is just speculation on my part, correct me if I'm wrong on that.

I do know for sure they made Betty into a lesbian. It seemed to be quite an abrupt change as she was previously married (I mean then again they could've split sometime after having Phil and Lil). Let's say I'm open to these erratic changes, of all people to turn gay, why would they pick the butchest looking woman in the room?

All for representation, not for caricatures. It's less "Let's experiment with sexuality and help inspire new ideas for plots, further representation and show kids that it's okay to be gay." and more "She looks pretty lesbian, quota complete."

It's a pretty dangerous move and it could cause newcomers to assume all lesbians look a certain way, rather than just understand any woman could pine for the same sex. You mean to tell me if a girl practices tomboyish behaviors and has short hair they are automatically declared a lesbian? Well how dare you force labels onto people because of a clear lack of communication and care to the sensibilities of people who are different.

You may be thinking, well who would I wish to be gay if there had to be those? Well Chaz can fit the bill (I know it's tempting the fate given his nature), but the opportunity is there. Kira can be a lesbian as well, as she got the gall to stick up to her former superior, but is still willing to act as a godmother to Chuckie.

By the way, Kimi's gonna be a late inclusion to the show, again.

There is one big notable change. They made Suzie the same age as the babies. I'm about to potentially repeat points by Jordan verbatim, but I doubt there's any other way to say something I happen to agree with. The point behind Suzie was to create a foil to Angelica, someone her age who can easily work against her. Just because Suzie aligned to the babies, that doesn't mean she had to be aged down for it, she could already understand them.

I get Suzie is a more divisive character, a bit of a mary sue in some cases (though All Grown Up hammered the latter point straight to the ground.), but was this really the best option? I mean again, Kimi's getting thrown into the mix too. Anything else I'd say would either be wishful and over-thinking.

Also for the clips I saw, apparently there was a gag involving Snapchat filters. 

How is this hard to look at?

I don't know if the changes got to me or not, but just looking at the footage gave me quite a reaction. I'm not one to lose my mind over reboots looking drastically different, I was willing to give this the benefit of the doubt of being an expendable reboot, not worth losing one's mind over. But let me tell you this, give the 2016 PPG reboot whatever crap you want, I'd defend it's easier on the eyes than this.

What prompted a CG reboot? This was well after theTV CGI craze of the mid 2000s, and even those cartoons look better than this. Because Rugrats had a very particular style, it was hard to translate to 3D, surely, and the results go to the uncanny valley, by foot and flight. It's a sharp turn, and the world wasn't ready for it. There's something about bulgy bodies with big eyes and tiny pupils.

When even most of the Rugrats video games are more aesthetically pleasing, something is seriously wrong. Hell, Kamp Koral looks better than this. Anything that doesn't have a malleable style hardly translates well to 3D.

How big was the demand for a Rugrats reboot? Has rampant nostalgia gone too far to the point Nickelodeon is seeking to bank on it? I hope it's the latter because all my complaining in the past would not be in vain.

There's a Ren and Stimpy reboot coming to comedy central, and I doubt that'd look any worse than this, hell, Adult Party Cartoon will always look worse.

Am I missing much with this? Let me know.

Turbocharged Thunderbirds review

 Thunder, thunder, Thunderbirds, HO!!!

That can't be right...

For many a British viewer, Thunderbirds is a perennial staple. What could beat high octane action starring puppets, or marionettes, are they any different beyond some distinctions?

I'm gonna level with you... I never saw the original Thunderbirds, beyond some brief clips. All else I know is that it employed a process known as supermarionation, sounds like it'd make for a good fansite name, and that it was incredibly popular.

But that's not the point.

You're an American in the 90s. The internet hasn't become a regular part of someone's life and where were you gonna watch the original Thunderbirds at that point? If this was you, your first introduction would've been a little ditty called Turbocharged Thunderbirds. And much like fans of Mobile Suit Gundam in 1997, it'd ruin the original for anybody.

You'd have had better luck if you were a fan of Supercar in the late-80s/early-90s, which was screened on The Higgins Boys and Gruber, plus Clutch Cargo.

Background

Thunderbirds' first introduction in America came in 1994, when episodes were ran on Fox Kids, albeit edited for time restraints and, you guessed it, localization through American actors and a new soundtrack (getting Saban vibes through it, they used their own soundtrack when they had control of the Dragon Ball Z dub back in the day.) This was said to be done to capitalize on the popularity of Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, which was ironically airing on Fox already. I guess it was only prophetic that Disney would acquire them since one source of income is never enough.

It'd be fun to look at how Fox handled this, but something more interesting came out a few months later in a place where people pray for death, but death won't come. UPN. And things took quite a turn. How bad was it? Well at this point they went from capitalizing on Power Rangers to trying to follow a similar formula. If you include live-action footage along with stunt action, that's an automatic parallel.

To say the creators weren't happy with this is an understatement, Gerry Anderson, who created it in the first place, even went as far as threatening legal action lest his name was taken off. Sufficed to say, only one season came of this. It's almost as if Power Rangers made their schtick work or Americans weren't as stupid as most would assume.

There're few actors I recognize in this. Apparently the guy who played Tripp would go on to appear in Eurotrip, a movie I actually have fond memories of. Tim Curry was in this, but then again he was in everything at this point. 

The show was distributed by ITC Entertainment, which made sense as they were initially created as a distribution arm by ATV who aired the original Thunderbirds series. It was also produced by Propaganda Television. The company was behind Beverly Hills 90210 (which ironically had Tripp's actor), Nickelodeon's Salute Your Shorts and David Lynch's Hotel Room.

Propaganda, or at least the film company it was a branch of, was acquired by PolyGram in the 90s, and ironically they would acquire ITC too.

So, what'll make this review special? What can I add to the table that no one else has? Well, as mentioned before I've never seen the original Thunderbirds. I will view this show on its own merits and see if it would've had something to offer outsiders.

How bad could this be?

Well the intro is a first for me, an intro that's half cool, and half shit. One half is the original footage, the other was tacked on, at least it looks that way.

The copy I found has Chinese subtitles, and when the title card appears, part of the subtitle reads SOS. Part of it is coincidence, the other, our first introduction after the theme song is the live-action stuff.

Our first time seeing the live-action characters, the music is making me think a game of Blue's Clues is about to begin. But let's be fair, most of the complaints about stuff like this come from people who had a particular attachment to the original material. There're some 90s live action shows as cheesy as this and people still enjoy them, maybe a fresh pair of eyes can help this out some.

Tripp wonders where his skateboard is, and I'm getting flashbacks to how the lead singer of Faith No More got into an accident with one at the tender age of 40. I guess along with being a hypocrite he's also clinging to his lost youth.

Okay, the dialog is kinda clunky, and littered with lingo, of the technical and the California variety. Da Boom Crew handled this worse, too bad the only review of it I can find is literally unwatchable. I'll give it this, Tripp is the better actor so far, and at least he landed some major roles since this. By the way, if you're wondering about the girl, other character... Roxette, she previously had a role in Back to the Future... the animated series and also appeared on Beverly Hills 90210 before dropping off after another UPN bastardization of Love Boat, I mean it might be good, who knows?

I'm running into too many coincidences and I'm not even two minutes into this.

So anyway, Roxette takes the wheels off of Tripp's means of movement in a series of video games bastardized by Activision in later years to create a device that'll either come in handy in the climax or get the conflict going. Tripp and Roxette tend to bicker, at least I'm sure of it.

But fuck them for about a minute or so, let's get into the Thunderbirds footage... for about a few seconds. I have to assume they used the American voices here. I'll admit, at times networks could get away with these dubs, I would've never known Bob the Builder came from the UK based on Nick Jr.'s initial airings of it, wait why would I be mad about it here? I never watched the original show.

Anyway, seems the computer is warning us about any future lingo about to be spouted, why else is it called the "yo" warning? It seemed to have a little too much "yo", it keeps fidgeting around as if it's trying to be loud and in your face to capture a 90s vibe. And it was right, we got technical lingo. It may fit with the situation, but how many times have we heard manual override? I mean then again they could've had someone call a wrench by a name not even a technical person would refer to it as.

The device Tripp is using almost looks like a View Master. In fact, it is. I can suspend my sense of disbelief as far as black garbage bags being used to resemble a black mass in a body of water that eats people, Creepshow 2. Hell, what is the standard for basic small vehicles in giant space ships? Am I gonna defend Space Mutiny of all things?

Why am I bringing this up? Easy, I figured this out the first time I saw it. Even if it was just a guess.

Anyway all that's going on for now is establishing the conflict and dialog that isn't necessarily hard to understand, just to sit through. The device is brought up, I think Tripp is looking at pictures of national landmarks, and shock of all shocks, it works, the device, and for a little breather, back to the Thunderbirds.

I'd like to point out that at times I question if the footage the producers picked actually fit what was going on in the live-action plot. We get the implication this solely revolves around an episode relating to Russian agents plotting to destroy a plane, and right after, we go through an ancient temple.

Is the Russian guy conspiring with ancient spirits for guidance? Is the context behind this blurred due to its awkward placement? Should I finally set up my Hulu account and thus have access to more content I can watch and have the luxury of watching stuff on my phone? I mean then again I don't wanna give Disney anymore money or Animaniacs the time of day.

Did that make sense? It made as much sense as the Thunderbirds clips they use to establish some form of a cohesive plot.

What this is trying to do is introduce Tim Curry's character, the Atrocimator. Why do I suddenly wanna watch Re-Animator? I'd say the effects here are nice, but even the effects in Demon Island are better, and I'm willing to bet that cost more to make than this. Tim Curry does a good performance, but he always does. Tell me, is there a single bad performance by Tim Curry? Anyone? Anything? Thought so.

Was the effect's low quality meant to fit in with the Thunderbirds segments?

Anyway from here, we don't just get separate segments, we get the live action segments blended with the Thunderbirds segments, which is what we saw with Tim Curry. Roxette calls Commander Tracy, and he questions if someone put anything weird in his morning cup. I say commander because there are multiple ones and I'm bound to piss someone off by getting it wrong.

I'll give the show credit, in that the commander doesn't act on their word right away. I can say so far Tripp and Roxette, while unnecessary, aren't mary-sues. Either they redubbed the original actors or didn't bother, still hearing some British voices, but also hearing some American ones. Drawing a blank.

Hearing more and more lines from Roxette, I'm reminded of Rev from Van-Pires in terms of acting that suggests they could either only afford one take or just straight up sucked. But surprisingly Rev's actress had roles up until 2020. On the other hand, I can't tell if this has better or worse effects than Van-Pires.

So a bomb is in the landing gear of a plane, all options to stop this are minimal, but the day will be saved through the power of... contrived idiocy. Tripp dinks around on what's left of his skateboard by riding on marbles, and in the realm of 90s live-action shows or just those with contrived writing, marbles will be the means of which they save the day... either this is how they did it in the original Thunderbirds, or we're gonna see some plane effects that'd rival the quality of Night of the Twisters.

This was an off-screen pitch, showing how little the live-action segments mesh with the Thunderbird segments.

Time away from the two space dinks is allowing me to see the merits in the original Thunderbirds. It's all about intricate models and designs, and for something produced in the 60s, it looks great. It's a big deal of effort marred with the conventions of 90s television in America. Look, even Tripp and Roxette enjoy the old show, why else do they suddenly pop in again just to cheer?

Okay how far along are we... not even exactly half way there huh...? This is turning into a journey, I'm losing sight of what's important, my work, my health and my personal data falling into the hands of corporations, hackers and more.

=======

This journal is sponsored by ExpressVPN. Personal security has become a universal desire, if not our parents it's tech companies, but ExpressVPN can help bring back some peace of mind. All it takes is one click and your data will be inaccessible to those who're willing to look into your browser history. You can even choose which country you're based in, so if there's a YouTube video you can't watch, sorry (insert channel with a video blocked in certain countries), I'm here to check it out and give my input.

Go to ExpressVPN.com/channeleven and get absolutely nothing because this sponsorship is non-existent, I just wanted to shake things up a bit.

Anyway.

=======

After hearing stock sound effects that remind me of one of those bonus missions in Ed, Edd n' Eddy the MisEdventures, I gave up.

Yeah, I gave up, I quit. I got as far as 11 minutes before I couldn't take it anymore. I feel like that reference to Night of the Twisters was prophetic, as I couldn't make it through that one either.

It wasn't an entertaining bad show, it was just dull with the worst of 90s live-action, I do not wanna see any more of it. Something tells me Van-Pires would've been more interesting. Would've had more fun trying to do more of my school work for the remainder of the day.

If only I can find an episode of The Higgins Boys and Gruber...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYGDeZ0UnYA

Ricky Sprocket: Showbiz Boy review

 Nicktoons Network was awesome, that's something I will always maintain. The initial concept of the network, re-airing classic Nickelodeon shows, had been retained, but in the mid-late 2000s they began bringing in shows and shorts from around the world, along with their own originals. While otherwise flawed, they were very enjoyable, at worst tolerable.

It's hard to say what their worst show at the time was, and though I had otherwise accepted them all, one may be in the running.

Background

Ricky Sprocket Showbiz Boy was created by the husband and wife team Alison Snowden and David Fine. Both are best known for their early short films, one of them being Bob's Birthday, which would gradually develop into Bob and Margret, still one of their better known works, well for the most part. It's a good series though.

Also, interesting trivia, aside from sharing the surnames of a famed leaker who uncovered various surveillance programs and an anti-Vietnam radical, they're the parents of the initial voice actor for Peppa Pig.

After a six year break from television programs (and by that I mean them creating or helming television shows of their own.), they came out with this.

Ricky Sprocket debuted on Teletoon in Canada and Nickelodeon UK in 2007 before coming to Nicktoons Network time after. While Bob and Margaret was initially a Canadian-British co-production until budget concerns and Canadian broadcast guidelines led the latter to break off, this was produced straight up in Canada.

The show was recorded in Vancouver, a first for Snowden Fine who ordinarily operated out of Ontario. It starred Jillian Michaels, who Nicktoons Network fans will recognize as Ellen from Edgar and Ellen, but others may recognize her as the other voice of Gohan in DBZ's Ocean dub. Otherwise we have our usual alphabet soup here, Kathleen Barr, Tabitha St. Germain, Ashleigh Ball around the time she was becoming more prevalent, Scott McNeil, Andrea Libman, Chiara Zanni (okay maybe I just recognize her). At least three of them voice half of the mane 6, can you guess?

In spite of recording in Vancouver, this show does have two actors from Ontario, though not necessarily belonging to a voice acting union from there. From it we have Jeff Lumby, who appeared in The Red Green Show and had a role in the initial Sailor Moon dub and Sailor Moon S, and around the time George of the Jungle shifted production to Toronto took on the role as the narrator for it. The other is Jayne Eastwood, who had previously played two characters on Bob and Margaret and it seems that's how she got on board.

The show was co-produced by Bejuba Entertainment, a mostly prominent company who would go on to produce Wishfart, which Jeff Lumby ironically appeared in as well, and this is the first time we see Snowden Fine credited to their own vanity card. Must've been real proud here.

Animation

The animation was produced at Studio B Productions. Around 2002 their shows adopted a particular style, which is often floaty flash animation with some occasionally abstract visuals. While not much to write home about, it's actually kinda distinctive, and works with differing art directions. For a better visual aid, check out an episode of this show and compare it to something like Yakkity Yak, George of the Jungle (preferably season 1), Being Ian, those early Edgar and Ellen shorts and, for the most part, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic (season 1 that is).

I can understand the budget was reasonably low for this show, and it could've been a hell of a lot worse.

Visually, while Snowden and Fine has a specific art style, it looked like they were trying to branch out a bit. Some look human-esque, others... not so much, not that it's a bad thing. It translated well enough, I guess.

The Show

Ricky Sprocket centers on, well I already said his name, a child actor who... well I'd like to say balance his celebrity life with his normal one, but that's not always the case. At times either life is mutually exclusive to certain episodes and are dependent on the plot. There was only one time the balance was explored, and it was the ever classic "trying to be two places at once without upsetting the other person, but oh wait it turned out they're more understanding than the protagonist would assume."

Those of you expecting this to explore the darker side of Hollywood, don't. This is basically a kid fantasy series, it's not here to squash a kid's dreams, that's what high school is for. But in most shows, the kid actor is either a sociopathic snot or target practice for that creepy director.

You're not gonna find anything too complicated or interesting with this show, is anything even that original anymore? Unfortunately, this would mean at times the bad suffices over the good, and that comes in the form of Ethel.

She is Ricky's younger sister and, how do I describe her? She's basically a cross-breed of Megan from Drake and Josh and Mandy from The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy. This isn't some crazed summary; the younger sibling who likes to antagonize her elder brother(s) for the hell of it (and has black hair) and a similar attitude and disposition to Mandy, albeit Mandy from the first season of her own show.

Aren't they the same thing?

No there's a distinction.

Let me make this clear, this wasn't a sudden realization, I distinctly remember watching this show as a kid and hating episodes where Ethel came out on top. Hell, the same sentiment extended to Drake and Josh. It's one thing to hate it as an adult, but to pick up on this when you see it for the first time as a kid says a hell of a lot more. My hangup with this is that it's not satisfying, and half the time there's no deeper reason for it, beyond just messing with the older sibling. At best she's just annoying, and while she doesn't always quash Ricky, even those aren't much to write home about.

I feel like she's only around to get the plot going. One time when Ricky agreed to helm a business where he sells his stuff on account of them being more valuable as they belong to a celebrity, Ethel sells Ricky's prized childhood relic, seemingly for the hell of it. Okay granted he gets it back, but still. There's "What? And ruin the plot?", and then there's "Because plot."

I go on about this because... that's really the biggest takeaway I got from this. Every other character is frankly ordinary, the bumbling but well-meaning dad, the mother who isn't all about that Hollywood jizz, and Ricky has quite a bit of friends. Fat nerd, token, boy with much wrong with him (but colorblind is a first for me, I'll give them that), and tomboy, back when that wasn't taken to a big extreme.

Also a co-star whom Ricky has a rivalry with and a mostly crusty... agent? Manager? Studio owner? There's an answer but I forgot it.

When it came to finding an episode to give me a taste, I wanted to find one that played against what I brought up, that way I won't base my overall opinion on that. At its best, is the show at least tolerable?

Episode

The episode I picked is one where Ricky is framed for eating a valuable piece of food belonging to his father, around the time he was set to appear in a new movie that's probably kid Superman. If this will end better than The Loud House's Sleuth or Consequences, then so be it. Also this was written by both Snowden and Fine (lest they handled every episode.) so this is what they wanted of their show, at least that's what I assume.

Anyhow, at times Ricky can be relatively basic, but at times he incorporates some method acting into his life, where he takes on the Superman/Clark Kent guise. Kid has commitment, I'll give him that. There is also a plus to this, I mean you can guess Ethel is behind the framing, but since his frequent rehearsal for the role is seemingly getting on the nerves of his family, you can assume Ethel did it for the sake of shutting him up about it.

For whatever I said about Ethel, at her best she has better motivations than Megan. Also they establish why the parents are quick to blame Ricky for this, he had borrowed things from his family without asking and seemingly put himself before others. Also back on Ethel, if there's a deeper meaning to her motives, in that she wants to knock her brother off his high horse and remind him of where he once belonged, forget what I said about her before, at worst the writing doesn't portray that well.

Still find it interesting that Ricky's parents are apathetic to the Hollywood business and go on as if it isn't that much of a part of Ricky's life. But we got a nice jab at child labor laws the first time this was implied, so fair enough, it was his time to go.

Anyway, on the crime, I can understand Ricky's dad being upset over it being eaten since he sent away for it in the mail. I can say that Ethel didn't do the crime to frame Ricky, rather she just ate it without knowing who it belonged to. Sucks for Leonard (the dad's name) who left it in the open and didn't put it away before going in the shower, but if Ethel runs with the allegation then there'd be some purpose.

So Ricky holds the wrapper, and eats what pieces remain on the wrapper just as Leonard comes in. So, Ricky holding the wrapper and eating the remaining morsels on it, around the time it was established that Ricky was inconsiderate to his family helped to make a convincing case for the plot. They could've had it where they assumed right away, but they didn't.

They do wind up playing favorites and assume Ethel couldn't have done it, but that puts it at like, what? A 75? A C+ is reasonable in some areas. I like how they mention alcohol here, like Vancouver is looser when it comes to the mention of it, even Ed, Edd n' Eddy mentioned it once in some context. They do have it where Bunny (the mother) questions whether or not Leonard was too harsh, important to establish to avoid making this over the top.

As Ricky is held in a relatively high regard at the studio, the higher ups do seek to try and get Ricky out of it long enough to finish a movie in progress. I do see a reporter that pops up from time to time, most interesting thing about her is that it looks like her mouth is stuck in a perpetual smile, kinda reminds me of The Flea from Mucha Lucha where most of the time he speaks it looks like he's smiling because they didn't have enough mouth movements to work with.

So Ricky immediately assumes Ethel at it, but to be fair it's not a forced realization. The family consists of Ricky, the two parents, Ethel and a dog. Leonard was in the shower, Bunny and Ricky entered the kitchen around the same time and Ethel came in first, Roy was with Ricky before the wrapper was found, and it had been established that Ethel is against Ricky. She would play the farce just for the sake of ensuring Ricky is miserable, so if she gets caught it'd help make for a good ending.

How does he prove himself or at least get back at Ethel? Apparently Leonard keeps a case of sweets in the basement. I gotta ask, how can food in a basic containment unit still be hot enough to admit smoke? I'll give it this, it plays on a weakness of Ethel, her love for sweets, which compelled her to eat the treat in the first place.

Needless to say, it works. She would've been grounded regardless since she was caught in the act, at the very least the parents were willing to listen this time.

Overall

To clarify, spoiler warning, Sleuth or Consequences had Lincoln take the fault for clogging the toilet just for the sake of protecting his younger sister. It was unsatisfying as all hell. With that in mind, I can conclude that this was a better episode compared to that, at least the motivations were believable enough.

The show itself is mediocre at best, there are some episodes I may not return to, but I don't consider them objectively bad, maybe I just remembered them differently. It's only technically on the lower end of Nicktoons Network's original programs, but it's still bearable to watch, with minimal expectation.

I'd go back to this sooner than other shows, but I'm in no hurry for it honestly. Sad to say Snowden and Fine didn't bother with their own efforts after this, for this didn't seem like a career killer.

By the way, they don't go for that many movie references, but seeing how it was handled in Being Ian, surface level parodies seemed preferable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZfwL0QZbU8

Alpha and Omega: Six Years Later

In August of 2015, I did a review of the first Alpha and Omega movie. It was the first review I ever posted on this blog. Yeah, August, why am I re-reviewing this six years later, and not even on the date of the review I did it on? Is this gonna be a recurring thing where I redo older reviews? Well, I had a long week, five assignments, one of which accounting for a nice chunk of my grade, and my first B+ against a previous A streak leaves me wanting to go back to simpler times. Also I was gonna do a review of Ricky Sprocket: Showbiz Boy but I can't it in my usual haunt. So this movie'll do.

And yes, I still consider the movie to be shit.

Background

I remember seeing trailers for this movie on television. After they stopped airing I basically forgot this movie ever existed for a while. The same thing happened with Beastly, but even then all I forgot of it was the title.

It's ironic, these are the only two movies I heard of through trailers that I forgot about, they would get video game adaptations released through the same publisher, and both of which would be acknowledged by Dumbsville.

Alpha and Omega was created around the time CG family films were becoming profitable, with DreamWorks and two other gluttonous entities bringing in bank with their entries, no matter the quality. I'm not gonna say every non DreamWorks/two gluttonous entities effort were bad, I like Fly Me to the Moon, Planet 51 looks like it'd be interesting, but don't get me wrong, a lot of these were shameless through and through, any that takes a cookie cutter premise and tries to look appealing to kids is the most guilty of that.

The film was produced by Crest Animation, a company owned by Richard Rich. Crest or whatever previous incarnations it existed under specialized in family films, namely the ore forgettable crop. Let's see, crappy adaptation of The King and I, something about a duck with a trumpet, also The Swan Princess, which was essentially Alpha and Omega before Alpha and Omega, in terms of a means of pumping out sequel after sequel, but at least there're only eight Alpha and Omega movies.

I wish I didn't have to pay money to see reviews of the Swan Princess movies. No wonder capitalism gets such a bad rep, maybe that or the fact that studios like Crest, later Splash Entertainment run the gambit of gearing out mediocre to crap sequels to movies of minimal relevance. You know how some people deride most movies of being cash grabs? At the very least for most of them there's something of substance.

For these, the movies pick a basic premise, have some colorful characters (most of which are palette swaps of their own characters sometimes.), have enough material to just barely scrape past feature length, even songs too. Your basic alphabet soup of a cheap movie made for a quick buck.

The film has not one, but two directors, Ben Gluck and Anthony Bell, one of which had primarily been involved with television for a bulk of his career before then, doing work for The Wild Thornberrys, As Told by Ginger, The Simpsons and early episodes of The Boondocks even. He was also involved with Norm of the North only to leave it to co-direct the first Alpha and Omega sequel, so does that mean Norm was in production for more than three years?

I feel like I hate Ben Gluck out of the two. I mean sure, he helped with films like 9. On the other hand, he directed the sequel to Brother Bear, a movie I already hate, it seemed he helped with Strange Magic too, and he is basically credited with creating Alpha and Omega.

The movie did well at the box office, but so did the 2014 Left Behind movie, and even Christians hate that movie.

Also the obvious, this was Dennis Hopper's last role (I would say he had it better in the Super Mario Bros. Movie, but it was actually hell for him, and I won't hound anyone over taking part in this, especially if roles were running dry. Who else do we have? Danny Glover, Justin Long, Hayden... something. I know the names but not the people evidentially.

Okay this has gone on long enough.

Summation

At its core, this movie is just a play on the Romeo and Juliet schtick, two lovers of rival families getting together against all odds, foregoing the whole, you know, death thing. This isn't to say romantic stories are inherently bad, it's how it's gone about. It can either be mushy to the point of sheer cringe, or it can be so basic and ordinary the lack of effort shines through.

This has been brought up in more detail than I'm comfortable to go into, well, lest it involves pointless production trivia. If you've seen enough of these animated romantic fantasy films, chances are some things are bound to seem familiar, like that one asshole friend who comes between the female lead and the douche other guy because of his own selfish desire. Poon before mending tension that can lead to all out war I guess.

It's a matter of lovers intertwining though it doesn't show at first, one is serious, one is a goofball, both wind up getting taken away to an area far from home and they work together to get back home while getting to know more about one another and ultimately tying the knot, but the girl picks the douche guy for the sake of another ongoing conflict, then when a situation beyond any side's control occurs both sides work together and as a sign of good faith the leads get together, along with any subplot involving the douche and another girl who get together.

And that's Alpha and Omega summed up. No kidding. Let's tell it again with the characters included.

It's a matter of lovers Humphrey and Kate intertwining though it doesn't show at first. Kate is more serious as an alpha who partakes in hunts, Humphrey is a goofball as an omega, of a lower class of wolves that lighten up the mood. Both wind up getting taken to a nature reserve to help repopulate and they work together to get back home while getting to know more about one another and ultimately tying the not, but Kate picks Garth for the sake of maintaining peace between the packs, then when a stampede occurs, they work together to survive and as a sign of good faith for their survival, Humphrey and Kate get together, along with a subplot involving Garth and Lily who get together as well.

Anything else I missed is either not imperative to the story or just extra. At least most CG films from this time attempted some unique spin. It's prophetic that I forgot this after the trailers stopped airing, 

Creativity

Something with a generic premise isn't always inherently bad, a cookie cutter premise can be saved with clever writing and execution. What makes this movie special?

Uh let's see uh, wolves? Wolves doing cartoony things? Wolves portrayed to be walking on all fours somehow able to stand on their hind legs, dance and choreographed moves?

You may be thinking "CHAN- Channeleven, this is clearly an example of creativity, by being different and whatever I think, that means this movie is creative (and exempt from anything beyond minor criticism.)"

Well it's very weak creativity. You can apply what the movie did to any species, ducks, birds, cows, pigmy-marmosets and you'd get the same result (hold the howl as that's specific to wolves). It would've been more creative if the film tried to work around the rules of contemporary wolves, but to be fair little could be done there.

A lot of what occurred in this movie is what occurred in other CG family films, dance numbers, colorful characters with dirt simple personalities, basic premise, the like. It wasn't down to creativity, it was a matter of riding a bandwagon to make a quick buck, which is void of creativity. How can we make this movie about wolves appeal to kids so that way we can compete with the bigger companies?

Let's be real, the only way they could make a film with wolves work is to essentially break all the rules. You can suspend some disbelief with something like garden gnomes, but a line has to be drawn with animals presented as they were in the woods.

Dare I say people like the idea of naked ferals the same way most people like Cuties for... you can figure.

Visually

Standard animation for the time, nothing more, nothing less. Obviously it would get worse with later installments.

Overall

I had six years to really think about it, and I maintain this is a shit movie with little or nothing to show for it. Take it from someone who finds value in crappy movies, I can forgive poorly executed ideas wrought through a lack of budget or camp, but I can't forgive movies of standard budgets gearing out dirt basic content, content that exists to cater to what sells rather than what comes from a true vein of creativity. Why do they focus on their freak offspring in later movies? Because small and cute, with a very basic personality sell.

It should go without saying that people are welcome to enjoy what they like, but honestly, they deserve a hell of a lot better. You can apply human attributes to anything, it doesn't make this any more special. Creativity comes with building a world around wolves, what associates with them, you can't get much mileage out of what the movie would portray here and later on.

You may not think it's the worst, but at large it's just plain ordinary. There are far better family films to be concerned with, even away from the usual suspects.

It wasn't interesting to me then, and honestly, it never got better. It's not shockingly bad, just incredibly basic, barren and I have a feeling people have other reasons for vehemently liking it, as much as I'm gonna say about that, I'm sure they're looking.

By the way I'm not gonna cover the sequels, just getting that out there.

Nothing more, I'm done here. See ya.