Posted on 12/18/2006 7:42:45 AM PST by qam1
Throw in that the movie was two hours long and started at 9 p.m., and you can’t tell me this was made for children
If they're showing it after 9 pm, and it's 2 hours long, it's a pretty safe bet it was not made for children in the first place.
There's little that Hollyweird offers that's appropriate for any age or sensibility. BTW, don't waste you $$$ on the third installment of the Santa Clause.
all week long, National Geo and History Channel are replaying all the bogus documentaries obviously created to show no Moses, no Temple of Solomon and no Jesus. sad.
Ping list for the discussion of the politics and social (and sometimes nostalgic) aspects that directly effects Generation Reagan / Generation-X (Those born from 1965-1981) including all the spending previous generations (i.e. The Baby Boomers) are doing that Gen-X and Y will end up paying for.
Freep mail me to be added or dropped. See my home page for details and previous articles.
A friend of mine watched some of it and said it looked like that production number they were making in Bill Murray's "Scooged" (with Mary Lou Retten and the Solid Gold Dancers!)
Somebody has too much time on their hands.
Nice generational warfare, there.
Boomers are not your enemies.
Lord of the Rings demonstrats that you are wrong.
We will NOT ALWAYS be disappointed.
As a general rule of thumb, Hollyweird prefers to display sex to children whenever they can.
Chocolate covered Pop Rocks??? Have people no shame!
I just love the Rankin/Bass Christmas specials. I remember one year when I was in high school, I was home sick and got to watch "Year Without a Santa Claus", "Rudolph", "Rudolph's Shiny New Year", "Nestor the Long Eared Donkey", and that story of Santa's origins where he takes on the Burgermeister Meisterburger! It was a good day. :)
*sigh* People just can't leave well enough alone, can they? These classics were made in the sixties and have brought joy to kids all the way through the nineties. Obviously they're just fine as they are thank you. I worry about the crapola that will be around for my little one when she's old enough for specials in a few years...and she's not even born yet ;)
Now there's a fresh idea...blame the parents. After all, you didn't ask to be born. ;-)
I'm glad someone else said it first.
Me too. I know my younger siblings liked it, though. One Christmas television special that I *do* remember fondly has almost entirely vanished: the original pilot for "The Waltons" series, titled "The Homecoming".
It was available on VHS and even DVD for a while, but good luck finding a copy. Just recently I saw it available for download on UseNet, if anyone is interested in hunting it down.
Had it been one hour, it might've been watchable. Two hours is way too long. Same goes for the Grinch movie. But if you're spending that kind of money and getting that many "name" actors, you need two hours to get your money's worth (or so they think).
War on Christmas aside, this isn't a part of that. This was pure capitalism. Grinch did well enough to greenlight a Cat in the Hat movie. And the Grinch made it to Broadway. So why not try another live-action movie? (Answer: because it will suck dingos kidneys.)
I watched "Charlie Brown Christmas" last nite. I had DVR'd it a while back and noticed it was on again so I fired up the recording from the beginning.
The first half hour was the normal special from the mid sixties. This is my favorite Xmas special so I watch it every year (along with Rudolph, the Grinch, Frosty and The Year Without a Santa Clause). Goofy I know since I am 42 but I love those old shows and the nostalgia puts me in the Christmas Spirit.
Anyway, ABC must have decided they needed to milk old C.B. for a few extra $$ cuz they made a new half hour to go with the old one. I was appalled but decided to watch a bit of it anyway. Man was it awful. The animation was the typical crappy animation of today. It was painfully obvious that the writers were trying to catch the wit and feel of Mr Schulz. They failed miserably. But the biggest offense was this. They failed to give Linus his blanket. My wife and I debated about whether this was simply an oversight (since I'm sure the 25 year olds who wrote the piece of crap did not grow up on Peanuts) or if it was some sort of PC "message" that indicated Linus' new "empowerment". What a joke. To quote Charlie Brown when he misses the football for the hundredth time, "AAAAAAHHHHHHH".
Here's a message for ABC and whomever was responsible for this: LEAVE OUR TRADITIONS ALONE! As a kid that grew up in the seventies, these specials are as much a part of our tradition as "A Wonderful Life". Maybe ABC can replay that film with digital appearances by George Clooney and Susan Sarandon.
Thanks for the rant, Big Red Clay
Not quite. You are allowed to watch third installments as long as the subtitle starts with "Return of the ..." (cf. "Jedi", "King") or the title contains the words "Harry Potter and the ..."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.