Replies

1. It needed to be edited down. It dragged on and on.

2. It was a rated PG ‘kids’ movie that wasn’t. This is a long time trend in Hollywood in which they inject inappropriate content into a childrens’ film. I suspect it’s the entire reason behing PG13. Shrek did this, too.

3. The same reasons noted by you. If you liked the Wizard of Oz, this film isn’t consistent with the theme. It lacks any innocence.

Because Hollywood is so liberal, even family men like Raimi are caught in the middle of the road. They have families and children and therefore get some of it, but because they worship at the idol of liberalism they don’t. So you get these muddled films.

Art De Vany did a study of Hollywood film success and failure. It turns out that this billion dollar industry with all its experience, star power and megalomania has utterly no idea how to make a hit movie. I find it shocking that they don’t get the formula.

1. It needed to be edited down. It dragged on and on.
We see this a bit different, but I agree that there needed to be changes, better choices in the production process. I found myself wishing they had made the movie more multi-dimensional instead of focusing on men's perceived predatory natures, or even the needy female psyche. So instead of wanting it cut down, I would have liked to see them change the material that was there. Just make them evil characters and be done with it. You don't have to blame men for it, or get into the female psychobable aspects of it. I think that is damaging to young minds. What are they supposed to do with this stuff at the age of young kids? IMO, this movie was abusive to the young kids that will view it.

2. It was a rated PG ‘kids’ movie that wasn’t. This is a long time trend in Hollywood in which they inject inappropriate content into a children's film. I suspect it’s the entire reason behind PG13. Shrek did this, too.
We're on the same page here. I agree that it has gotten worse over time to the point that much of what they offer up for children is way way over the line.

3. The same reasons noted by you. If you liked the Wizard of Oz, this film isn’t consistent with the theme. It lacks any innocence.
We're on the same page here too, as you noted. I noticed this too, the lack of a clear connection to the Dorothy Gale experience that we know would follow. Did you find yourself wondering the sex of the writer of this tripe the farther in you watched? I did. I didn't pay attention up front, but I swear it seemed to me like it was written by some bitter 45 year old wench who had been jilted herself, and wanted to warn the other broads to avoid men. Well, I'd have to temper that with the included theory that all it takes is a woman to straighten out men. What great subject matter for children.

Because Hollywood is so liberal, even family men like Raimi are caught in the middle of the road. They have families and children and therefore get some of it, but because they worship at the idol of liberalism they don’t. So you get these muddled films.
I guess. For the life of me I don't get some of the inclusions in these films. Why introduce adult subject matter at all? It's a kids film. What psychobable was included in the original Wizard of Oz? It was a story of a young girl in a dream, experiencing the sorts of things kids experience in a dream. It wasn't the nightmare of an older woman, exposure to the male of the species. It was innocent. That movie has stood up for 80 years. This one will probably be forgotten in five.

Art De Vany did a study of Hollywood film success and failure. It turns out that this billion dollar industry with all its experience, star power and megalomania has utterly no idea how to make a hit movie. I find it shocking that they don’t get the formula.
There's some truth in that alright. During the last few days I read an article here talking about how the studio model was failing. The big hits aren't drawing the fans in. Well guess why? Movie fans are tired of getting hit over the head with a Liberal-stick every time they venture into a cinema. Who knew?

Thanks for the response.