The Smurf's Triumphant return!

[Yorick]

Right on DrtTooth, the so-called Smurfs movie TV ads are absolutely dreadful. That is NOT the Smurfs. Even Jonathan Winters wasn't given very good lines it seems. What a garbage can of a film, (and slap in the face to the longtime fans). No one has any respect for anything anymore. They just know when they make a cliche film with "modern" sensibility it will (often) sell.

I think 20 years ago nothing was this bad. And anything from then looks and sounds great compared to a lot of this junk out now. Perhaps even 15 years ago, I could say the same. But in the last 10 or so years, that's where the biggest ever decline in movies (and music)began and has continued, in my opinion. And I see no end in sight.

Of course that's not to say there aren't special moments that are exceptions, but up to and including, let's say, 1994 - I think there was a lot more good than bad (or at least acceptable to me) than there is now. Just the ridiculous way people talk on TV now for example, which of course influences people in real life.

TV and film from 1991, that feels more like the 60's or 70's classics next to today's trash.

I just wish they left the Smurfs alone, since they refused to do them justice. And I wish they would stop making these things from now on where they totally desecrate the past.

But for $ome rea$on, they won't.

 

[Oscarfan]

I think the over-use of the word Smurf is what bothers me the most about those spots. "Smurf-abonga"? REALLY?

 

[Yorick]

LOL

 

[Drtooth]

I think the over-use of the word Smurf is what bothers me the most about those spots. "Smurf-abonga"? REALLY?

The problem is the &^&%&%^ 1980's cartoon TOTALLY blastardized what the word Smurf meant... now, i don't 100% trust wiki... but here's the explaination:

The original term and the accompanying language came during a meal Peyo was having with his colleague and friend André Franquin in which, having momentarily forgotten the word "salt", Peyo asked him (in French) to pass the schtroumpf. Franquin replied: "Here's the Schtroumpf — when you are done schtroumpfing, schtroumpf it back" and the two spent the rest of that weekend speaking in schtroumpf language.[3] The name was later translated into Dutch as Smurf, which was adopted in English.

So they actually DID say "schtroumpf" (or, rather Smurf) in the comics, but the intention was slightly different than what the 80's cartoons projected...

there's more:

A characteristic of the Smurf language is the frequent use of the word "smurf" and its derivatives in a variety of meanings. The Smurfs replace enough nouns and verbs in everyday speech with "smurf" as to make their conversations barely understandable: "We're going smurfing on the River Smurf today."
When used as a verb, the word "Smurf" typically means "to make," "to be," "to laugh," or "to do." When a word is replaced in a statement, that same replacement is made in every repetition of it, even by other Smurfs: as an example, the statement "A dragon that breathes fire" becomes "A smurf that smurfs smurf", no matter which Smurf says it.
It was implied a number of times that Smurfs still understand each other due to subtle variations in intonation. Humans have found that replacing ordinary words with the term "smurf" at random is not enough: in one adventure, Peewit explains to some other humans that the statement "I'm smurfing to the smurf" means "I'm going to the wood," but a Smurf corrects him by saying that the proper statement would be "I'm smurfing to the smurf"; whereas what Peewit said was "I'm warbling to the dawn." So "I'm smurfing to the smurf" is not the same as "I'm smurfing to the smurf."[7] This is somewhat contradicted in The Smurfs and the Magic Flute when Peewit brags that he has mastered the Smurf language and "proves" it by asking for a drink of water ("Dear Smurf, I want a smurf"), leading to a musical number in which each of the Smurfs interprets "smurf" differently.
So that the viewer of the animated series is able to understand the Smurfs, only some words (or a portion of the word) are replaced with the word "smurf." Context offers a reliable understanding of this speech pattern, but common vocabulary includes remarking that something is "just smurfy" or "smurftastic."
In Schtroumpf vert et vert Schtroumpf (see Smurf Versus Smurf), published in Belgium in 1972, it was revealed that the village was divided between North and South, and that the Smurfs on either side had different ideas as to how the term "smurf" should be used: for instance, the Northern Smurfs called a certain object a "bottle smurfer," while the Southern Smurfs called it a "smurf opener." This story is considered a parody on the still ongoing taalstrijd (language war) between French- and Dutch-speaking communities in Belgium.[8]

However, I have NEVER heard the Smurfs use the word "blue" so abusively. Again, that's like saying "Man, am I feeling White today!"

The fact one fell in the toilet (which would have been hilarious in 1992) just killed the movie for me. I don't even want to give it the benefit of the doubt. The Yogi movie sucked, but even the previews for it weren't THIS bad. it's like they WANT the movie to fail.

 

[Redsonga]

I will watch it (on DVD for a dollar) if only because my inner 1980's smurfness wants to see if it really does smurf. The smurfy thing is that maybe more of the cartoon will be smurfed in the end..I also would not mind more smurfy toys

 

[Drtooth]

I will watch it (on DVD for a dollar) if only because my inner 1980's smurfness wants to see if it really does smurf. The smurfy thing is that maybe more of the cartoon will be smurfed in the end..I also would not mind more smurfy toys

I'm so ticked off, I'd consider buying a bootleg so I can see it without giving any one who worked on this the satisfaction of having me pay for it. Even Neil Patrick Harris, who IS Legen...wait for it...... Dairy! shouldn't get my money for this.

But chances are I won't. I did consider a bootleg of Cat in the Hat once, and I would for that Gnome movie I complained the heck out of... but even then, I wondered if even then it would be worth the money.

Sigh... I was REALLY looking forward to a Smurf movie... but it doesn't look like we got one. I am SOOOOO sick of Brady Bunching stuff.

 

[Sgt Floyd]

I was watching something yesturday and they showed a clip about 10 minutes long where the smurf where trying to find a telescope in a mall for some reason. All I gotta say was the clip was long enough to tell me that This movie isnt worth wasting my time, even watching it for free on HBO. I also got the feeling it was made for 3 year olds with ADD. Everything was happening super fast, all the dialogue was being spoken at a thousdand miles an hour with no pause between poeple speaking. Like the second the last syllable of a line was said, someone else chimed in. I realize its a mall and its hectic, but there is no excuse for that. I felt out of breath just watching it. And the scene transitions were just way too numerous. They couldnt focus on one thing for more than five seconds. *headdesk* my brain hurts thinking about it

 

[Redsonga]

Maybe becuase Smurfs are smaller..animals they wanted to give the effect to them that they were running on a faster line of thought and movement, like chipmunks? XD

 

[CensoredAlso]

I think 20 years ago nothing was this bad. And anything from then looks and sounds great compared to a lot of this junk out now. Perhaps even 15 years ago, I could say the same. But in the last 10 or so years, that's where the biggest ever decline in movies (and music)began and has continued, in my opinion. And I see no end in sight.

The film industry is going through a rut, just as it did in the 1950s. In both cases, a new technology was sucking up all the attention (first Television and now the Internet). And as a result, Hollywood films started relying more on gimicry and less on quality. In the 1950s it was 3D, color film, Cinemascope, even Smell-O-Vision, all at the expense of decent storytelling. Nowadays it's CGI and (surprise!) 3D that's getting too much emphasis.

 

[ryhoyarbie]

The film industry is going through a rut, just as it did in the 1950s. In both cases, a new technology was sucking up all the attention (first Television and now the Internet). And as a result, Hollywood films started relying more on gimicry and less on quality. In the 1950s it was 3D, color film, Cinemascope, even Smell-O-Vision, all at the expense of decent storytelling. Nowadays it's CGI and (surprise!) 3D that's getting too much emphasis.

I also have to agree entertainmant in general is bad, from movies, to television shows, and music. All three have no void of life in them. Reality tv is horrible to the point that I don't even watch tv anymore (the last tv show I watched was Life On Mars back in 2008.) Movies in general seem to rely on cgi (horrible) and 3D (why???? you were never popular before, especially in the 80's), like you pointed out. Even my father has said there is nothing good at the theater anymore. And music?????..........Horrible, horrible, horrible. If there are talented singers and bands out there, they're being kept in the dark and not being promoted. Lady Gaga is a weirdo, but she knows how to make money and keep people interested in her. She's still odd though. Britney Spears? Little Wayne? Justin Bieber?? That can't hold a tune to the greats of Electric Light Orchestra, Leslie Gore, Pat Benatar, Bill Haley and the Commets, the Beatles, the Beach Boys, and others. Maybe that's why I use wikipedia and youtube and find songs from singers and bands I either never heard of or forgot about and listen to them. Those songs might be old, but they're new to me (to paraphrase the NBC slogan of reruns in the summetime if one hasn't seen episodes before).

The Smurfs movie looks horrible. I've been seeing preview to this movie and it looks so bad that it seems like something I would write since I've never written a screenplay before.
Is this a decline in the entertainment industry? I don't know, but they're no where near as imaginative like they were in the 80's.