I like to think Reynolds worked on this movie so his kids could see him in something they're old enough to watch. I just can't picture him letting them watch "Van Wilder" or "Deadpool" 1 or 2.
I'm not someone who minds celebrity voice acting if the actor fits the character but getting a bunch of actors for small roles with two lines seems very pointless.
I do have a big reason for why just about every single IF is voiced by a huge celebrity… …they are friends with Krasinski. Yes, it is the typical “I am friends with the director” excuse, but it is still a sweet reason.
Good Morning! This movie is really exciting! I hope to see it soon! EDIT: Someone once said that this one is like a live action “Foster’s Home for Imaginary Friends”.
I think agree with some of the previous comments that this sort of seems like a live action attempt at Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends, sans the license. I'm not sure if this was intentional of John Krasinski's part. Maybe he's legit never heard of that show due to not being the kind of guy who'd ever watch Cartoon Network in passing as it was out due to a lot of the acting work he was doing at the time or something. Although it kind of makes me wonder and think, did any of his kids watch that show at all, and maybe point this sort of thing out to him while he was making it or something?
In Imaginary Friend named "Blue"? Did Krasinski try to make a Foster's movie? Has he heard of it before? I know he knows of "Drop Dead Fred" in his denial of saying THAT movie inspired THIS one.
2:34 (celibrities instead of trained voice actors) i think this is a long running practice that Hollywood can't quite seem to shake. I forget when this got started as a thing, but I think when the first started doing that this was to get the adults to bring their kids to stuff if it was a kids movie so that both would enjoy or something. but i think the bigger reason they do this kind of thing is for investors or something i think the studios feel that investors like comfort and assurance that something is going to do well when a known entity that made a lot of money in the past is going to be in something. they assume and hope there's going to be a return on investment (ROI) that this will get mainstream audience members out and get their butts in seats to see that movie. I'm not sure how well this worked in the past. But in cases like this where it gets celebrities or popular actors who aren't necessarily trained voice actors, it might get mixed results. also i think this sort of thing is for their marketing team to maybe send to trailer houses for how to make trailers to their movies and stuff.
Yeah to marry plot holes for me. The grandmother is her guardian and yet she spends all day and at the end evening with Cal but grandma seems fine with letting her 12 year old granddaughter roaming the streets of NY alone as far as she knows. Then she tells dad, Oh i have a job. He's all like i shouldn’t ask questions? Okay fine whatever. Like dude your 12 year old told you she had a job and grandma Never visits with him. So neither had a clue as to this "job".
I wonder if Krasinski isn't really all that connected to section of the film and tv industry that has the professional voice actors to put out a casting call for them to voice the characters in his movie. so he just went with the people he knew in the live action sphere and got them to voice the characters for his movie. or maybe it's a financing or marketing thing to get all the popular actors vs pro-voice actors or something? bit of a weird question, is it possible that it was cheaper to get popular actors to voice the characters and not be on screen rather than professional voice actors? (like maybe pro-voice actors cost more and they needed to save money where possible or something due to whatever else they had invested money in previously or something?)
I feel like someone wanted to make a Foster’s Home for Imaginary Friends movie, but couldn’t get the rights from Cartoon Network.
Exactly. This is basically what the movie is: Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends the movie.
Does this movie have a version of Coco in it? She was my fav character.
Exactly.
I'll give Krasinski this, his movie is more imaginative than the horror film about imaginary friends that dropped earlier this year
Wow, didn't see that comparison coming. So clever 🙄
Wait, a horror movie about what? When did that come out?
@@louisduarte8763 it's called Imaginary and it came out back in March
I gotta say, Deadpool 3 went in a bizarre direction by having Wade Wilson become a caretaker of Fosters Home.
I like to think Reynolds worked on this movie so his kids could see him in something they're old enough to watch. I just can't picture him letting them watch "Van Wilder" or "Deadpool" 1 or 2.
I'm not someone who minds celebrity voice acting if the actor fits the character but getting a bunch of actors for small roles with two lines seems very pointless.
When I first saw this trailer I thought they had rebooted Drop Dead Fred.
I feel uncomfortable about this movie's similarities to Foster's. Including a character named Blue.
Yep😊
Blue looks very Grimace-ish
I S T H A T G R I M A C E S H A K E ?
First thing I thought when I saw the billboards. I really don't understand the point of this film.
Voice actors deserve so much better than Hollywood gives them.
Jeez Craig McCracken gonna sue somebody
Um no he didn’t create the concept of imaginary friends 😅
I do have a big reason for why just about every single IF is voiced by a huge celebrity… …they are friends with Krasinski.
Yes, it is the typical “I am friends with the director” excuse, but it is still a sweet reason.
I'd rather they give some parts to actual professional voice actors who can do a better job and probably need the paycheck.
Emily Blunt voices one of the IFs, and she's his wife if I'm not mistaken
Seen foster home for imaginary friends?
Seriously. I feel like tugging my collar at every similarity.
RIP Louis Gossett Jr.
So it's about finding new homes for imaginary friends, and the main one is named "Blue"...
I'm pretty sure Cartoon Network could sue them.
You got to see this early? Interesting and cool.
Good Morning! This movie is really exciting! I hope to see it soon!
EDIT: Someone once said that this one is like a live action “Foster’s Home for Imaginary Friends”.
Literally everyone who saw the trailer said the same thing, including me
"No kid is going to see this because Matt Damon is voicing the sunflower"
No, but the parents know who Matt Damon is.
And also because the sentence "Matt Damon is voicing the sunflower" is just straight up funny.
I think agree with some of the previous comments that this sort of seems like a live action attempt at Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends, sans the license. I'm not sure if this was intentional of John Krasinski's part. Maybe he's legit never heard of that show due to not being the kind of guy who'd ever watch Cartoon Network in passing as it was out due to a lot of the acting work he was doing at the time or something. Although it kind of makes me wonder and think, did any of his kids watch that show at all, and maybe point this sort of thing out to him while he was making it or something?
Maybe the abundance of actors for small parts was a response to the strike? A small paycheck is better than not having one.
You should review Drop Dead Fred, which is like the 90s version of IF and a film so bad it should've been nominated for a Razzie back in 1991.
Wasn’t this called “ Foster’sHome for Imaginary Friends” as a cartoon ?
I concur with all those commenting about Fosters Home for Imaginary Friends. Right down to a main character named Blue.
In Imaginary Friend named "Blue"? Did Krasinski try to make a Foster's movie? Has he heard of it before? I know he knows of "Drop Dead Fred" in his denial of saying THAT movie inspired THIS one.
This is on my to do list
Holy Sh*t, that was fast!
2:34 (celibrities instead of trained voice actors)
i think this is a long running practice that Hollywood can't quite seem to shake.
I forget when this got started as a thing, but I think when the first started doing that this was to get the adults to bring their kids to stuff if it was a kids movie so that both would enjoy or something.
but i think the bigger reason they do this kind of thing is for investors or something
i think the studios feel that investors like comfort and assurance that something is going to do well when a known entity that made a lot of money in the past is going to be in something. they assume and hope there's going to be a return on investment (ROI) that this will get mainstream audience members out and get their butts in seats to see that movie. I'm not sure how well this worked in the past. But in cases like this where it gets celebrities or popular actors who aren't necessarily trained voice actors, it might get mixed results.
also i think this sort of thing is for their marketing team to maybe send to trailer houses for how to make trailers to their movies and stuff.
2:35
I've been asking that question ever since I saw how useless Dua Lipa was in the Barbie movie...
Is it better then Drop Dead Fred? Yes, that's all I need to know
This remake of 'If....' seems very different.
This is just Fosters but with Celebrities instead of Voice Overs. I like Fosters Home for Imaginary Friends better tho.
I’m gonna see the movie on Friday
Can we please have movies that have professional voice actors starring in them instead of a bloated all star cast for once!?
Yeah to marry plot holes for me. The grandmother is her guardian and yet she spends all day and at the end evening with Cal but grandma seems fine with letting her 12 year old granddaughter roaming the streets of NY alone as far as she knows.
Then she tells dad, Oh i have a job. He's all like i shouldn’t ask questions? Okay fine whatever.
Like dude your 12 year old told you she had a job and grandma Never visits with him. So neither had a clue as to this "job".
I wonder if Krasinski isn't really all that connected to section of the film and tv industry that has the professional voice actors to put out a casting call for them to voice the characters in his movie. so he just went with the people he knew in the live action sphere and got them to voice the characters for his movie. or maybe it's a financing or marketing thing to get all the popular actors vs pro-voice actors or something?
bit of a weird question, is it possible that it was cheaper to get popular actors to voice the characters and not be on screen rather than professional voice actors? (like maybe pro-voice actors cost more and they needed to save money where possible or something due to whatever else they had invested money in previously or something?)
Is this the first time you're actually reviewing a movie relatively on time? I swear you're usually like 2-3 weeks late
ua-cam.com/video/KNd4rNdbUbo/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/cdKITm3CcpM/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/-CMI8g0TFHM/v-deo.html
Yeah they really didn’t need to have all these celebrities voicing characters. It felt kidna pointless
2:22 That's easy. A-list celebrities get rears in seats and actual voice actors are not worth of movie studio execs' time, money, and effort.
Although, it is biting them in rear since 2023 WGA & SAG-AFTA strikes
Well, I enjoyed this channel for a while but it's time I move on. The blogs just don't do it for me. I wish you luck . I'm out
Don’t let the door hit you on the way out, dude.