**WHOOPS. Little error on my side, so Sony Animation had nothing to do with this one, so the opening sketch doesn't make much sense. Sorry about that! Not uploaded on a Monday 😉 Hi there stranger! If you liked the video then don't forget to hit subscribe, click the like, and share this video with your c̶a̶t̶ friends!
Fun fact: Sony pictures animation wasn't involved with this movie since you don't see there studio logo when the film starts and when the credits roll.
They should have gotten John DiMaggio to voice Garfield, nobody does sarcastic and lazy better than he does. And I think the other problem is that Garfield just isn't a character designed for big adventure stories, because it goes against his built in personality traits. The tv specials managed to find the right formula for longer storytelling without having to do that, and they're holiday classics.
Can you imagine if this movie was a modern adaptation of Garfield finding the restaurant he was born in and expanding on his family even more, that would’ve been so cool
My biggest problem with this movie is how low the stakes feel. If you look back to Garfield and Friends and the Garfield Show, there were things like magic and robots, and those were just 11 minute episodes. Here, all they do is try to steal some milk.
Hire an actor with the voice closest to the character? Every studio:👎 Hire an actor going for the cheapest possible price or just for the "I know that person!" wow factor? Every studio: 👍👍👍👍
The only reason Chris Pratt was cast was solely because of marketing. You see, Chris Pratt is somebody I personally like to call this generation's "Will Smith." He's an actor got his start on popular TV shows, made his theatrical debut with a few Hollywood blockbusters, is widely considered charming and charismatic by the general public and as a result, movie studios noticed this popularity and now they are clamoring to get him in their movies. Nothing against Chris or Will but Hollywood solely wants to focus on a famous name rather than a fitting actor
I think instead of a whole adventure, they could have done a whole movie with Garfield celebrating his birthday, him realizing that he’s getting older and looking back at his past, remembering his dad abandoning him and maybe Garfield will take John and his companion to search for his father again after so many years and reunite❤ Edit: might actually write this myself LOL
@@Shad0w.m1lk_c00kie well, I have heard many people classify anxiety as an emotion. I need to do research myself before I can make a definitive answer, but even if that's the case does that really mean the movie sucked, rather than being a little misinformed. I will say though Inside Out 2 isn't as good as the first, but it's not bad.
I think the reason he works in Mario and not Garfield, is that Mario is a lot closer to Chris Pratt personality than Garfield. but let's be honest, he was only picked because he's a big name to boost tickets. so they'll give all the money to him while they replace their artists and animators with AI. (they're actually doing that)
Fun fact: The director of this film is Mark Dindal, the same director of Cats Don’t Dance, The Emperor’s New Groove and…well Chicken Little. I could see a lot of aspects of these other movies just from the cartoony slapstick moments the movie has.
@LovelyLivelyV nah, 2 was actually alright or atleast bareable. Sure, it was the same conflict regurgitating but it didn't suck nearly as hard as the fourth and (personally) the first. I mainly semi-hate the first cuz of jonny. He's just boring and a nothing character. A pathetic excuse fir a love interest imo Also, I don't see the 3rd being hated that much at all. It's the most bareable out of the franchise and the most funny
I took my 5 yr old niece to see this movie, and her reaction was so mid. Meanwhile the whole time I was just counting down the time for this movie to end.
Technical speaking, Sony Pictures Animation had nothing to do with this film, this was DNEG Animation's offering. Still like the intro though, and yeah, this film is not a Garfield film. I'll just stick with the specials from the 80s and 90s.
What baffles me is how despite trying to make a story more connected to garfeild's family they don't even mention garfeild's mom, and im not saying that just bc "well since dad's there mom should be too ofc!!!" Im saying that cuz garfeild's mom was already a character a very sweet one on top of that, in the old garfeild show she and garfeild have a very heartfelt and suprisingly mature conversation about how she seperated herself from him because it would mean he would get a better life than she could ever offer him and despite missing him it's the best they seperate again simply because she loves him so much and wants him to have an easy life Also i think garfeilds mom would have a more intresting dynamic with him in a longer story especialy since she's very kind and softly spoken while garfeild is mostly rude and ...not very soft spoken Prehaps a movie with her could continie the heartfelt and mature vibe she brought with herself last time and be about her getting with someone else and garfeild slowly going from testung and disliking the guy to accepting him and his mom's new relationship In other words make garfeild a mama's boy
THANK YOU! I saw this with my family and we were all pleasantly surprised. I'm a Garfield fan as well and I loved it. It almost made me cry, and I never cry at movies. Mad props.
Yeahhhhh when I saw the first ad for it I got so excited and thought Garfield was so cute the BAM! Chris Pratt with his (you nailed it) golden retriever voice not even trying to dial down his energy the slightest bit. I grew up liking the original cartoon that was aired on a retro tv shows channel and I had a Garfield comic book I read so much that it became 3 different pieces with no cover so I so wish this felt like him and, like you said, actually involved John. I also love me some sarcasm so just watching the ads for this movie made me so disappointed.
Frankly, even as someone who didn't really mind Chris Pratt's performance in the movie TOO much, I can completely understand why many people didn't like it. The sad thing is, at least imo, it isn't even that Chris Pratt isn't a good VA, more so that, as those moments where he does sound like Garfield show, he probably did have _some_ potential but it sadly got squandered so badly to the point of being hilarious, and back to being straight up depressing. Seriously, what the absolute hell is happening with the voice direction up in here?
Garfield was my life when I was little, I can’t believe they gutted John and a ton of side characters, like if you have to include his dad i would would want Garfield to be reflecting on his past/ just an early part of his life like how I thought it would be in the trailers. Also his dad didnt abandon him he just had a different owner (I think his name was Lyman)I’m just disappointed
According to an interview, they casted Chris Pratt to fit with Garfield's laziness simply by just using his voice. In other words, they intended on making his performance as lazy as possible
Honestly I gave the pass to Mario for casting Chris Pratt but I carve in the line at Garfield, his voice is way too iconic. When I heard Garfield's voice in the trailer I knew it was a wrap
I personally like it. Just a simple comfort movie to relax to. The product placement and drones makes sense because modern Garfield comics criticize and joke about the nature of technology over reliance (only for some of them to fail because of waiting on hold or a loading screen) and speedy delivery. The movie feels like The Garfield Show, one of my most favorite shows (why are people saying the animation is terrible? Jimmy Neutron didn’t age well, and that’s not even getting to the DK cartoon). The jokes work, the parodies work, the emotions work, and the looming stakes work, so the movie works for me. 8/10.
i mean hey i can't get on your ass about having an opinion even if i disagree. but no one has said the animation is terrible. that was the one thing everyone praised. other than that i disagree that the jokes worked and emotions as it all felt safe, and it feels far more corporate to me to be a comfort movie. but again that is far more a matter of opinion i guess. 5/10 to me. it is mediocrity at it's finest.
@@magmamaze69 I meant people apparently hated The Garfield Show’s animation. Many people (especially UA-camrs) say that show looks bad. I literally thought it was the best looking 3D tv show I ever seen.
@@juanca2567 oh really. personally that animation of that show is pretty bad to me. not only is it filled with errors but also i just feel like that 3d animation doesn't land well with how some of the characters looked. i mean garfield looks fine i guess but then you see john and some of the other humans. it's not awful but i think most people's criticisms on the animation was pretty fair. even if i think some people made it seem far worse than it actually was.
7:35 I haven't seen the movie yet but you're right it should have been about Garfield Odie and John instead of being a story about Garfield reuniting with his random made up long-lost father.
I think Chris Pratt should’ve either voiced John, which makes the most sense to me or Odie maybe have them talk once which would be funny. And as for Garfield , I probably would’ve just got Frank Welker or got someone else to do it because I don’t know anyone else who would voice Garfield
Or even if I were to get Chris Pratt as Garfield , why doesn’t he just do the voice he was doing and some of the scenes like he points out in this video, just weird?
Bill Murray not voicing Garfield after his work on the live-action movies was a huge red flag for me not to go, I should've listened. They keep throwing in certain ass celebrities to do any voices with no thought or care put into it and I say we revolt bc they're just gonna keep doing garbage until we say no.
The Garfield movie is a movie that exists. It's the movie of all time if not the movie of the decade. Immediately you can tell the filmmakers really put a lot of into it, the amount of that leaks from it is amazing. The animation is definitely animated, and while the plot was.......... it was really........
It’s genuinely sad that UA-camrs have to say what they use is fair use before the video just to not get striked because now so many people abuse the system
Should've used the Emoji Movie for the bad Sony example instead of Hotel Transylvania. HT 1 was fine until the garbagefire sequels, as opposed to... the Emoji Movie.
With this i confirm something i had been thinking for a lot of time, im still a little kid on the inside I liked the movie, it is funny and Im also a Graciela fan so i think that is other thing that made me like it
they also completly miss the orginal backstory for garfield and how jon adopted him. yes, it was similar, but was it the same? no. For those who don't know what it is, he was born in Mamma Leoni's place (the same place Jon meets Garfield in this story) and y'know, he was being Garfield and eating everything. so, the owner had to decide whether to get rid of garfield or close the shop so he gave garfield away, which ended him up in a pet shop. Jon found him and bam, adoption. so like, the movie completly ignored the ORGIN STORY THAT THE CREATOR MADE. that kinda makes me mad :( (also the movie would be 10x better if they had Jon, Nermal, and garfields mom in more movie time (yea garfields mom isnt here but there could be an idea where he sees his mom again while with his dad and the mom and dad have a fued ig.))
I went to see this movie with my friend. Our review was that John was pretty much forgotten, and Garfield wasn’t Garfield. I think the one animated cartoon from somewhere in early 2000 (I think) was so much better. They had him go on fun adventures while keeping him sarcastic and lazy. In this they completely re-made Garfield. Now if they kept the dad unimportant to the plot and just used that as a small backstory on how John and Garfield meet, that be different. But in this the focus is about a character that never even existed. The animation is great, that’s good, but the story was kinda bad. The only character that stays relevant and in character is Odey. That’s it.
I never want to see Chris Pratt in an animated movie again. He’s probably never even seen anything Garfield related like how he definitely never played a single Mario game.
You can't have John a straight white male to be part of the movie and possibly be the hero. It's 2024 hello 😂, I'm joking but also not wouldn't be surprise if that's the reason they didn't want to include him more
It feels like they really wanted to make Jynx be his mom but couldn’t get it approved/figure out a way to make her redeemed by the end. They also really missed out by not having the 2007 show characters be more prevalent. They’ve been heavily pushing that on the Kid Profiles on Netflix, that and the original run of cartoons is how my kids are aware of and wanted to see this movie. My 5 year old wasn’t to happy with the lack of Nerml, Arlene, etc.
It’s great kids movie, but definitely one of those that the kids will rewatch in 15-20 years and say it “didn’t age well” like we go with our old movies.
Please just enjoy the movie if you like it People are aloud to not like it. Your not the authority of them And “It’s A Children’s Movie” is not an excuse for negative reception. Children’s movies (like The Last Wish) can be great and warrant high praise.
Pixar has been the only studio that hasn’t let me down. Not all their movies are a hit but they’re still decent compared all the other animation studios.
Hot take... This movie is really good. I love Garfield, so I really enjoyed the movie. It had great heart, (seriously, the scene where Garfield sees the tally marks in the tree almost made me cry) great action, Odie was SO CUTE, (I love Odie, he's my favorite character in the strip) and unlike most people, I don't get annoyed by miscasted voice actors. Yes, Chris Pratt was an odd choice, but I didn't hate it. I also love the easter eggs and references to his strip, like his passcode at the beginning being 061978, a reference to his birthday, June 19th, 1978. As for the complaints about it not being a Garfield movie... What do you expect? Garfield sleeping, eating, pranking Jon, quipping sarcastically and kicking Odie off the table for 90 minutes straight? Because that's what Garfield does. It's what he's made his living off of. And trust me, no one wants to see that, not even me. That would be boring as heck, and if someone did make that movie, people would complain that it's boring. There's just no winning with critics. "It's too exciting for Garfield." "OK, we'll make him sleep for an hour and eat for another 30 minutes." "Nah, that's boring." "Bruh." But it's fine, people are entitled to their own opinions. I just disagree with this one and lots of other people's. It pleasantly surprised me and my family when we went to see it. Give it a watch. It's great. Also, Odie was played by Harvey Guillen, the voice of Perrito from Puss in Boots: The Last Wish. That's the second time Guillen has played an adorable dog character that's the best friend of an orange tabby cat and I am so grateful for it.
I disagree. This is not a case of there is "no winning" with critics. I think if anything the Live Action film had a good idea how to make a story for Garfield. (probably because they took a lot of elements from Garfield's first special. People want to see more from Garfield's world. Not these bland dry new cast. I can't defend Chris Pratt as if you want to say it's not horrible, I can pick anyone on the planet and they would either be better than him or at the same level. No hate to the guy but he does not fit the casting choice. And they clearly did it to bring kids into the theater. Chris Pratt, he's the guy from GOTG. I gotta watch this. The animation was good, but that's really it. The movie felt soulless. They just throw references or easter eggs at you but never make it feel like Garfield. Not his cast. Not his world. No Jon, no Liz, no Nermal, no Arlene. Nothing. Sure some of these characters I listed appeared. But they didn't have a role in the movie at all. Garfield doesn't even feel like his lazy self like he used to. But of course you're allowed to have your own opinion I guess.
@@magmamaze69 I respect your opinion, but I gotta say this: You say "No Nermal" like it's a bad thing. He is SO ANNOYING, especially in The Garfield Show. I'm glad he didn't show up, just give me more Garfield and Odie. Which they did. I love the movie, but that's just me.
@@elijahpatterson2596 okay him in the Garfield show... yeah i can't argue with you. he was a little shit in that one. but garfield and friends nermal i kinda enjoyed the dynamic garfield and nermal shared. but also it's not that no nermal ruins the movie to me it's just these characters don't feel like garfield or odie to me. like if anything i think odie took the role of garfield being the smart one when he is normally a lovable idiot. and garfield who normally has some pretty smart tricks to get what he wants, seems more dumb in this movie. again you are allowed to like the movie, i respect your opinion but jeez it does not scream garfield to me.
This video made me laugh so hard! I was so excited to watch this movie actually, i did like the first 10 minutes of it, but after that I fell asleep half way through it for a bit, couldn’t believe what I was watching honestly, i don’t know what I was expecting, but I guess I was a foooool 😂😂
I loved they kept that. His ears going into different positions has always been used to show his anger/mischief/sadness etc and they did a really good job at portraying it on this 3D model
Sony Animation don’t made The Garfield Movie this is DNEG animation who do The Garfield Movie (DNEG animation is the people who resurect NIMONA to the dead and who made Entergalactic by Kid Cudi the special from Netflix) colombia just distribut the Garfield Movie
I don't get the hate it was honestly pretty fun and a massive massive improvement over the terrible live action flims. Beside WHAT DO PEOPLE WANT FROM A GARFIELD MOVIE? him sitting around doing nothing boring
Honestly the flashback scene with baby Garfield kinda felt like it was going somewhere interesting so I kinda wished they leaned into that route more than doing a random heist movie lol
One thing I don’t understand is why Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtules: Mutant Mayhem was well-received by critics, despite not being faithful to the original source material, but this Garfield movie is criticised for its unfaithfulness.
Because the TMNT movie still felt like a TMNT movie; four superpowered turtles fighting against evil with their leader Spllinter. Meanwhile a Garfield movie should be about the relationship between Garfield and his owner or Oddie yet they made it a heist film about his real dad. On top of the fact that it's got mediocre animation and writing
@@user-x7dc2pq7nEven though I was extremely disappointed by TMNT:MM, I can’t deny that you have a point. But it’s just that I still wasn’t pleased with the overall movie.
Vic is a terrible father! He ABANDON his baby in a dark alley while he could look for food with him; watches his son grow up and never tries to talk to him during years untill he's in trouble. What a jerk! Garfield was right to be mad at him. Vic doesn't care about him 😢
There's actually such a sweet comic story where Garfield finds his mom and other old family, I was so genuinely disappointed when not even his mom showed up but they introduced a new father who we don't like? No wait, actually he's not so bad? Could've been so much better if they didn't rely entirely on original characters for some reason
Sony Pictures Animation wasn't animating The Garfield Movie, production was done outside of America. Not their first non SPA film though, knowing The Angry Birds Movie in 2016.
As crap as the 2004 live action CGI Garfield Movie was, I think its premise fit Garfield a lot better. Garfield is lazy in the movie and expects everything in the world to come to him, until it doesnt and he's forced to get off his lazy ass to save Ode. In this movie Garfield is always hyper active and capable for no apparent reason.
**WHOOPS. Little error on my side, so Sony Animation had nothing to do with this one, so the opening sketch doesn't make much sense. Sorry about that!
Not uploaded on a Monday 😉
Hi there stranger! If you liked the video then don't forget to hit subscribe, click the like, and share this video with your c̶a̶t̶ friends!
Are you gonna do a review on Despicable me 4??
@@olivia-944 yep!
@@beaniiebrianWOOOOOOO
@@beaniiebrianYAY
@@beaniiebrianWas it like The Super Mario Bros. Movie and Migration or was it safe?
I REALLY wish Jon had a more important role
At least he had an important role in the live action films.
Fun fact: Sony pictures animation wasn't involved with this movie since you don't see there studio logo when the film starts and when the credits roll.
They should have gotten John DiMaggio to voice Garfield, nobody does sarcastic and lazy better than he does. And I think the other problem is that Garfield just isn't a character designed for big adventure stories, because it goes against his built in personality traits. The tv specials managed to find the right formula for longer storytelling without having to do that, and they're holiday classics.
Unfortunately we don't hire actual voice actors to voice act anymore.
@@princessaur I recommend the stop motion film Twice Upon a Time. One of the main characters is voiced by the great Lorenzo Music.
@@princessaur Atleast in theatrical animation
09:43
Can you imagine if this movie was a modern adaptation of Garfield finding the restaurant he was born in and expanding on his family even more, that would’ve been so cool
That's what I've been saying!
My biggest problem with this movie is how low the stakes feel. If you look back to Garfield and Friends and the Garfield Show, there were things like magic and robots, and those were just 11 minute episodes. Here, all they do is try to steal some milk.
Hire an actor with the voice closest to the character?
Every studio:👎
Hire an actor going for the cheapest possible price or just for the "I know that person!" wow factor?
Every studio: 👍👍👍👍
The only reason Chris Pratt was cast was solely because of marketing.
You see, Chris Pratt is somebody I personally like to call this generation's "Will Smith." He's an actor got his start on popular TV shows, made his theatrical debut with a few Hollywood blockbusters, is widely considered charming and charismatic by the general public and as a result, movie studios noticed this popularity and now they are clamoring to get him in their movies.
Nothing against Chris or Will but Hollywood solely wants to focus on a famous name rather than a fitting actor
I have a lot of things against will Smith and Chris pratts voice acging
The voice is so iconic if they couldn’t get Bill Murray, they should have got a sound-a-like.
I know right like even a Frank Welker sound alike would’ve been better than what we got😭
@@rainbowdruuls I recommend the stop motion film Twice Upon a Time. One of the main characters is voiced by the great Lorenzo Music.
Maurice LeMarche could've done a good impression.
@@minespatch Get this, this film made 4 times it's budget at the box office.
I think instead of a whole adventure, they could have done a whole movie with Garfield celebrating his birthday, him realizing that he’s getting older and looking back at his past, remembering his dad abandoning him and maybe Garfield will take John and his companion to search for his father again after so many years and reunite❤
Edit: might actually write this myself LOL
That would’ve been better.
Aw yeah 🥹❤
You sound so much more like a professional writer than whoever wrote this😅❤
Why does it feel like the writers stole some of this movie’s plot from Chicken Run?
And the soundtrack was a knock off of Twister hahah
6:44 - "OmG lOoK aT tHe BaBy GaRfIeLd" - beaniiebrian
"He Is So CuTe, LoOk At ThE tInY hEaD, tHe TiNy FeEt"
- also beaniiebrian
"AnD tHe bIg EYes!! aNd ThE tIny whIsKERS!!"
- also also beaniiebrian
@LuvPlays_
"OK NOW BACK TO BEING A DICK"
-Beaniiebrian
I cAnT mWgHahsgHgsh He’S sO cUtE
Imagine you start a small comic and expect it to now get that big and over 40 years later it becomes this BIG
This movie was so bad it caused a specifie internet movie review channel to make a review saying that it made him loose his faith in humanity.
The hate is seriously overblowned
@@Probox-hn9yf No it's not. I watched it with my friends when it came out in theaters. God was it awful. Made me realize why I pirate everything
Only pirate stuff when it is being misused my corporations and the product is being mistreated. If so then by all means, 🏴☠️🏴☠️☠️⚓️⚔️🏝️
@@The_Lord_Vader bros the moral compass
@@marcel7734 someone had to be bro…now imma pirate all of hbomax cya
I’m sorry for your loss, no man should be put through such a barbaric form of torture. 🙏😔
garfield is the best animated movie of this year so far
@@btafbmThe fuck?
@@btafbm the biggest fib in the universe. what about Inside Out 2?
@@magmamaze69 That movie kinda sucked, they think that anxiety is an emotion when it's not. It's a literal disorder.
@@Shad0w.m1lk_c00kie well, I have heard many people classify anxiety as an emotion. I need to do research myself before I can make a definitive answer, but even if that's the case does that really mean the movie sucked, rather than being a little misinformed. I will say though Inside Out 2 isn't as good as the first, but it's not bad.
Instead of making a movie about lazy cat they made lazy movie about a cat.
good one. Very underrated
I think the reason he works in Mario and not Garfield, is that Mario is a lot closer to Chris Pratt personality than Garfield. but let's be honest, he was only picked because he's a big name to boost tickets. so they'll give all the money to him while they replace their artists and animators with AI. (they're actually doing that)
Ghibli looking at the AI part: *HA HA*
Fun fact: The director of this film is Mark Dindal, the same director of Cats Don’t Dance, The Emperor’s New Groove and…well Chicken Little. I could see a lot of aspects of these other movies just from the cartoony slapstick moments the movie has.
1:43 hey, don’t diss hotel Transilvania like that.
How could you possibly defend the last 3 movies?
Hotel transylvania 1-2 are some of my favorite movies
@@Robyamdam3 is overhated, but 2 and 4 suck
@LovelyLivelyV nah, 2 was actually alright or atleast bareable. Sure, it was the same conflict regurgitating but it didn't suck nearly as hard as the fourth and (personally) the first.
I mainly semi-hate the first cuz of jonny. He's just boring and a nothing character. A pathetic excuse fir a love interest imo
Also, I don't see the 3rd being hated that much at all. It's the most bareable out of the franchise and the most funny
I took my 5 yr old niece to see this movie, and her reaction was so mid. Meanwhile the whole time I was just counting down the time for this movie to end.
I appreciate the respect given to baby garfield
That movie wasn’t made by Sony Animation it was made by DNEG animation
Technical speaking, Sony Pictures Animation had nothing to do with this film, this was DNEG Animation's offering. Still like the intro though, and yeah, this film is not a Garfield film. I'll just stick with the specials from the 80s and 90s.
Whoops, totally overlooked that part. Thanks for the info!
@@beaniiebrian Some how this film made 4 times it's budget in the box-office.
What baffles me is how despite trying to make a story more connected to garfeild's family they don't even mention garfeild's mom, and im not saying that just bc "well since dad's there mom should be too ofc!!!"
Im saying that cuz garfeild's mom was already a character a very sweet one on top of that, in the old garfeild show she and garfeild have a very heartfelt and suprisingly mature conversation about how she seperated herself from him because it would mean he would get a better life than she could ever offer him and despite missing him it's the best they seperate again simply because she loves him so much and wants him to have an easy life
Also i think garfeilds mom would have a more intresting dynamic with him in a longer story especialy since she's very kind and softly spoken while garfeild is mostly rude and ...not very soft spoken
Prehaps a movie with her could continie the heartfelt and mature vibe she brought with herself last time and be about her getting with someone else and garfeild slowly going from testung and disliking the guy to accepting him and his mom's new relationship
In other words make garfeild a mama's boy
I knew it wouldn't be good but it's better then what Disney is putting out.
What are they putting out?
ANYTHING EVER that gets super popular internationally try not to make a movie about that thing challenge (impossible)
As a Garfield fan, I actually enjoyed this movie a lot. I do wish Jon was in the movie more, but I still enjoyed it a good amount.
THANK YOU! I saw this with my family and we were all pleasantly surprised. I'm a Garfield fan as well and I loved it. It almost made me cry, and I never cry at movies. Mad props.
YOU you understand
This movie was practically Monday: Impossible
In my opinion the film was mediocre at best
It feels more like a short film than a movie
It's an hour and 40 minutes but ok
@@Probox-hn9yf Garfield is very hard to transfer well in film format.
Yeahhhhh when I saw the first ad for it I got so excited and thought Garfield was so cute the BAM! Chris Pratt with his (you nailed it) golden retriever voice not even trying to dial down his energy the slightest bit. I grew up liking the original cartoon that was aired on a retro tv shows channel and I had a Garfield comic book I read so much that it became 3 different pieces with no cover so I so wish this felt like him and, like you said, actually involved John. I also love me some sarcasm so just watching the ads for this movie made me so disappointed.
Frankly, even as someone who didn't really mind Chris Pratt's performance in the movie TOO much, I can completely understand why many people didn't like it.
The sad thing is, at least imo, it isn't even that Chris Pratt isn't a good VA, more so that, as those moments where he does sound like Garfield show, he probably did have _some_ potential but it sadly got squandered so badly to the point of being hilarious, and back to being straight up depressing. Seriously, what the absolute hell is happening with the voice direction up in here?
Garfield was my life when I was little, I can’t believe they gutted John and a ton of side characters, like if you have to include his dad i would would want Garfield to be reflecting on his past/ just an early part of his life like how I thought it would be in the trailers. Also his dad didnt abandon him he just had a different owner (I think his name was Lyman)I’m just disappointed
Why didnt they just hire the voice actor from The Garfield Show to voice garfield
According to an interview, they casted Chris Pratt to fit with Garfield's laziness simply by just using his voice. In other words, they intended on making his performance as lazy as possible
I will now forever refer to mis-cast voice actors as "The Awkwafina Effect". 😊
i swear i've seen more r34 of Garfield's father than literally ANYTHING else about this movie
edit: not willingly i gotta admit
come again?
@@theshockinglyeloquentdog9945 lets just say my twitter moots are freaky...
Honestly I gave the pass to Mario for casting Chris Pratt but I carve in the line at Garfield, his voice is way too iconic. When I heard Garfield's voice in the trailer I knew it was a wrap
Listen, the first 5 minutes before the start of the flash back was actually ok. I enjoyed it, after that I didn’t really have that charm.
I personally like it. Just a simple comfort movie to relax to. The product placement and drones makes sense because modern Garfield comics criticize and joke about the nature of technology over reliance (only for some of them to fail because of waiting on hold or a loading screen) and speedy delivery. The movie feels like The Garfield Show, one of my most favorite shows (why are people saying the animation is terrible? Jimmy Neutron didn’t age well, and that’s not even getting to the DK cartoon). The jokes work, the parodies work, the emotions work, and the looming stakes work, so the movie works for me. 8/10.
i mean hey i can't get on your ass about having an opinion even if i disagree. but no one has said the animation is terrible. that was the one thing everyone praised. other than that i disagree that the jokes worked and emotions as it all felt safe, and it feels far more corporate to me to be a comfort movie. but again that is far more a matter of opinion i guess. 5/10 to me. it is mediocrity at it's finest.
@@magmamaze69 I meant people apparently hated The Garfield Show’s animation. Many people (especially UA-camrs) say that show looks bad. I literally thought it was the best looking 3D tv show I ever seen.
@@juanca2567 oh really. personally that animation of that show is pretty bad to me. not only is it filled with errors but also i just feel like that 3d animation doesn't land well with how some of the characters looked. i mean garfield looks fine i guess but then you see john and some of the other humans. it's not awful but i think most people's criticisms on the animation was pretty fair. even if i think some people made it seem far worse than it actually was.
This movie is made by the same director who brought hit and miss films like Cat Don’t Dance The Emperors new groove and also Chicken Little
7:35 I haven't seen the movie yet but you're right it should have been about Garfield Odie and John instead of being a story about Garfield reuniting with his random made up long-lost father.
Garfields voice actor will never match the true essence of his chaos.
3:02 this is the reason why family guy made a joke about this
Request: Inside Out 2 is a Pixar masterpiece
I think Chris Pratt should’ve either voiced John, which makes the most sense to me or Odie maybe have them talk once which would be funny. And as for Garfield , I probably would’ve just got Frank Welker or got someone else to do it because I don’t know anyone else who would voice Garfield
Or even if I were to get Chris Pratt as Garfield , why doesn’t he just do the voice he was doing and some of the scenes like he points out in this video, just weird?
Bill Murray not voicing Garfield after his work on the live-action movies was a huge red flag for me not to go, I should've listened. They keep throwing in certain ass celebrities to do any voices with no thought or care put into it and I say we revolt bc they're just gonna keep doing garbage until we say no.
The Garfield movie is a movie that exists. It's the movie of all time if not the movie of the decade. Immediately you can tell the filmmakers really put a lot of into it, the amount of that leaks from it is amazing. The animation is definitely animated, and while the plot was.......... it was really........
this movie had no involvement with sony pictures animation. it was released by columbia but was produced by alcon entertainment and dneg animation
They should've got H. Jon Benjamin (the Bob's Burgers guy) to voice Garfield instead.
I don't wanna be that guy, but Sony Pictures Animation didn't make this movie. They were never involved.
It’s genuinely sad that UA-camrs have to say what they use is fair use before the video just to not get striked because now so many people abuse the system
Should've used the Emoji Movie for the bad Sony example instead of Hotel Transylvania. HT 1 was fine until the garbagefire sequels, as opposed to... the Emoji Movie.
It’s a bad thing when the b plot bull is the best character. It was ok, but would rather read a Garfield book compilation over watching it again.
The Garfield Movie really is divisive. Some people liked it while others didn't.
Brooo the peter griffin skit was exactly what I was thinking of XD
With this i confirm something i had been thinking for a lot of time, im still a little kid on the inside
I liked the movie, it is funny and Im also a Graciela fan so i think that is other thing that made me like it
they also completly miss the orginal backstory for garfield and how jon adopted him. yes, it was similar, but was it the same? no. For those who don't know what it is, he was born in Mamma Leoni's place (the same place Jon meets Garfield in this story) and y'know, he was being Garfield and eating everything. so, the owner had to decide whether to get rid of garfield or close the shop so he gave garfield away, which ended him up in a pet shop. Jon found him and bam, adoption. so like, the movie completly ignored the ORGIN STORY THAT THE CREATOR MADE. that kinda makes me mad :( (also the movie would be 10x better if they had Jon, Nermal, and garfields mom in more movie time (yea garfields mom isnt here but there could be an idea where he sees his mom again while with his dad and the mom and dad have a fued ig.))
Two videos within a MONTH, Bro is spoiling us!!!
So basically Sony learned absolutely NOTHING from those two live action shitposts that Garfield had 20 years ago.
Chris Pratt doesn't deserve to play beloved icon Garfield
Well… DAMN, now i want my money back
Product placement in movies were a mistake
I went to see this movie with my friend. Our review was that John was pretty much forgotten, and Garfield wasn’t Garfield. I think the one animated cartoon from somewhere in early 2000 (I think) was so much better. They had him go on fun adventures while keeping him sarcastic and lazy. In this they completely re-made Garfield. Now if they kept the dad unimportant to the plot and just used that as a small backstory on how John and Garfield meet, that be different. But in this the focus is about a character that never even existed. The animation is great, that’s good, but the story was kinda bad. The only character that stays relevant and in character is Odey. That’s it.
I never want to see Chris Pratt in an animated movie again. He’s probably never even seen anything Garfield related like how he definitely never played a single Mario game.
The Garfield movie is not a Garfield movie mind blown🤯
It’s the type of terrible plot you can copy-paste any character on to
Even the peanuts movie got the charm from the originals. The movie felt like an extended version of the TV specials. This one did not have any of it.
Did someone remember this year we had a garfield movie?
That first minute of the movie is just a family guy joke
As someone that likes how chris pratt did the mario voice, i can definitely say that he doesnt work with garfield
I actually enjoyed the Garfield movie (2024).
You can't have John a straight white male to be part of the movie and possibly be the hero. It's 2024 hello 😂, I'm joking but also not wouldn't be surprise if that's the reason they didn't want to include him more
It feels like they really wanted to make Jynx be his mom but couldn’t get it approved/figure out a way to make her redeemed by the end. They also really missed out by not having the 2007 show characters be more prevalent. They’ve been heavily pushing that on the Kid Profiles on Netflix, that and the original run of cartoons is how my kids are aware of and wanted to see this movie. My 5 year old wasn’t to happy with the lack of Nerml, Arlene, etc.
Nermal is in the movie as a cameo
To be fair jinx being garfield 's mother in an old draft sounds plausible
So am i the only one who actually liked this movie
Reminder this movie is for children so if you dont like it
Screw you i dont know what to say
It’s great kids movie, but definitely one of those that the kids will rewatch in 15-20 years and say it “didn’t age well” like we go with our old movies.
Please just enjoy the movie if you like it
People are aloud to not like it. Your not the authority of them
And “It’s A Children’s Movie” is not an excuse for negative reception. Children’s movies (like The Last Wish) can be great and warrant high praise.
0:37 Batman Beyond appears on screen.
Batman fans: YES!
#JusticeforBatmanBeyond!🦇❤
They should have given Jon more screen time and also time with garfield
2:52 i swear this is literally that one family guy cutaway 😂
Bro he put it in the video
Pixar has been the only studio that hasn’t let me down. Not all their movies are a hit but they’re still decent compared all the other animation studios.
I'm really liking these creative thumbnail designs
Hot take... This movie is really good.
I love Garfield, so I really enjoyed the movie. It had great heart, (seriously, the scene where Garfield sees the tally marks in the tree almost made me cry) great action, Odie was SO CUTE, (I love Odie, he's my favorite character in the strip) and unlike most people, I don't get annoyed by miscasted voice actors. Yes, Chris Pratt was an odd choice, but I didn't hate it. I also love the easter eggs and references to his strip, like his passcode at the beginning being 061978, a reference to his birthday, June 19th, 1978.
As for the complaints about it not being a Garfield movie... What do you expect? Garfield sleeping, eating, pranking Jon, quipping sarcastically and kicking Odie off the table for 90 minutes straight? Because that's what Garfield does. It's what he's made his living off of. And trust me, no one wants to see that, not even me. That would be boring as heck, and if someone did make that movie, people would complain that it's boring. There's just no winning with critics.
"It's too exciting for Garfield."
"OK, we'll make him sleep for an hour and eat for another 30 minutes."
"Nah, that's boring."
"Bruh."
But it's fine, people are entitled to their own opinions. I just disagree with this one and lots of other people's. It pleasantly surprised me and my family when we went to see it. Give it a watch. It's great.
Also, Odie was played by Harvey Guillen, the voice of Perrito from Puss in Boots: The Last Wish. That's the second time Guillen has played an adorable dog character that's the best friend of an orange tabby cat and I am so grateful for it.
I disagree. This is not a case of there is "no winning" with critics. I think if anything the Live Action film had a good idea how to make a story for Garfield. (probably because they took a lot of elements from Garfield's first special. People want to see more from Garfield's world. Not these bland dry new cast. I can't defend Chris Pratt as if you want to say it's not horrible, I can pick anyone on the planet and they would either be better than him or at the same level. No hate to the guy but he does not fit the casting choice. And they clearly did it to bring kids into the theater. Chris Pratt, he's the guy from GOTG. I gotta watch this. The animation was good, but that's really it. The movie felt soulless. They just throw references or easter eggs at you but never make it feel like Garfield. Not his cast. Not his world. No Jon, no Liz, no Nermal, no Arlene. Nothing. Sure some of these characters I listed appeared. But they didn't have a role in the movie at all. Garfield doesn't even feel like his lazy self like he used to. But of course you're allowed to have your own opinion I guess.
@@magmamaze69 I respect your opinion, but I gotta say this: You say "No Nermal" like it's a bad thing. He is SO ANNOYING, especially in The Garfield Show. I'm glad he didn't show up, just give me more Garfield and Odie. Which they did.
I love the movie, but that's just me.
@@elijahpatterson2596 okay him in the Garfield show... yeah i can't argue with you. he was a little shit in that one. but garfield and friends nermal i kinda enjoyed the dynamic garfield and nermal shared. but also it's not that no nermal ruins the movie to me it's just these characters don't feel like garfield or odie to me. like if anything i think odie took the role of garfield being the smart one when he is normally a lovable idiot. and garfield who normally has some pretty smart tricks to get what he wants, seems more dumb in this movie. again you are allowed to like the movie, i respect your opinion but jeez it does not scream garfield to me.
@@magmamaze69 Fair enough.
This video made me laugh so hard! I was so excited to watch this movie actually, i did like the first 10 minutes of it, but after that I fell asleep half way through it for a bit, couldn’t believe what I was watching honestly, i don’t know what I was expecting, but I guess I was a foooool 😂😂
Not a good movie, but it's a fun time Imo
When Garfields ears go flat, it looks like a rich boy haircut
I loved they kept that. His ears going into different positions has always been used to show his anger/mischief/sadness etc and they did a really good job at portraying it on this 3D model
Sony Animation don’t made The Garfield Movie this is DNEG animation who do The Garfield Movie (DNEG animation is the people who resurect NIMONA to the dead and who made Entergalactic by Kid Cudi the special from Netflix) colombia just distribut the Garfield Movie
Tbf, Chris was told to do his regular voice, I personally don't mind it. Unironically the best film of the year that isn't by Pixar.
Imagine if this is an angry birds movie situation but with Garfield where sony makes a sequel that is better. I enjoyed all of these btw.
Thank you
I don't get the hate it was honestly pretty fun and a massive massive improvement over the terrible live action flims.
Beside WHAT DO PEOPLE WANT FROM A GARFIELD MOVIE? him sitting around doing nothing boring
Honestly the flashback scene with baby Garfield kinda felt like it was going somewhere interesting so I kinda wished they leaned into that route more than doing a random heist movie lol
The impressive thing is, this is least weird thing Garfield has done in a while.
I get the feeling that a lot of people just didn't want a Garfield movie at all because his lazy personality works better in small doses
It’s almost like making a movie about a cat who does nothing was a terrible idea🤣
@@user-x7dc2pq7n Garfield is very hard to transfer well into film.
I do agree XD this was a miss cast, 100%.
Man makes me think of a puppy, not a cat.
You see what happens when you white knight for Chris Pratt? Christening the man "Labrador Retriever" absolutely is ironclad insult comedy at its best.
Fittingly, the animation's nothing to phone home about either.
One thing I don’t understand is why Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtules: Mutant Mayhem was well-received by critics, despite not being faithful to the original source material, but this Garfield movie is criticised for its unfaithfulness.
Because the TMNT movie still felt like a TMNT movie; four superpowered turtles fighting against evil with their leader Spllinter. Meanwhile a Garfield movie should be about the relationship between Garfield and his owner or Oddie yet they made it a heist film about his real dad. On top of the fact that it's got mediocre animation and writing
@@user-x7dc2pq7nEven though I was extremely disappointed by TMNT:MM, I can’t deny that you have a point.
But it’s just that I still wasn’t pleased with the overall movie.
Holy crap. I thought the movie logo family guy joke was exaggerated
Vic is a terrible father! He ABANDON his baby in a dark alley while he could look for food with him; watches his son grow up and never tries to talk to him during years untill he's in trouble. What a jerk! Garfield was right to be mad at him. Vic doesn't care about him 😢
There's actually such a sweet comic story where Garfield finds his mom and other old family, I was so genuinely disappointed when not even his mom showed up but they introduced a new father who we don't like? No wait, actually he's not so bad? Could've been so much better if they didn't rely entirely on original characters for some reason
Sony Pictures Animation wasn't animating The Garfield Movie, production was done outside of America. Not their first non SPA film though, knowing The Angry Birds Movie in 2016.
6:44 And he SITS!
Please watch Inside Out 2 next
You're not wrong Pratt does some like a dog. Like marmaduke type shit 😂
As crap as the 2004 live action CGI Garfield Movie was, I think its premise fit Garfield a lot better. Garfield is lazy in the movie and expects everything in the world to come to him, until it doesnt and he's forced to get off his lazy ass to save Ode. In this movie Garfield is always hyper active and capable for no apparent reason.