Thursday, June 6, 2024

Garfield Gets Real (2007) - A Lousy Attempt to Bring the Comics to Life

 

So, I've been on a Garfield kick right now, not sure if that's really a surprise. I remember reading those comics as a kid, we used to have a set of those rectangular books full of the comic strips, there was also this big thing that sort of got me reacquainted with Garfield; I began my journey to read through every entry in the 1001 Comics You Must Read Before You Die book, yes I am losing my grip on sanity. Also, there is that new Garfield movie that came out, so that may have got me thinking too. I always did have a soft-spot for Garfield, so I think this is the perfect time to look at one of his direct-to-video movies from the late 2000s... as for why I chose this specific one, well it was available on YouTube, sometimes I don't need a real reason.

The plot follows Garfield as he grows tired of his job of acting in a comic strip. Y'know, I would say that this is stupid, ridiculous and asinine, but the original Roger Rabbit book, Who Censored Roger Rabbit? by Gary K. Wolf had pretty much a similar setting, comic strip characters doing the comics as their job. The difference is, in Wolf's book, the cartoons and the humans coexisted in the same world, while in this movie it's two separate worlds, which adds a layer of confusion. After Odie looses a prop in the real world by a tear in a screen that lets the comic characters see into the real world, Garfield decides to jump into it, followed by Odie. Then after a day, their strip is about to get cancelled, so they have to return to the cartoon world, but they might be replaced by two buff and muscular animals, and hold on one second, how can they find replacements for Garfield and Odie if they're in the real world. It is said in the movie that there is no way back from the real world, so why is the real world finding replacements? Call it a nitpick, but it's kind of distracting. I guess the rest of the plot works, but that one bit bothers me.

The movie does Garfield as a character alright, like at no point did I think, "Nah, this ain't Garfield". Most of the characters remain the same from the comic and other adaptations, save for two. Nermal and Arlene just kind of felt different. I think it's felt less with Arlene, but in the comic she actually could keep up with Garfield's dry wit and sarcasm, she was practically just as sarcastic as he was, and here she feels like... gosh I don't know how to describe it, she feels like the only thing that the writer knew about this character was that she was Garfield's love interest, and I know for a fact that isn't right because the sole writer credit is Jim Davis himself, so maybe he wanted to do something different here. Nermal straight up annoyed me in this movie, he always did have a little ego calling himself the "World's cutest kitty cat", but here, he's just arrogant and annoying, and Jason Marsden's voice performance does not help. That being said, the voice cast is fine overall, Frank Welker does a good job replacing the late Lorenzo Music as Garfield, he doesn't have the same voice, but the inflections are there. Wally Wingert and Gregg Berger as Jon and Odie respectively are good. I think most people agree that Wally is almost as good as Thom Huge as Jon. Of course, the two villains have to have the worst voice performances though, being muscular pets, they obviously have to have Hans and Franz accents.

As an aside, for a world of cartoon characters, most of the comic strip characters they have are not real characters from real strips. Dagwood from Blondie cameos, but he doesn't really say or do anything, I mean I doubt you could have actually gotten Snoopy to appear, and so you only had to mention him, but why not Hagar the Horrible? Pearls Before Swine? Doonesbury? What about Dilbert... Actually yeah, maybe that was a good call, but my point still stand. Heck, even have some characters from discontinued strips appear, Little Nemo is in the public domain, any of those characters could have appeared. It really does cheapen the film a bit by not including that many memorable comic strip characters. They don't even make a reference to Rube Goldberg, and they invented a character who makes inventions.

The animation of this movie is disgusting. Okay, that is a bit of hyperbole, but the 3D models and this style of animation just do not mesh at all. The movement is almost too fluid, and character designs just look ugly. It sits in that middle ground, where the animation is cheap, but not Television cheap. I'm gonna say it, the 2009 Garfield Show looks better than this movie, yeah that animation was cheaper looking, but this movie just looks hideous. I suppose compared to other movies I've reviewed this movie isn't the worst, but I just hate looking it at, I can't really think of any other movie I've reviewed that is just straight up unappealing to look at, even movies like Silver Circle or The Misty Green Sky I can excuse as not having any real budget. I know Garfield hasn't had the best looking animation in anything, with the exception of a couple Television Specials, but this may just be the worst he has ever looked. They don't even do anything visually to separate the cartoon world from the real world.

It probably wouldn't help much if the movie looked good, because the writing just isn't there. We've all made comments and jokes about how the Garfield strip has become less funny over the years, but this movie is just painfully unfunny. Each joke was predictable, and Garfield just doesn't really have that bite to him, probably because he's not working off of Jon in this movie, he's working off of new characters who aren't really interesting, and Odie, who doesn't talk. I think back to a lot of the old Garfield strips, and Garfield's wit and sarcasm was genuinely funny, even if it took a while to get the joke, his dry responses to what was around him was a big chunk of the humour, so taking that away, what are you left with? Not much really.

Really, "Not Much" is the best way to describe this movie. The writing is lousy, the plot is flawed, the art-style is terrible, really the only saving grace is Garfield himself, and even then this movie doesn't have any of his strengths as a character. If you really want a solid adaptation of the comic strip, I say keep looking, I think your best bet would be the Garfield specials like Garfield Hits the Town, Here Comes Garfield and even the Garfield Christmas special. This movie just doesn't work, and I can't really think of any reason to watch it, unless you're like a big, and I mean big, Garfield fanatic. Even then, I think this is one that is safe to skip.

No comments:

Post a Comment