In the episode "Tricycle Thief," Chuckie overhead Angelica say "You're gonna be sorry, Susie" because Chuckie ran and hid in a bush after Angelica crashed Susie's tricycle and landed in a mud puddle. Why was Chuckie hiding in the first place?
Probably because he was scared of Angelica. He expected her to take out her anger on him after she embarrassed herself.
What is your estimate of Angelica's exact ages in the seven "No More Cookies" flashbacks?
I'm guessing newborn to about eighteen months, maybe even two years old. She might even be her current age in the last one with the gingerbread cookie, because we see the sleeve of her usual outfit when she grabs it off the tree.
In "The Santa Experience" the cast goes to a cabin in the mountains and takes one mini van.....with 8 Adults, 4 babies, a toddler, a dog, and luggage. Ummm......
It's not unreasonable to think maybe the Pickles and Devilles travelled together since they lived next door to each other - while maybe Chaz, Drew and Charlotte came up separately. Or else the babies just sat on their mothers' laps. If Betty takes both Phil and Lil, Didi takes Tommy and Chaz takes Chuckie, it's tight but they could all fit. From the way Stu talks to Charlotte, that implies she at least came up separately.
They've also got Christmas decorations and presents to think of as well. Some of them could have travelled up in advance to put the decorations up - and just waited while everyone else came up with the children.
Okay, lemme check. In the van, we can see Didi and Stu in the front row with Tommy between them. In a carseat, although you're not supposed to put carseats in the front, but, dude, babies haven't ridden on laps since like the 70s that is TERRIFYING to say, oh my god, then Betty and Howard between them, and Grandpa Lou and Drew in the backseat. This does not, however, seem to be your average van, because when it opens later, Betty and Howard are facing backwards. Phil and Lil could reasonably be between the adults in the back, or perhaps Chaz drove in another van with Chuckie, Phil, Lil, and possibly Angelica. Or P/L were in the first with Angelica in another car since she seems to surprise them when she jumps out from behind a suitcase. Since we don't see Charlotte until later, I'm guessing that she drove up separately, probably because she had to stay later for business. It's most likely that Chaz just wasn't tailgating the first van since he seems like a fairly cautious driver. He was probably a few minutes behind. Still a tight squeeze in the first van (especially with Spike in it too!), but reasonable.
Why did Netflix get rid of the episodes that aired from 1991 to 1995? Did Nickelodeon revoke their rights to those episodes?
The Rugrats series has 351 episodes - each consisting of the adventures of one day, presumably.. sometimes more. This is over a year of time chronologically, yet the babies do not age. This issue is more noticeable because one year is a HUGE amount of time and development to children of that age range.
Well, they celebrated Christmas what, three different times, Hanukkah, Passover, and Kwanzaa. Especially grating in that Dil shows up in a Christmas special later on and... that.. really messes up any possibilities of a timeline.
Well, you can't really expect any sort of continuity in shows like this.
Yeah, the Simpsons have had a ton of episodes and they're still the same age IIRC.
Actually, according to the rugratonline.com website, they have 172 episodes (counting the two-parts as one), three movies, and two straight-to-video specials.
Moreover, Hanukkah is like Easter, in that it doesn't always take place at the same time each year. They could easily celebrate it the same year as the Christmas special, and not have both happen at the same time. They could also celebrate Kwanzaa with Susie without disrupting Christmas either, as they were at her house they entire time. Therefore those three took place in the same December, and the one with Dil was a year later. The babies could also have latent development due to the fact that their parents are horribly neglectful, and listen to EVERYTHING that a pop baby doctor says, even though most of it is absolute crap advice.
The characters act like months pass in-series, well over twelve.
Did Chuckie originally have a live mom? In the earlier episodes, season one mostly, both him and his dad mentioned a mom and wife like she was alive despite the fact Chuckie's mom died when he was a few weeks, or months, old and Chuckie's dad didn't date until he fell for Kira.
I remember an extremely early episode where the Rugrats are at a barbeque at a park (I believe it was for the club Tommy's grandfather belonged to), and the babies escape the playpen and antagonize some geese, and Spike saves them. The reason I'm mentioning this is because in the crowd shots, Chas can be clearly seen more than once with a woman, I'm assuming an early prototype of Chuckie's mother, who had the same wild red hair as Chuckie and Chas. I always assumed she was suppoed to be Chuckie's mother until they decided he didn't have one. So I'd say: Yeah, at one point he had an in-show mother, but it's not the same mother that was in the "Mother Day's Special," so consider her retconed.
In one episode, the third one actually, Chas also says "Wow! My fish! Your mother never liked this fish; but, now she's gone, I guess we can put it back up, now." So he did have a living mother that supposedly just left them, before they decided to retcon her into being dead.
In the season one episode "Real or Robots" Stu told Chuckie as he was putting him and Tommy to bed that "His Mom and Dad will pick him up in the morning."
Isn't Susie a little young to know where babies really come from?
Susie's mother is a doctor, so would probably be more willing to tell Susie the truth as opposed to dumbing things down. Also, Susie has two teenaged siblings who seemed obnoxious enough to tell Susie the reason (and her brother Edwin is pretty much a genius, even though he believes in the tooth fairy).
Also, for all we know she whispered into Angelica's ear something along the lines of "it grows in a mommy's tummy for 9 months and then comes out."
I don't really think she was too young. I'm pretty sure I knew that babies came from their mom's tummy when I was in preschool, but I didn't know all the details, or how the baby got in the mom's tummy.
I knew EVERYTHING by the time I was 5, probably earlier, with only television and an 8 year-old sister to tell me. Her older siblings would have definitely told her everything as well
In the second movie, for what reason did the villains kidnap the babies?
Coco wanted to avoid the kids blabbing to Chas about why Coco wanted to marry Chas so Chas would call the entire wedding off and Coco wouldn't get promoted. However, it happened anyways.
But... Angelica was the only one that could talk...
IMHO, I think they had Coco and her gang kidnap the babies (all of 'em) so make the audience see them as evil. If only Angelica were kidnapped, I doubt the majority would care. I mean, she was just a snobby, rude, loud, spoiled brat and she may have caused Didi to enter premature labor in the first movie (After the singing scene where Angelica basically yells at Didi's stomach). Um, okay, it's obvious I don't like Angelica. XD
The babies they were watching climbed into a giant robot and marched to the wedding chapel (not that they shouldn't be there). That's all they meant by it. Karmic bad luck I suppose.
Coco just didn't like the babies. She probably thought they would be a disturbance at the wedding or something, or she got really mad at them right before the wedding.
She was probably going to allow them to come in the first place but seeing them getting all disruptive right before the wedding was probably a last straw for her.
So how does Stu bring home an Income? He looks to be an independent Toymaker, and doesn't make as many inventions that often...
He seems to strike up a lot of deals with investors, such as Mr. Mucklehoney in the restaurant episode. He has to be getting grants from the toy companies he builds for. There's no way he can afford the parts for high-tech toys like Mr. Friend on Didi's school teacher salary.
Also, Grandpa Lou is a semi-retired professional wrestler. Maybe he has endorsement deals or occasionally makes appearences and competes in matches behind Didi's back. Then he gives Stu the winnings to fund his research.
He probably saved his money from the repair shop.
Can Tommy talk? Everyone acts like Chuckie was the first to speak, other then Angelica and Susie, however in the earlier season Tommy would say words. It's most likely not translated baby talk either, because it barely sounds like his translated voice (it's more babyish and like a toddler speaking), and it was in the episodes where baby talk wasn't translated (just a bunch of cooing and such; for example the baseball episode).
Tommy can't talk. He can make noises the adults can't distinguish but that's about it.
How do babies get screw drivers?
It was a toy.
And who gives a 1 year old a toy screwdriver?
As long as it wasn't small enough to be a choking hazard, their family deemed it safe.
I had a sort of plastic tool set when he was growing up, with big hollow plastic versions of various standard work tools; granted he might have been slightly older, but it was still around a similar age.
Truth in Television - I've seen a lot of one-year-olds with plastic toys like that. It's so obviously a fake screwdriver that they probably assumed he can't do anything with it. Heck, you can't do anything harmful with those toy tools anyways.
Maybe Tommy just swiped it from his dad. Stu has taken him to the basement before.
How did Tommy's parents never find out that Tommy kept a screw driver in his diaper. I mean, wouldn't they find it when they changed his diaper?
The babies are a little smarter than the adults. Tommy may know when he's about to be changed and slip the screwdriver elsewhere for the time being.
If you think about it, Tommy was a smart baby; if he was about to soil his diaper, he might have figured he'd best take his screwdriver out of it.
In the "Chuckie Is Rich" episode, Drew ends up taking Chas' entire $10 million dollar fortune out from under him in order to fund his hokey earwax startup, and he gets away with it! Even Drew, who's not exactly a criminal mastermind, seems surprised about what he's just done. Assuming something like that isn't worthy of at least a 25 year sentence, why did Chas still stay friends with him after that kind of complete and abject betrayal?
He didn't steal it. He thought it was a good idea, and convinced Chas to invest. And those were just his liquid funds. After he sold all the stuff he just bought (save for his glass elephant) he was able to renovate his old house.
This. When you invest in something, you are willingly taking a risk that it won't pan out.
Still, Chas specifically asks "how much of my money did you invest in this?" when Drew breaks the news to him, so it's apparent that Drew still hoisted the money to at least some degree.
Odds are that maybe Drew didn't have an exact figure in mind when he first proposed the idea to Chas, so Chas let him think about it on his own. After deliberating, Drew might have been so confident in the product that he was willing to invest nearly all of Chas' winnings into funding it. Remember, Chas' reaction when he found out (probably) wasn't because Drew had invested all of his money— it was because Drew had lost nearly all of his money.
This is about All Grown Up! but it doesn't have a Headscratchers page. Why are they all pre-teens? They act like high schoolers, they're treated like high schoolers, they have high school problems, etc.
The episode of Rugrats that inspired the series was originally a celebration of Rugrat's tenth anniversary and was intended to show what the characters would be like if they'd aged ten years. What with the majority of the cast being between one and three they'd have to be preteens. The problem was that the writers apparently had no idea how 11-13 year olds acted in real life and decided to just make them act high school aged. It's a fairly common thing seen in various media featuring kids: Grade schoolers act like middle schoolers, middle schoolers like high schoolers and high schoolers like college students. Seriously, I was still pretending to be Pokemon when I was 11, not going to concerts!
Why not age them up?
Actually, this whole "kids act like teenagers in television because they have no clue how kids really are" actually became Truth in Television. Kids see television as a role model for life sometimes, and they see "Oh, so this is how I'm supposed to be." Seriously. Remember those novels, The Clique? Before they all decided to go goth and read Twilight, they all acted like the girls in those novels. Even though we were barely out of elementary school. Besides that, kids always want to look and act more adult anyway. And are very mean to anyone who isn't as 'mature' as them. Tommy and the gang could be trying to be more adult, and their parents, being not-as-competent-as-they-think-they-are, would encourage this by humoring them.
It's pretty Fridge Brilliance there - Just hang around any elementary school and they'll start trying to act "older" so they fit in with the "Cool" crowd.
I said this on the Headscratchers for Daria, but when has any high-school-and-below-themed work EVER accurately represented those years? Sides, if they acted like "actual" eleven year olds, you'd be here talking about how annoying they are and how nobody can identify with the protagonists. We wouldn't actually have an original series if the characters in the original series acted like real babies that were like, one to three - there's that appeal of having the kids act older than they really are in fiction.
Well, they did act twice their age when they were babies. I mean seriously, Angelica acted like a six year old.
"All Grown Up" takes place nine years into the future. That means that they would be aged 9-13 (counting Dil). I thought they were about 15 when I first saw the show, and was shocked when I found out that most of them were only like, 10. Seriously, 10 year olds shouldn't even be old enough for middle school. Just look at Timmy Turner. He's also 10, and acts nothing like the kids in "All Grown Up." It could be that the writers didn't know how to make story-line out of things 10 year olds really do, but if that was the case, they should've just made them teenagers in high school.
Something else to consider is the audience. A portion of the kids who had grown up with the Rugrats were either at, approaching or a little past pre-teenhood when All Grown Up premiered, and so maybe they thought it would go over well with that demographic.
I teach at a middle school that's attached to an elementary school. Assuming the kids are in anywhere from fifth to eighth grade, their actions aren't particularly unrealistic. Kids these days act way older than you'd expect, and today's middle schoolers are yesterday's high schoolers.
Think about this: In the original Rugrats, the kids are about 1-3 years old, but were much smarter. Maybe they just kept the trend: age them 10 years and make them smarter than their age.
In "The Word Of The Day," Angelica learns a cuss word, so her parents try to tell her to never say that word again, without telling her which word is the problem. So when she says it again in order to clarify, they punish her. I mean, I know her parents aren't exactly Parents Of The Year, but still, that just isn't playing fair.
It's kind of funny in hindsight. One of the only times Charlotte and Drew are stern and unyielding with punishing Angelica is when she actually didn't deserve it, for once.
Well considering the word in question was one she had never heard/said before, they probably (naively) assumed she knew what word was bad and was just being cute.
It wouldn't exactly be out-of-character for her to do so.
It's pretty common in real life for parents to not specify which word they don't want the kid to say and why they don't want them to say it (often because they're reluctant to say the word in front of the kid). At 3 kids have just grasped the concept of words, but are confused about the concept of how a word can be "bad."
I find that a lot of parents tend to have an "ignorance of the rules is not an excuse" policy when it comes to punishment, especially with foul language. I once got yelled at for using a curse word, and all I could do was sit there and wonder how I learned an ancient Egyptian mummy's curse and when I repeated it.
Still, it makes no sense. They basically punished her for being confused rather than saying the curse word. All she was asking for was verification.
That's how I learned most of his curse words and the finger.
I thought it was kind of realistic to me...Most parents I knew punished kids for breaking rules they didn't know existed. My parents did it a lot and once yelled at me for talking back when I simply said, "But you never told us that was against the rules - how were we supposed to know?"
Just because I don't explicitly state that something is against the rules doesn't mean that you're off the hook for doing something that blatantly goes against what you know your mother and I want... Wait, this is my son editing this, right?
It could be. Did you ever ground your son for stuff as petty as not turning your socks inside out when you sent them through the wash?
It wouldn't be right for Angelica's parents not to do anything, because the child will not know that there is anything wrong with the word if you don't.
But they should still tell her which word she's saying is inappropriate. Really, they can say something like "Angelica, (curse) is a bad word and you shouldn't say it." How hard is that?
A lot harder than you think, when you consider Little Kid Logic. The first thing she'd say back is, "Well, you just said it!" and the inevitable questions as to "Why is it such a bad word?" Some battles can never be won.
Better yet... WHY DIDN'T THEY EVER ASK ANGELICA WHERE SHE LEARNED THE WORD FROM IN THE FIRST PLACE? This sheer ignorance is enough to make the Nostalgia Critic explode. Then again I doubt they would believe that Angelica learned it from Miss Carol.
You're asking this as a headscratcher for this show when it applies all the time in real life? I mean, you may as well ask every parent ever why they don't act rationally, logically, and perfectly at all times in real life, sweetheart. Humans are flawed people. The Rugrats parents are flawed people. They don't always have the right answers or make the right decisions. I mean, duh. Have you ever met people? Ever?
How do the adults get Phil and Lil confused when they're always wearing different clothing except for one or two times? Lil in her typical outfit lacks pants (instead you can clearly see a diaper) and wears a dress, and Phil wears pants.
Maybe it's just when the adults are just in a rush, and not really paying attention when they get them mixed up.
Truth in Television. I know parents who made sure to buy their kids specific matching outfits so they would be able to spot them if they got lost. Babies can be very hard to identify. And for what it's worth, in "Twins Pique" Lil is wearing pyjamas and not her bow when Betty mistakes her for Phil. And in "Together At Last" she assumes Lil is Phil because Phil is the baby that was in her house. She sees her child crying and her first instinct isn't going to be to check the shoes to see if they switched.
The third movie. First of all, why does Spike's personality seem so different from his Rugrats one? Next, anyone else find the Thornberrys actually hindering the movies abilities? Next, Chas states that it's his and Kira's anniversary...Huh? The kids haven't aged a day.
I don't remember much about that movie, but did Chas specify one-year anniversary? It's not uncommon for new couples to excessively celebrate anniversaries that are only a month or two apart each time. And how on Earth would they get off the island without the Thornberries?
Well that would be a reasonable assumption but in one of the episodes following the 2nd movie Kira and Chas celebrate a four month anniversary.
Actually he said it was their honeymoon, see? Now it makes sense!
Exactly. I re watched the movie and never was it stated it was for there anniversary. I just assumed the original WMG was correct thats why i responded like such. As i said...They celebrated there 3,000 hour anniversary in ''The Big Sneeze." Thanks for pointing that out and correcting it.
The version I rewatched, a few moments before I made the WMG, had "anniversary" in one line near the beginning.
I just rewatched and nowhere did it mention "anniversary."
Am I the only one who thinks time actually passes in this series? Or maybe it's like Pokémon where years pass but no one ages.
The second movie. Everyone speaks English because..? Is Reptarland supposed to be billingual or mainly English, despite being in France? Also, Kira has an American accent. I'm presuming that she's either American, has lived in America, or learned English from someone with an American accent.
Maybe because the majority of fans who watch the show are presumeably american?
Ever heard of Translation Convention? It's pretty much used by everything. It's the same reason why you wouldn't watch a Spanish dub of something only to find out it's actually Chinese.
And everyone knows how to suddenly speak French how? Plus the accents seem to imply they're speaking English.
Then again, it is a French interpretation of a Japanese theme park, and English is the 'business' language.
Coco, Jean Claude and Kira are the only ones we really hear speaking English (in addition to Mr Yamaguchi). Each are in very prominent positions in the company and would be expected to know English for business reasons. The likelihood is probably that Kira was educated in English before she moved to France. Asian countries do have schools where Westerners teach the children English. If said Westerner was American then that explains her accent. I know German people who speak English with American accents. Kira seems to be in charge of communications in Coco's office so it would be surprising if she didn't know English.
Did Angelica realise Cynthia wasn't alive or not?
Angelica's three. Most three-year-olds talk to their inanimate toys. No problem here.
An episode of All Grown Up states that Angelica stopped playing with Cynthia when she was five.
Yeah, it's kind of like how some kids have imaginary friends. Cynthia is a parody of Barbie, and I have seen little girls talking to their Barbie dolls before. And it makes even more sense for Angelica, since she was an only child. She might've gotten bored sometimes without any siblings, so she had Cynthia
Why are Phil and Lil often mistaken for each other, when Lil is wearing a dress and Phil wears pants (among other design differences)?
Most of the time they're being mistaken, they're crying. Since you're trying to calm and reassure an upset child, you're probably not going to double check something like gender when you do so.
Is it me or was Lil more.. Adventurous then Phil for most of the series? Phil would get uncomfortable or squeamish more then her, with her often being the reason for his discomfort.
I personally never noticed that. Anyone got an example?
Nothing comes to minds, but I've noticed several scenes where Lil is enthusiastic about something gross but Phil is quite Squicked out.
Yeah, that's kind of true. Why is that a headscratcher, though?
Lil has been more prone to breaking down and crying than Phil who would otherwise say nothing, toughen up, or have a snarky remark. (first episode, first movie both come to mind)
Actually, that's a pretty common thing with twins; for one (Usually the elder, in this case Lil) to be the dominate, more assertive one who comes up with the schemes and gets the pair in and out of trouble, and the other to be their partner in crime.
What exactly happened in All Growed Up? It's implied they went into the future (or at least from their baby Point of View), but it's obviously not that. Also, I watched the special again, and it seems a bit heavy set on the lampshading of Rugrat things.
I think it's just supposed to be a look into their future for us, and they didn't really experience it. Of course, I haven't seen the special in years so I could be wrong.
I have seen the special, and I agree, that was rather strange. I guess the time machine worked so that the babies went to the future, but aged into their All Grown Up ages and accepted that they had to act like teens. Or maybe Tommy dreamed the special. In my opinion, They Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot that would've involved the babies meeting their teen selves and realizing how they've changed and how they are the same.
Um, you do remember that previous episodes of this show included the babies entering a Reptar movie, acting out both the Passover and Chanukah stories, playing pretend through fairy tales, and imagining themselves as superheroes, right? The whole thing was probably just another Imagine Spot, and it would have stayed that way if the concept hadn't proven to be a successful pilot.
What was with Chuckie's haircut episode? He cut his hair once, and kept his normal look the rest of his life. Plus why'd they cut it off if he was going to go back to the same style? Did Chas not like it, or is it simply just to keep status quo?
Chas mentions how rapidly it grows. After all the hassle of the first haircut, he probably just got trims so as not to freak him out.
When Tommy was accidentally kidnapped, why was everyone Grandpa questioned acting suspiscious like they were in on it?
I always thought it was a little weird myself. Grandpa Lou should have contacted the police the moment he couldn't find Tommy. I'm surprised how unhelpful everyone was. Maybe they just didn't want to get into trouble with a super rich guy.
He made them uncomfortable. They're trying to live a quiet, unassuming life and he goes around asking questions. Also, from a production point of view, it helps the noir/detective story angle.
So the babies drove a giant dinosaur robot through the streets of Paris, destroyed half the city, climbed up the Eiffel Tower, dueled a giant Robo Snail, and their parents never found out?
They probably heard about it but didn't know it was their kids.
Sort of a fandom thing more than anything else, but - what it so 'sociopathic' about Angelica? She's three. Even when you take into account that she's acting older than she actually is (which all the kid characters do to some extent) she would be right about the age where the ego's set in, but she doesn't completely understand the needs and feelings of others. At worst, she's a mean-spirited and spoiled bully, but she's not evil.
Calling Angelica a sociopath goes too far, but this is likely because of the extent of her bullying towards the babies. Most of the time, she harasses them with no provocation.
The unprovoked harassment might just happen because she's bored. When I was around that age, I was the most selfish person in the world, without having been spoiled at all. Had my sister been younger than me, I would have been bullying her out of boredom instead of annoying her.
Angelica also does things that no normal 3-year old wouldn't do such as making up scary messed up lies she tells the babies, having an extremely hard time telling the truth, the way she treats the babies, steals their sweets, breaks their toys, general disregard over their safety like the time she was almost responsible for getting Tommy mauled by a mean dog in "Barbeque Story"... and not feeling any remorse for it! Yeah, Angelica has got to be a sociopath because the behaviors of one matches the descriptions. I am surprised that Angelica's abuse towards the babies didn't cause permanent psychological damage or worse. I wonder what goes on in Angelica's psyche to make her such a "nightmare fuel station attendant"... at least she's not as bad as Ren Hoek from the adult Ren and Stimpy series.
How do we know that Angelica even understands the fact that a large, aggressive dog like that could easily kill a one-year-old? And to be fair, it's not like Angelica necessarily knew the yard where she punched the ball had a guard dog in it— she also didn't make Tommy go over the fence to go get it. He did that on his own. She wasn't directly responsible for Tommy almost getting "eated."
This may be Nightmare Fuel to some, but compared to the stuff that happened to me and a lot of people I knew growing up, I thought that was standard three year old behaviour, what Angelica's trying to do. My sister tried to put an infant me in the fridge when she was three, my aunt was kicked into an open grave when she was three, my mom was afraid of the garbage can after her brother told her that her mom was going to throw her away, someone I went to school with had his three year old brother try to stab him with a toy spoon, someone else I went to school with also had their three year old sister try to pee in a bottle and feed it to her when they were an infant...yeah, Angelica was actually rather tame compared to them. And I had to help my sister babysit a three year old who tried to flush his baby brother down the toilet.
My mother and her sister tried to bury their baby sister in the garden. My mother would have been about 3 and my aunt almost 5.
Also the episode "The Trial" shows how really messed up she is— she was planning to draw on a wall and blame Tommy for it, and then she had the idea to destroy Tommy's clown lamp. Why? Because she believes Phil and Lil were "playing a kids' game that they never invite the bigger, better kids to play." Here's the link that reviews the episode and points out how messed up Angelica is. http://abcnotjustforkids.blogspot.com/2009/11/recap-rugrats-trial.html
Again, I thought that was perfectly normal. To elaborate, the series implies many times that Angelica actually likes the babies, but she doesn't know how to show it, so she picks on them so they'll pay attention to her (remember, she's the only Rugrat, by show's end, without a sibling). In "The Trial," she said that Phil and Lil didn't invite her to play, and that "really [made her] mad." At other times as well, she's shown to be upset that the babies don't see her as a friend, the way they do each other.
I'm just going to point out that Angela is three years old. Even if they act older than they really are (like what happens in every work of fiction like these), she's still three years old. I know people who're thirteen who aren't fully aware of the consequences of their actions. Given that things seem to work out in the end (except when Angelica gets rightfully punished), Angelica probably thinks the same thing a lot of kids do - oh, I almost got Tommy mauled by a big dog? Well that's okay, he wasn't hurt.
Long story short, Susie acts like how a 3 year old should act... Angelica does not act like a normal 3 year old and for some reason gets a strange kick out of tormenting the babies with her lies... that is not normal at all! No wonder she doesn't have many friends.
LOL Susie so does not act like a normal 3 year old, dude. Spend more time around 3 year olds before saying that XD
This might scare some people, but Angelica actually acted much much tamer than most three year olds I knew - especially compared to my sister, who got me terrified of the doctor because she told me the booster shot was a lethal injection, and that when I was two, I murdered her "Sister" so that I'd have to die. When she was at preschool, she ahd to be separated from a few kids who gave her all sorts of nasty ideas they told their siblings - many of which would make Angelica's lies look like Disney fairy tales. (One of them had his little sisters convinced that he was god and that if they didn't do everything they could to please them, they would be torn to pieces by their parents.)
I was watching a Criminal Minds the other day where they said that all teenagers profile as sociopaths. Possible Truth in Television? And many 3 year olds are still actually learning to, you know, talk, so obviously she's exaggerated because we're seeing her through the babies' POV.
I'd also like to point out to those who believe Angelica is a sociopath: Even though she's spoiled, her childhood is not ideal. Her mother is a workaholic who is often absent-though-present, with her cell phone pretty much fused to her ear. Angelica's dad tries to make up for this, but he does it by either letting her get away with murder and buying her toys and sweets, or trying to enforce discipline which he then backpedals on. (This is because a shocked Angelica has never been disciplined and doesn't know how to react other than to try to manipulate the situation, such as by asking Daddy if he doesn't love her anymore). Thus, she's getting mixed signals from one parent and neglect from the other. She wants to play and be friends with the babies, but hasn't been raised with the appropriate social skills to do so. It's also possible that her Nightmare Fuel stories are manifestations of things she secretly fears may happen to her.
Alternate Character Interpretation much? In fact what you just typed down is exactly how some people see Roger Klotz on Doug where they believe he wants to be friends with Doug but doesn't know how... kinda like your take on Angelica. Also you just pointed out how surprisingly negligent Angelica's parents are.
The series needed a token bully, so it picked Angelica. She's only three, people. Give her some time to grow and mature a bit before assuming that she's some crazy psychopath in hiding. People can change, y'know.
In "Angelica Breaks a Leg," she appears to be laughing uproariously while watching a WAR movie. That is definitely not normal behavior for a three year old!
Remember, she's three. Most three year olds don't understand the concepts of death and war. To her, it was just a lot of loud explosions, yelling, and people falling down. For all she knew, it was some kind of slapstick comedy. To us, it's nothing to laugh at as a war film is often a re-telling of an actual war that happened in human history. Are we really expecting a toddler of all people to understand this? Plus, it's possible she knows it's all fictional, no one's really dying in the war movie; it's all actors in period clothing and a liberal use of ketchup sauce. Also, I've heard of small kids watching The Exorcist and playing M-rated videogames, yet they somehow managed to grow up not a sociopathic, evil monstrosity.
For all we know, she could have just been watching a cartoon. We never actually hear anything other than gunshots coming from the TV, and there was a point in Real Life where you could watch Daffy Duck or Bugs Bunny and be more likely than not to see one of them shot or shot at repeatedly.
And let's not forget the various Bugs Bunny skits involving him and Elmer Fudd, where the entire punchline is "Elmer thinks he's shot and killed Bugs and has a serious My God, What Have I Done? moment, only for Bugs to jump up, kiss him on the face and run off." That may have been exactly what Angelica was watching.
In the episode where Angelica convinces Tommy to "go bad," one really needs to look at all the damage he caused: he busted up nearly every single window in the house some of them really badly, destroyed thousands maybe millions of dollars worth of stuff in the house, but his parents never stop and throw him in his crib for a time-out at any time in all of this?! He's a one-year old baby, not a rapid coyote or something.
I just watched the episode. His parents follow the advice of Dr. Lipschitz again, which (from the book) says to "give the baby all the freedom he needs and his behavior will be over in 3-4 months." Yeah.
During "The Family Tree," Chas assumes that Tommy misses his parents (who are away on a cruise) and is suffering from "separation anxiety." Later, while they're trying to cheer him up, Chas' mother says, "He seems very happy to me," and Chas responds, "We shouldn't be misled by the appearance of happiness." Then, at the end of the episode, Chas sees Tommy and says, "Well gee, you look happy now. Golly, maybe you just needed to be with your friend for a while!" This line has always bugged the HELL out of me! Every time I hear it, it sounds like the writers saying, "We need to wrap up Chas' role in the episode, but we only have about a minute left, so let's just have him say a real quick line, even though it totally contradicts what he said earlier in the episode." It would have been MUCH better if they just let it go as-is; I hardly think anyone would have been very bothered by the dangling "separation anxiety" thread, especially given the huge revelation that comes at the end of the episode (Didi's pregnancy with Dil). I know I'm probably making a huge deal over nothing, and I'm probably the only one who feels this strongly about this stupid line, but I felt the need to vent.
Perhaps because what made Drew think Tommy had "separation anxiety" was that he looked like he was playing by himself. He left Tommy alone and Tommy seemingly went out to play with the others. In Chas' mind, Tommy decided on his own to go and play with the others.
In the episode "The Santa Experience" Drew hires a guy to play Santa. Santa comes and gives the kids presents. He later gets a call from the guy he hired saying he can't make it and Drew gets pissed. Why did he get upset the actor couldn't make it after Santa already came?
Drew didn't realize at first. You see when the real Santa shows up, Drew assumes it's the actor. The actor then phones and when Drew gets off the phone he says "the guy I hired to play Santa couldn't make it" and then he stops, realizing what had happened. Chas then says "Drew, who was that?" which means they both realized.
Could be a case of Fridge Horror, as well. If that wasn't a professional actor and they don't want to believe that it was really Santa, that means a random guy came in the house dressed like Santa.
In "Ice Cream Mountain" why would the manager of the mini golf place be ruined by people winning free games? It's not like them reusing the putters and balls will cost him anything. Bribing them with that free giant bowl of ice cream was a big waste of money.
Because nobody wins at Ice Cream Mountain! Ever! MWAHAHAHA!!! Seriously though, it's a way to get people to keep coming back. Think about it: The infamous Ice Cream Mountain, a hole so hard that no one's ever beaten it. But today could be your day. Today, you could conquer Ice Cream Mountain and be a legend among mini golfers for generations! Or if that's not your thing, you could just keep coming back out of frustration. "*&#% Ice Cream! I'm not leaving this $#@! park until I sink this %@&$ shot! Get my credit card and my putter!"
This is for 'Rugrats in Paris.' Chuckie drives a giant robot Reptar. What. I mean, come on! This is a show, that for the most part, is pretty grounded in the rules of reality (Except for the talking baby thing.). This isn't Spongebob where the characters can do anything the writers damn well want because it's silly and goofy and the laws of physics don't apply. When you establish up a fictional universe, you set up the rules, and then you stick to them. Having Chuckie pilot a giant robot clearly breaks this universe's rules. Think I'm over thinking it? Ok. What if for example, Daria suddenly flew a space shuttle without any training? What if Ginger could suddenly breath fire? It would baffle viewers, because, with few minor exceptions, these are worlds where these things do not happen. Having a baby drive a giant robot in a series where the characters act like real people, and not like cartoons, is just ludicrous.
Glad to hear I'm not the only one who found this weird. I always liked the scene, being a kaiju fan, but I always found this to be a pretty 'out there' scene forthe series.
If it's worth anything, Stu says earlier that the technology is so simple a child could do it (though he later redacts this to "young adult"). It's a bit out there, yes, but personally, I never bat an eye at that part of the movie, particularly because the babies act rather clumsily. Though it still leaves the question of how they got into the head, considering they are babies, and it's about a bazillion feet off the ground.
This, and no thought as to how absolutely no one questions why there was suddenly a mech-Godzilla wannabe stomping around Paris after that scene was over? I would imagine it'd be all over their papers the next morning, and Stu banned from France (as he was the genius who built the thing in the first place.)
Fridge Brilliance - the robot was Coco's property. She's the one that commissioned it to be built. And who had the babies banned from the wedding and taken to the place where it was being held? Coco. And let's not forget that Jean Claude was meant to be responsible for them - or that he drove a second giant robot through Paris after a group of babies. Basically the babies and their parents are probably going to fine - but Coco is going to be in big trouble with the law. Hell, the parents could probably sue her for putting their children in such danger. Kira could probably testify against Coco and Jean Claude if the matter went to court. Plus the robot arriving at Coco's wedding just implicates her even further.
Was it ever confirmed that the babies can talk but for some reason they have to keep it a secret from the adults? This trouper always thought they could talk like Stewie from Family Guy but unlike Stewie who talks to adults in the open the Rugrats can't, why is that?
They talk in baby language. Angelica and Susie are at a halfway point where they can speak English but still understand babies. Though it seems they really could talk in the original pilot, as they wait until the grown-ups leave the room before they start talking.
I could never understand why Chuckie couldn't talk to the adults; he was two!
It could just be that he's a bit developmentally slow, he seems to be roughly on the same level as the one-year-old babies.
He's on the same plane of communication as Phil, Lil, and Tommy (i.e., can talk to them but not the grown-ups), but throughout the series, he shows a higher level of intelligence than the other three babies. He tends to have good foresight going into potentially bad situations, he's extremely Genre Savvy, and he's the only baby to actually say his first word in the show. And in the episode "Home Movies," Chuckie's drawings are arguably even better than Angelica's, and Chuckie actually learned to draw much later in the series (and it's revealed that he's left-handed, despite using his right hand in the Home Movies episode).
Well technically the other babies can 'talk' to the adults - just as a bunch of gibberish they don't understand. Chuckie's just the first of them to learn to communicate.
Exactly. The babies essentially have their own language that they're fluent in, but sounds like gibberish to everyone else, just like a foreign language an American doesn't know would sound.
Some kids just don't talk until they're a little older. 18 to 24 months completely normal, and it's not necessarily a sign of something bad if a kid starts talking later. Later in the series, he does have words adults can understand.
I don't get the end of "Case of the Missing Rugrat". Why does Tommy fold his arms then smile at Grandpa?
It's because the sisters think Tommy resembled their late father so they named him "Bostwick" so I guess Tommy was imitating the look of their late father.
Me and my friends were debating about this but is there a actual mental illness that leaves the victim constantly unable to stop lying and either having a hard time or being unable to tell the truth? Well whatever it is it's implied that Angelica has it in "Angelica Nose Best" and she did seem to have a extremely difficult time in trying to tell a truth.
Not sure, but there are people who are chronic liars.
Angelica could be a chronic liar. She loves making up elaborate stories to scare the babies and blaming them for anything that goes wrong. Since her parents rarely punish her, she's learned that she can avoid getting into trouble if she comes up with a good lie.
Simply put, it's a habit that she's essentially addicted to, since lying constantly improves her life to such an extent.
I've been meaning to ask this for a while now. In the episode "Special Delivery", Tommy is declared overweight on a scale, then a crane picks him up and he slides down a chute with a loop-de-loop and knocks over some packages in the process. What kind of chute did he slide down, and how can it have a loop-de-loop of all things? More importantly, how did no one know that a 1 year old baby was being sent through the mail system?