Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers

Here's the promo for Disney XD's two-day full series marathon of the original Chip 'n Dale: Rescue Rangers series.

Tad Stones likes the film.

I think that given how the Duck Tales reboot went, a Rescue Rangers reboot could be pretty good, too.

Matt & Trey just revealed themselves to be the biggest hypocrites possible.

It's wrong when Space Jam 2 does this shit but they'll happily grant Disney the right to use Randy to cameo in a movie that does the exact same shit.

Was that the head of Marie from The Aristocats that I see?

I can't get enough of Little Chip's Knight Rider lunchbox

Edited by Zarius on May 20th 2022 at 6:51:07 AM

They said "Pokemon" was dumb, when they never shut up about how "Star Wars" keeps getting ruined when "Pokemon" is more inspirational and popular than "Star Wars".

They were ALWAYS hypocrites.

By the way, the Post Malone cover of the series theme is now out:

Ok, finished the movie. Overall it's pretty good, nowhere near as wild as I'd thought it'd be, and that's a good thing, kept everything tight, but it's less about the Rescue Rangers as a team and more about Chip and Dale playing 'detective' with a human cop while sorting out their showbiz issues and debating the relevancy of their brand

The 4chan rumour that Pluto was the villain wasn't true, though I suspect it may have been in the earlier script drafts. But those saying 'Sweet Pete' wasn't An older Peter Pan were dead wrong, and he is the main villain of the film

I like what they did with soulful Zipper and his Babies Ever After with Gadget, but it's a real bummer that Monty, him and Gadget really don't get involved in the final fight at all, Gadget is very much the taxi driver to Dale and says to him, and essentially the audience, that she'll never change as as character, almost as if responding to internet speculation she'd be a feminist man-hating action chick...that's fine, but actually do something like show your smarts instead. She doesn't do either. She's just Happily Married and that's it.

This is essentially another Sonic movie too. Ugly Sonic has the best scenes and is more crucial in tying up the final act of the movie than Monty, Zipper, or Gadget are. SONIC. In a Disney movie, is more plot relevant than the Disney afternoon characters.

Edited by Zarius on May 20th 2022 at 9:01:04 AM

Never thought I would see a Robert Crumb character in this movie.

So from what I can tell the movie seems to basically be a You suck for liking this and wanting more of it for nostalgia's sake?

Not really, it's saying Hollywood ain't original and makes mistakes with their I Ps, the actual movie doesn't trash Rescue Rangers at all...much anyway, just pokes fun at a few of it's tropes.

Edited by Zarius on May 20th 2022 at 11:53:27 AM

Is this canon to MCU?

This is a really weird thing that I quite dig and wish I could love, but a lot of dialogue gags are dragged out and overwrought and they probably should have gotten a stronger actress for the sole human character. That being said I'm an animation nerd to my core and there are some incredibly deep cuts and smart jokes. If nothing else I have to applaud this for being the most unhinged thing mainline Disney has released in years.

At a stretch it could be canon to the DCEU

Maybe it's my love for Who Framed Roger Rabbit, but this is probably the most disappointed I've ever been in a movie. An ugly, sloppy, cynical thing. I think I hated it.

For me. The movie and it's concept is a okay for me. Just not that great.

Kinda wish it doesn't copy Who Framed Roger Rabbit. My problem is that how the characters are miscasted and the unnecessary shipping of Gadget and Zipper. But I do wonder how they were able to get Ugly Sonic to be there in a Disney film without being sued?

Edited by Bubblepig on May 20th 2022 at 10:48:39 AM

I feel like with Ugly Sonic, considering Randy and several Viacom owned characters making cameos along with parody law being a thing, they likely didn’t care about the use of Ugly Sonic especially with the more flattering light he was in.

Was Waldo in this movie?

Did you guys know that Waldo (or Wally, whatever) set the world record for fictional character that the most people dressed up as in one meeting? That is not a joke at all.

You'd think that record would go to some character like Superman, but he's not even remotely close. I don't even remember seeing any Waldo cosplayers at any Con I've been to.

That is seriously one of the most hilarious world records I've ever heard of in my entire life.

This movie was... WEIRD. Like, on all fronts, including quality. It’s definitely not as awful as I expected. It’s not even really bad, nor is it really great, or even particularly mediocre. It’s... weird.

It’s basically a FAR lesser Roger Rabbit crossed with a non-terrible Ralph Breaks the Internet. The animation was pretty uneven; sometimes, the 2D-3D hybrid style worked for me, like with Chip, or it didn’t, like with Sweet Pete. I audibly groaned when the human cop character was revealed to be a huge fan of the Rescue Rangers, like every live-action cartoon reboot and their dog. I was disappointed that the Baloo and Pumbaa that showed up were their live-action counterparts. And in general, none of the emotional moments landed for me at all, which was probably my biggest issue.

But... on the other hand, most of the jokes were pretty solid. Nothing that made me laugh out loud, but I at least registered that the jokes were funny. Some of the cameos did catch me off-guard, like the Phineas and Ferb one, Randy from South Park, and Butthead. And in general, there’s an air of self-parody about the whole movie that makes me forgive a lot of its issues. It feels less like a cynical attempt to wring cash out of stupid people to me, and more like an irreverent, cheeky poking of fun at the Hollywood trend of reboots and bootlegs, which I can get behind. It feels less like the team went into this trying to make a cohesive story and more like they just wanted to go absolutely bonkers with every facet of everything Disney owns, and even some stuff they don’t own, which I can actually kind of respect. While this does mean that it doesn’t really have a good story, it means that it feels earnest throughout, like the team working on it were having the time of their lives. And frankly? More power to them.

So at the end of the day, I honestly don’t really have an opinion on this movie. It has its fair share of lows, highs, and in-betweens, and it all balances out to create an... experience. Not an awful experience, not a boring experience, not a life-changing experience. Just... an experience. I couldn’t tell you what it’d be like if you grew up with the original Rescue Rangers show, but I had a decent enough time with it, and wouldn’t mind checking it out again.

So I don't exactly have Disney+, but based on reactions from Twitter and here, the good news is that it turns out Pluto isn't the bad guy and the Peter Pan cosplayer, Sweet Pete, is the bad guy.

The bad news is that Sweet Pete's origin story is looking to be an echo of what happened to Bobby Driscoll minus the dying young part. Namely, in the movie's universe, Sweet Pete isn't a Peter Pan cosplayer, but rather he was the toon who played the original Peter Pan, only to get fired simply because he got too old to be Peter Pan, ergo he became a crime boss. This would've been a cool idea if it wasn't for the real-world connection and maybe it would've had more weight if it was someone besides Peter Pan. Maybe Pinocchio?

The gross news is that in the movie's universe, Gadget and Zipper are married. With kids. I mean, I guess that was more poking fun at the weirdos who insist on making up really random relationships, but it's still pretty weird and not something I want to think on for long. But then, I guess a competent fan-fic writer could do a fix-fic to establish that the kids aren't really biological and more like early test runs from the bad guy's plot and Gadget and Zipper didn't have the heart to off them, so they adopted them? Sort of like how The Boys From Brazil had the protagonist letting the Hitler clones go?

Overall, this looks to not be the worst thing ever? I guess we can peg this as a fine third movie in an unofficial "The Lonely Island vs. Cinema" trilogy? Because I notice that this could somehow fit alongside the other Lonely Island movies like Hot Rod, which spoofed the daredevil movie genre, Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping, which spoofed the genre of "awesome musician realizes he's a blockhead and needs to be a better person", and now this movie, which spoofs Hollywood's recent insistence on reboots and remakes that no one asked for.

About that part...

at first, I just went straight "WHAT?!" at the Gadget and Zipper part and reached for the brain-bleach, but stopped midway and really started thinking about it for a while... and then the light-bulb of logic in my head lit up...

How does toons have kids? They draw them. By hand.

and if all those kids are basically "doodles" that Zipper and Gadget drew on a piece of paper with pencils and erasers and color-pencils before agreeing on each of their designs before having them come to life first, then I surprisingly enough, found their relationship perfectly fine and less disturbing by all accounts...

Well, you can always go the “yar har fiddle de dee” route, if you see what I mean.

I watched the movie this morning and was not a fan of it.

Besides the Peter Pan thing being distasteful if you know about what happened to his real life voice actor, a lot of it just seemed like just constant in-jokes and memes. For instance, the whole thing with Ugly Sonic makes no sense if you're unfamiliar with the backlash to the original trailer for the Sonic movie, and I find it weird that they used a three year-old meme as not just a joke, but a major plot point. A lot of the jokes felt less like actual jokes and more like "Do you get this reference?", almost like a Seltzer and Friedberg film.

There was a very subtle Mythology Gag at the beginning that I think a lot of people missed. During the scene of the students entering the school, a toon goat student is stopped by a teacher who tells them to put some pants on, saying "You aren't Donald Duck!" I wonder if that was a reference to how Clarence Nash's iconic duck voice was originally meant to be an imitation of a pet goat he had instead of a duck. That is a perfect example of a joke you won't get unless you're a Disney nerd like me, but won't be too distracting and will make sense in context even if you're not, and I wish the rest of the references in the film had been like that.

My two pre-release complaints still apply here. First of all, you cannot make fun of the switch from 2D to CGI if you're going to cheat by using cel-shaded CGI for the 2D characters. That makes the film come across as hypocritical, like it's trying to be self-aware without actually being self-aware. Secondly, why try even try to work Chip n Dale: Rescue Rangers into this if you're going this insane and meta direction? Why not use original characters like Roger Rabbit and Wreck-it Ralph?

I'm actually surprised by the sharp divide in reaction I'm seeing to this movie. Most of the responses to it have either been "It's actually a lot better than it sounds and genuinely funny" or "It's an unfunny and cynical cameo fest that tries to be Roger Rabbit and fails".