i really enjoyed the film for what it was, and I think its an awesome movie for kids that parents will definitely enjoy.

Spoiler

Also find it hilarious that people here are debating if the Optimus leg is a 1:1 match to the new techinically unrevealed ROTB OP design. The whole premise of the movie is that these are bootlegs and the movie even explains that the bootlegging machine modifies designs to skirt around copyright laws. So Optimus' leg being slightly different is 100% in line with the movie's premise.

 

It's a real cannon. It fires cannon balls and all. Guessing maybe it's from Hook's ship?

 

Oh Matrix, let's hope not!  
Although I think they'd have to buy all of Hasbro to do that. In which case,
Oh Matrix, let's hope not!  

["The preceding post was not an attempt at a haiku, nor paid for by the new World order."]

 

I highly doubt they would. They really don't need Transformers at this point. Also they'd legally probably not be allowed to since they own a lot already, they got lucky with buying Fox (I think they had to sell or get rid of some things in order to acquire Fox).

 

No, they did not. Universal likely baited Disney into paying far more to get Fox than it was worth given what little Disney actually got. It wasn't worth the billions of dollars in debt it placed them and especially not the compounded financial trouble this led to following the closure of every revenue stream Disney had thanks to the pandemic.

The Fox buyout is really an albatross around Disney's neck they're still paying for and has returned next to nothing on with the investment. It was part of the reason Bob Iger took his golden parachute and got out not long after said buyout was made, because he knew he'd fucked up.

 

Just watched the movie and I gotta agree with others. While I'd never seen rescue rangers or didn't get most of the cameos, I really really liked the film. It shouldn't be as good as it is. Would be down for a sequel (with more TF easter eggs of course   ).

 

It amuses me that the people who actually like the film are those who don't actually know what the source material was, which if you think about it is ironic.

 

Kind of but it more so shows that the movie isn't relying on the cameos for people to like it. If you get the cameos it will heighten the film. Just a lot of them are before my time. Those that grew up in the 80's and 90's will probably get the cameos and love them. Which is how it should be done (good movie/story with cameos to heighten the film). But those that don't get all the cameo's aren't the only ones that like the film.

 

Have you at any point considered actually just watching the original Rescue Rangers?

Because from what I'm seeing, more people would actually rate the film higher if the film simply wasn't titled Rescue Rangers, because it largely has nothing to do with the Rescue Rangers as a cohesive group.

 

Saw the movie with my son, agree it's cute, especially seeing all the homage to the other older toons, even more hilarious seeing darkwing duck. The only thing i didn't care for was the voice of chip n dale...didn't seem to fit right, the rest of rescue rangers sounded fine...i guess they meant to do that with them maybe...i also used to watch both shows as a kid.

 

Basically the movie is Bonkers: The Live action movie, for the script. But old people had a special connection with Chip'n Dale RR, and that movie in jam packed with inner jokes on RR and other old franchises.
And i totally see

Spoiler

Ugly Sonic

returning for an eventual Bonkers movie.

P.s. Bonkers instead of Chip'n Dale would'nt have worked so well.

 

I grew up on the old Rescue Rangers cartoon and loved this movie.


As for the cameos, they're ultimately meaningless. Disney isn't buying Hasbro or Transformers or anything like that. The director wanted the world of the movie to encompass all animation, not just Disney animation (read an article about it yesterday). There were cameos not just from Hasbro properties but also Sega and Mattel at a minimum.

 

Pretty much, the story was first and the cameos were second and helped fill in the world (which is how it should be - not the other way around).

 

Exactly. They director and writers wanted the world to feel filled out in a manner similar to Who Framed Roger Rabbit in how that movie used both Warner Brothers and Disney cartoon characters to fill out it's world.

 

I haven't seen W.F.R.R but I know about it and some of who's in it and agreed it's definitely in that vane and style (so much so he's in it). And I think the movie did the cameo's very well. Never overshadowed the story.

 

Great movie, especially considering how old it is. One I will always highly recommend.

 

I know, I need to get to it at some point. From what I've seen, the animation is still super impressive.

Okay?

 

It's all in good fun.

 

Ah, was hard to tell without the blue text.