CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
4.3/10
18 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Una familia de los suburbios se muda a un nuevo barrio con su adorable perro, que tiene tendencia a causar estragos a su manera.Una familia de los suburbios se muda a un nuevo barrio con su adorable perro, que tiene tendencia a causar estragos a su manera.Una familia de los suburbios se muda a un nuevo barrio con su adorable perro, que tiene tendencia a causar estragos a su manera.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 3 nominaciones en total
Opiniones destacadas
Marmaduke is the adaptation to movies of the cartoon of the same name. The story is about a suburban family moves to a new neighborhood with their large yet lovable Great Dane, who has a tendency to wreak havoc in his own oblivious way. Marmaduke is mainly intended for little kids, some adults may enjoy it others might feel light a living hell. The movie has some funny moments and others are kinda foolish. The CGI to make the animals talk are nothing out of this world but decent enough. The story is a little predictable. The cast of voices are the best thing with Owen Wilson as Marmaduke, Fergie as Jezebel, Kiefer Sutherland as Bosco and George Lopez as Carlos. We also have Lee Pace and Judy Greer as Phil and Debbie Winslow, Marmaduke's owners and William H. Macy as Pace's boss. In conclusion, Kids will love Marmaduke and for one strange reason I enjoy it. So if you have children and a very big patience, take them to see this movie. If not well its your choice.
In short, the CGI talking dogs was done extremely well, even carrying on through nuances found in most dogs - head-tilts, twitches, etc. Typical past CGI attempts practically demanded that the subject remain still while the effects are applied. So, I have to give very high marks to the special effects. The Marmaduke character is very likable as are most of the ensemble here. The story is predictable but I had a fairly good time and even found the humor to be occasionally very funny from a dog-oriented viewpoint. I truly didn't expect much from this but ended up liking it quite a bit. Having said that I will say that I enjoyed it once and will probably never watch it again, but I believe kids 7 to 11 would enjoy it quite a bit.
My 3 year old loves animal movies, even Beverly Hills Chihuahua (which let's face it was pretty average at best). She didn't like this movie at all.
It's not cute, it's not adult, it's not a lot of things and the most important thing it isn't is entertaining.
This film is a horrible adaptation from a beloved cartoon - the characters are not really likable, there is a confusing mish-mosh of adult aimed humor and situations involving the dogs, and then just horrible parts featuring the humans. William H Macy is sinister and extremely creepy as the dog food company owner - he could have been kooky and funny, a little zany perhaps, but no, he comes across as aggressive, pushy and sinister.
The story itself is stupid and lacking in any real interest for the young kids this movie is really supposed to be aimed at. The adults forced to take the kids won't find anything better in it either.
I would advise anyone not to even both renting it for a dollar, it's not worth it, and I don't say that about many movies.
CGI may be very clever and way better than it used to be, but this movie over uses it to the point of boredom on the part of the viewer.
CGI isn't enough if there is no real, interesting story - I for one could care less about Phil and his new job at the pet food company.
Nothing about this movie is appealing!
It's not cute, it's not adult, it's not a lot of things and the most important thing it isn't is entertaining.
This film is a horrible adaptation from a beloved cartoon - the characters are not really likable, there is a confusing mish-mosh of adult aimed humor and situations involving the dogs, and then just horrible parts featuring the humans. William H Macy is sinister and extremely creepy as the dog food company owner - he could have been kooky and funny, a little zany perhaps, but no, he comes across as aggressive, pushy and sinister.
The story itself is stupid and lacking in any real interest for the young kids this movie is really supposed to be aimed at. The adults forced to take the kids won't find anything better in it either.
I would advise anyone not to even both renting it for a dollar, it's not worth it, and I don't say that about many movies.
CGI may be very clever and way better than it used to be, but this movie over uses it to the point of boredom on the part of the viewer.
CGI isn't enough if there is no real, interesting story - I for one could care less about Phil and his new job at the pet food company.
Nothing about this movie is appealing!
The funniest joke in the long-awaited live-action/CGI adaptation of everyone's second-least favourite comic strip Marmaduke is actually intentional, which is kind of impressive. Of course, it's not funny in the way that the filmmakers intended it to be funny so that's too bad I guess but it is actually a joke that is actually funny. Some connection had been made, through the layers of awful script and boring staging and legitimately creepy CGI. They intended to make me laugh, when they had the mean dog Bosco call out our Owen-Wilson-voiced hero in the middle of the hero's crowning moment, a big raucous "O.C. rager" of a party, icing our dog out with a growled, "Marmaduke? More like
Marmafake." And they did.
I laughed, I admit it. Marmapuke, Marmapoop, Marmadreck there's a lot of ways the screenwriters could have gone, and they chose Marmafake, which well dog-gone it, it doesn't even rhyme. Notes: I also laughed when the filmmakers, seeking to set the tone after Marmaduke & family's big cross-country move to the O.C. from Kansas so the dad (Lee Pace) could work for a dog-food company with a mean boss (William H. Macy, for some inexplicable reason) by mixing "California" by Phantom Planet almost directly into "California Love" by 2Pac. I assume they'd spent all the soundtrack licensing money by that point, because they left out "California" by Belinda Carlisle and "California" by John Mayall and "California" by Joni Mitchell and "Going back to Cali(fornia)" by L.L. Cool J and "Hotel California" by the Eagles. Too bad.
Anyway Marmaduke is, we're told, a big, gangly goofy dog played by two or more real dogs in the film, that talks with a creepy CGI animated mouth. I'm pretty sure, at least, that they used more than one dog because sometimes Marmaduke has a big, dangly pair of testicles, and sometimes he doesn't, which is obviously problematic and I started thinking, while on-screen Marmaduke was having another interminable dialogue session with some other dog about something that to so brazenly, as filmmakers, use dogs with varying levels of testicle-havingness is kind of bold, almost as if they're saying "Yeah, sometimes 'duke's got nuts and sometimes he doesn't. We don't care, because nobody will notice, and if they do notice, it's because you're a perverted weirdo who both looks at and notes dog's nuts." Which left me feeling vaguely insulted, and terribly aggrieved.
So Marmaduke has some friends that are dogs and some enemies, and he makes some mistakes and eventually gets sad and runs away from his family and his haughty girlfriend, voiced by Fergie from the Black-Eyed Peas, who is actually a better voice actor than she is a singer. Marmaduke then falls into a sink-hole along with another funny-looking but faithful and nice dog (voice of Emma Stone) and then or perhaps before then there is a dog-surfing championship and everything is fine, even the sub-plots about 'duke's dad's mean boss and his kid that hates soccer.
Kids might like it, but I doubt it, as aside from being creepy and awkward and really poorly plotted it's just dull. One of the first thing they teach you in screen writing school is "show, don't tell", that expository dialogue is a no-no and narrators all the more so. But dogs can't really act, and they don't really do anything except run around and eat sandwiches so for the film to have a narrative structure the dogs have to talk, a lot, explaining everything, and because dogs don't drive or frame houses or fold clothes they talk while just standing there looking around. It's hellaciously boring, but probably unavoidable as Marmaduke is clearly an intellectual property that fans have literally been screeching and rending their clothes to see brought to the big screen and given the ol' Hollywood treatment.
I don't have anything more to say about Marmaduke. 2/10
I laughed, I admit it. Marmapuke, Marmapoop, Marmadreck there's a lot of ways the screenwriters could have gone, and they chose Marmafake, which well dog-gone it, it doesn't even rhyme. Notes: I also laughed when the filmmakers, seeking to set the tone after Marmaduke & family's big cross-country move to the O.C. from Kansas so the dad (Lee Pace) could work for a dog-food company with a mean boss (William H. Macy, for some inexplicable reason) by mixing "California" by Phantom Planet almost directly into "California Love" by 2Pac. I assume they'd spent all the soundtrack licensing money by that point, because they left out "California" by Belinda Carlisle and "California" by John Mayall and "California" by Joni Mitchell and "Going back to Cali(fornia)" by L.L. Cool J and "Hotel California" by the Eagles. Too bad.
Anyway Marmaduke is, we're told, a big, gangly goofy dog played by two or more real dogs in the film, that talks with a creepy CGI animated mouth. I'm pretty sure, at least, that they used more than one dog because sometimes Marmaduke has a big, dangly pair of testicles, and sometimes he doesn't, which is obviously problematic and I started thinking, while on-screen Marmaduke was having another interminable dialogue session with some other dog about something that to so brazenly, as filmmakers, use dogs with varying levels of testicle-havingness is kind of bold, almost as if they're saying "Yeah, sometimes 'duke's got nuts and sometimes he doesn't. We don't care, because nobody will notice, and if they do notice, it's because you're a perverted weirdo who both looks at and notes dog's nuts." Which left me feeling vaguely insulted, and terribly aggrieved.
So Marmaduke has some friends that are dogs and some enemies, and he makes some mistakes and eventually gets sad and runs away from his family and his haughty girlfriend, voiced by Fergie from the Black-Eyed Peas, who is actually a better voice actor than she is a singer. Marmaduke then falls into a sink-hole along with another funny-looking but faithful and nice dog (voice of Emma Stone) and then or perhaps before then there is a dog-surfing championship and everything is fine, even the sub-plots about 'duke's dad's mean boss and his kid that hates soccer.
Kids might like it, but I doubt it, as aside from being creepy and awkward and really poorly plotted it's just dull. One of the first thing they teach you in screen writing school is "show, don't tell", that expository dialogue is a no-no and narrators all the more so. But dogs can't really act, and they don't really do anything except run around and eat sandwiches so for the film to have a narrative structure the dogs have to talk, a lot, explaining everything, and because dogs don't drive or frame houses or fold clothes they talk while just standing there looking around. It's hellaciously boring, but probably unavoidable as Marmaduke is clearly an intellectual property that fans have literally been screeching and rending their clothes to see brought to the big screen and given the ol' Hollywood treatment.
I don't have anything more to say about Marmaduke. 2/10
Some guy was giving out tickets to a test screening of this abomination to mankind, and I decided "Eh, free film and I always liked Marmaduke". Well, I was wrong. This film is a physically painful experience. This film consists of the BAD jokes from Marley & Me. The difference is, Marley & Me was touching and funny and cute. This is horrible. No more words to fit this. HORRIBLE! The horrible scene that sticks out the most is the dancing dogs sequence that features a ton of dogs dancing around to music in a park. I just saw a preview for this film on TV, and the song "Tik Tok" was playing during it. Tik Tok, during a dog film commercial. The writing is horrible, the acting is horrible, the effects are horrible, the jokes are horrible, the music is horrible, EVERY SINGLE LAST THING IS HORRIBLE!
I did not apply a rating to this review as 1 is too good for this.
EDIT: Under pressure from somebody, I watched the film in theaters to see if anything was different. I was wrong... IT WAS EVEN WORSE!
I did not apply a rating to this review as 1 is too good for this.
EDIT: Under pressure from somebody, I watched the film in theaters to see if anything was different. I was wrong... IT WAS EVEN WORSE!
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThe film has the distinction of featuring two dog farts, three urine gags, two hits to the groin, one animal belch, two record scratch moments, and two uses of the phrase, "Who let the dogs out?"
- ErroresWhen Marmaduke has the cone around his neck, his collar comes off along with it when he pulls it off with the fence. Then it's shown on his neck again as he walks away.
- Citas
Marmaduke: [Ending scene, going to sleep with Phil and Debbie again]
[Whispering]
Marmaduke: Wait for it... Wait for it...
[Marmaduke farts loudly]
Phil Winslow: Oh, Marmaduke!
Debbie Winslow: Marmaduke!
Phil Winslow: What did you eat?
Carlos: Man, you got a serious problem.
Marmaduke: [laughs] It never gets old.
- Versiones alternativasThe UK cinema release was cut to remove a use of the word "spaz" for a U rating.
- ConexionesEdited into Doggiewoggiez! Poochiewoochiez! (2012)
- Bandas sonorasMr. Pitiful
Written by Matt Costa
Performed by Matt Costa
Courtesy of Brushfire Records / Universal Records
Under license from Universal Music Enterprises
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitio oficial
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- Chú Chó Marmaduke
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 50,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 33,644,788
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 11,599,661
- 6 jun 2010
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 83,761,844
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta