Cenerentola e gli 007 nani

I really don't understand all of the venom and vitriol directed at this cute little film. Is it a cinematic masterpiece? No, but it's hardly the worst children's animated film you'll ever see. (I leave that honor to the horror that is DOOGLE.) The ill-fated romance between Rick and Ella seems genuine enough -- it makes you take a second look at the classic fairy tale and ask the question, "what is so all-fired wonderful about Price Charming, anyway?" The casting was appropriate -- anything featuring the underused Wallace Shawn can't be all bad -- and the acting was fine, if not Oscar-worthy.

Again, is this film on the level of SHREK or ICE AGE, or anything by Pixar? Of course not. But is it better than a lot of the animated children's films that have come out lately? Absolutely.

Avoid this film until you've read all of the negative reviews on it first. That way, you are less likely to be as disappointed in it as I was. The previews suckered me into seeing it. Do not make this mistake!

Though a cute idea, it ended up as only that ... a cute idea. Fortunately, the acting was well suited to this shallow attempt to entertain. Comparing it to Shrek and Hoodwinked is rather unfair, since this movie is no where near their league.

If you have absolutely nothing to do on a cold and rainy day, and you get hold of a free ticket, pick up a newspaper on your way to the theater and read what the critics have said about it. If you decide to see it, on those terms, you have at least been warned.

If you can compartmentalize your movie viewing, you will be able to negotiate through this.

The thing to ignore is the thing we are supposed to place foremost, all the dialog, acting, story and pacing. Its just dreadful. Enough said about that.

But. It has two things that interested me.

One is simply the idea. It is a movie of a fairy tale inside a movie about manipulating fairy tales, inside a movie narrated by someone who seems to be outside both movies (he actually gets to stop the film physically) but at the same time trapped in the innermost movie. There's magic to explain some of this, but only a part. Its a very clever concoction.

But the other thing was some of the characters. Well, they vary so; I guess I really mean the two women in front, Ella (Cinderella) and her redhaired stepmother. Its how they are rendered. Ella seems to be the only character whose face seems outside the cartoon world she inhabits. She's clearly a version of Audrey Hepburn with each of her attractive feature made a little more so. Its really quite good.

The bodies are another thing. Not since Betty Boop's boobs were stilled by the censors, have we seen a young body as naturally sexy as this. There's nothing seductive or intended or cheap or erotic about it. Its just that all the parts move as they should, under modest clothes. I really was amazed, especially at the attention paid to her rear end.

The step mother is something else. She moves with exaggerated erotic intent. She has huge bosoms and a nearly invisible waist. And then again huge thighs. Where the younger just walks, this puffy dominatrix swings. There's clearly some intent by the filmmaker here to get some sort of message across about the undesirability of overt sexuality. It zoomed right past me just in my astonishment at Ella's motion.

Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

I remember wanting to see this in the theater when it was first released, it seemed like a guaranteed hit. But unfortunately, I never got the opportunity to see it, when I saw that it was available for rent, I didn't hesitate, I also never looked at the IMDb rating, so I thought that this would have been a fun family movie that had a few good laughs. OK, I admit this really wasn't what I expected, it was kinda lame, but I think a 3.0 is a little too harsh. This wasn't the most original computer animated film, but it had a few good laughs here and there. It's just a fun and wacky family film that I think some people might get a kick out of.

We all know how fairy tales go, the happily ever after ending, but did you ever wonder if there was some sort of monitoring going on to make sure that everyone had a happy story? Well, that's what this story is about, only Cinderella has another man in her life that wants her heart, a slave, Rick, who wants a happy ending of his own. But when Cinderella's step mom finds out about the monitoring, she takes over and wants the villains for once to win the day.

Happily N'ever After is a silly film, but it was all in good fun, you have got to admit that the prince character was pretty funny, when he was admitting all his failures and started crying. There were some fun moments also, I think people were a little too harsh on the film, just give it a look for yourself, it's not unique, but it's just a fun little animated film that I think just got over looked.

5/10

I looked forward to this movie, having been pleasantly surprised by other fractured fairy tales such as "Shrek" and even "Hoodwinked", and I really wanted to like this one a lot, but as it was, I only like it a little.

Here's the lowdown: Cinderella, or Ella, as friends call her (Sarah Michelle Gellar) is taken with the charming but clueless Prince Humperdink (Patrick Warburton), but in the classic fashion of the fairy tale we all know, stepmother Frieda (Sigourney Weaver) has other ideas--when she stumbles upon the lab of a powerful wizard (George Carlin) and runs afoul of his hapless assistants, Mambo and Munk (Andy Dick and Wallace Shawn, respectively) she learns that everyone's fate in Fairy Tale Land is pre-written, can be manipulated, and proceeds to do so. She garners the support of just about every fairy tale villain in a regular coup, Forcing Ella, Mambo, Munk, and cynical palace dishwasher Rick (Freddie Prinze Jr.) to search for the Prince, or some way out of the mess.

This film looks terrific--the visuals of Fairy Tale land are quite stunning, and the character design, along with capable voicing, makes the characters memorable. Even the idea is juicy, and leads to other interesting notions, such as the view of Rumplestiltskin (Michael McShane channeling Gilbert Gottfried) as a concerned guardian. The problem--and it's a big one--is that they all deserve a better executed, better timed story. The plot, while intriguing in concept, drags in too many places, and there just feels like a few too many holes are left here and there. The disjointed use of the talent is somewhat evident as well; I'm somewhat used to guys like Warburton, Shawn, and Andy Dick getting the great lines, and Dick does get some good ones, but most of the good lines are divided between Prinze and Weaver. Oh, they handle them effectively enough, but the uneven feel loses punch for the whole production. So technically, it's excellent, but overall, it's mediocre. You should really wait for DVD on this one...