Sansone

I am not going to compare copiously here, but I do agree about Marmaduke being a poor adaptation. It isn't completely awful, as the locations and photography are striking and the soundtrack is infectious. Plus there is the occasional good amount of CGI. However, what let it down was the weakness of the story and script. The story is the sort of story that works better as a 30 minute animated short at least, the whole plot felt not only very predictable but very overstretched too. While the script is decidedly lacklustre at best, with humour that would be perhaps too sophisticated for kids and too childish for adults. Kids may like it because the dogs are quite cute and do look good, though in regards to the CGI I do think there is too much of it. The direction is not exactly a high point either, like the story it is never sure of what it wants to do, and the acting is pretty weak, well the voice work was passable but the human characters are not developed or written well at all and the performances suffer as a consequence. In conclusion, partially succeeds as a kids movie, fails as a family movie, in my opinion of course. 3/10 Bethany Cox

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.

Don't know why so many people have a downer on this.I took my 7yo and 3yo boys to this and they really liked it!

I thought it was OK, not great but OK easy to watch. Now is that not what a kids film should be? Too many people out there think they are experts, just relax man and watch the movie.

Instead of writing crap about every film, it's unfair as myself as a parent checked the reviews for this. I am pleased I ignored them as I have my suspicions about a lot of these reviewers. This is a long line now in poor reviews which turn out to be decent movies. End result the kids had a good time watching a nice gentle movie with some laughs-get over yourselves.

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

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!