Avaliações de usuários

"Garfield" is a movie for the whole family. Despite being silly in most cases, it has a very childlike aspect with some sharp jokes. It's a 6/6.5 movie, but it manages to entertain children in particular. It's not like the old animated Garfield; however, it is still a pleasant film. I believe that, for the adult audience, it can be silly in many parts; however, there are some parts of the movie that can please both audiences. The sharp jokes that "Garfield" makes can get some laughs out of us. It is not a movie that will please 100% of the adult audience due to its silliness, but it can be enjoyable for some people.

I didn't think this would be important to me, but it is. Garfield is more known to have a raspy, "lazy" type of voice. I'm not hating on the actor, but I feel the Garfield in this movie doesn't have that kind of effect.

However, Chris Patt did wonderful with his voice acting. So did everyone else!

The thing is that Jon didn't have a major role, there was more pizza than lasagna, and no Liz.

I would like to say, the movie by itself is good. If you are okay with everything listed, I'd say to watch it. It can be a little fast paced by the start, but it'll slow down later on. In conclusion, the movies good.

In 1976, the comic called 'Jon' by comic book artist Jim Davis was published locally in the Pendleton Times. The comic was so successful that it was published nationwide under the name Garfield in 1978 and since then the greedy orange cat with a heart of gold has become indispensable. The drawing style was changed in 1984 to a more cartoon--like style as we actually know it well now. In 2002 was one of the most printed comics in the newspaper in 2570 newspapers worldwide with 263 million readers. Now with different animation series and different films we now get to see the second cinema film about the orange hangover. This time voiced by Chris Pratt as Garfield, who of course had a lot of success in recording Mario's voice in The Super Mario Bros. Movie. Samuel L. Jackson speaks the voice of Garfield's father Vic and so we can mention a whole bunch of celebrities. In the Dutch version, these are Jim Bakkum and Jörgen Raymann who record the voices of Garfield and his father Vic. Either way, the film promises a lot of fun, fun and action.

With many delays and postponements of the release date, of course due to the pandemic and problems with production, the time has finally come. In a kind of origin--like story telling, we see how a baby Garfield is just left behind by his father Vic. The story actually focuses a lot on that and because of this a main character like Jon is pushed back. When Garfield and his loyal buddy Odie are kidnapped, they end up with the crazy cat Jinx and her two mean service dogs Roland and Nolan. But why is Garfield actually kidnapped out of nowhere? That becomes clear when Vic appears on stage, but of course Garfield doesn't want to know anything about Vic at all. We all understand that leaving Garfield when he was still a kitten had a different reason than that you would think at first glance and that is quite a shame, because it makes the film very predictable for the older viewers. You notice from this that a film like this is really made for an audience under 10 years old, but don't be put off, because apart from that fact, the film is really entertaining for an older audience.

The animation itself is average and nothing more than that. Nowadays it is difficult for most animated films to say anything about it, given that it is most similar in style. Well, well it was not expected in advance that we would get to see an artistic masterpiece, so in that respect the film succeeds in that area with flying colours. The music was a positive point, this was in the hands of composer John Debney and at some points the music was completely reminiscent of the beautiful melancholic sounds that Thomas Newman often makes. In the end, the big picture is crazy fun and you won't be bored for seconds. The humor is good and fun and things like Catflix where Garfield watches cat movies are hilarious. In the end, you have to stay there during the credits for the funny cat movies that continue to play when the credits start rolling.

Garfield has become a successful and funny movie for the whole family. The jokes are fun, the animation is fine and Garfield and Odie get the laughs on their hands very often. Perhaps the predictability of the film could have been a little less, because this actually only makes the film suitable for children up to 10 years old, but well, this is not something you should also care about, because the film is just too fun for that. The animation itself is standard, doesn't excel in anything, but that's fine. The music pops out and from time to time it is reminiscent of a soundtrack that Thomas Newman could have made. Just stay seated at the end credits too because the crazy cat movies that Garfield watches on Catflix make for a last smile on the face.

"The Garfield Movie" is a pleasant film without further ado, the script is simple and fun, in addition to containing a well-made family message, however it fails to capture the essence of the animated series "Garfield and Friends" or the sarcasm of the strip comedy by Jim Davis. The actors who lend their voices to give life to the characters do a good job. The computer animation has quality but it would have been better if it had been done with old school style animation. The soundtrack, sound design, and editing all achieve their goal without being of superb quality. "The Garfield Movie" is a decent movie, it has fun scenes but it is not wonderful.

I have been waiting from this film since it was announced during the pandemic back in 2021 but it suddenly got delayed multiple times and at some point many stuff was leaked before release teasing that something was going wrong during production, after the film finally released I realize I was right. The film feels like a less special Garfield version of The Peanuts Movie which instead commits the same mistakes as Toy Story 4 by getting less focus of the iconic characters like Jon Arbuckle and Nermal over new ones like Garfield's father Vic in a mostly boring robbery storyline that you can feel was chopped during production as many scenes feel disconnected and with weird pacing and tonal issues.

As someone who was genuinely excited about Garfield 2024, I found it to be incredibly disappointing. My expectations were high, but the film failed to meet them on nearly every level. This film had the potential to bring the beloved, lasagna-loving cat back to the forefront of popular culture, but instead, it felt like a missed opportunity.

Firstly, the storyline was lackluster and uninspired. Garfield, a character known for his witty remarks and clever humor, was relegated to a series of uninspired jokes and predictable plot points. The narrative lacked the cleverness and charm that made Garfield a household name in the first place. Instead of the sharp, sarcastic humor fans have come to expect, the film relied heavily on slapstick comedy and tired clichés, which felt out of place for a character like Garfield.

The animation style also left much to be desired. While advances in animation technology have allowed for more realistic and detailed visuals, Garfield 2024's animation felt oddly lifeless. The characters, especially Garfield, lacked the expressive quality that made the original comic strips and earlier adaptations so endearing. The film's attempt to modernize Garfield's look resulted in a character that felt distant and unrelatable. The charm and warmth of the hand-drawn Garfield were lost in the transition to a more polished, yet sterile, digital form.

Moreover, the voice acting was another area where the film fell short. The choice of voice actor for Garfield was crucial, as the character's dry, sarcastic delivery is one of his most defining traits. Unfortunately, the performance felt flat and uninspired, lacking the nuance and timing needed to bring Garfield's personality to life. This was a significant letdown, as the voice is a critical component of the character's identity.

The supporting characters, including Jon and Odie, were also poorly handled. Jon, who should be the lovable, bumbling foil to Garfield's antics, was portrayed as overly dramatic and whiny, making it hard to sympathize with him. Odie, usually the simple yet lovable dog, was reduced to a mere background character with little impact on the story.

One of the most significant disappointments was the film's failure to capture the essence of what makes Garfield so enduring. The original comic strips and earlier adaptations balanced humor with a sense of heart and relatability. Garfield's laziness, love of food, and disdain for Mondays are characteristics that many people can identify with, making him a beloved character. However, Garfield 2024 seemed to forget these core elements, opting instead for a generic, cookie-cutter approach that stripped away the uniqueness of the character.

Additionally, the film's pacing was off, making it difficult to stay engaged. Scenes dragged on without contributing to the overall narrative, and the jokes often fell flat. The lack of a compelling storyline or character development made it hard to invest in the film, and by the end, it felt more like a chore to watch rather than an enjoyable experience.

Garfield 2024 was a major disappointment. As someone genuinely excited about the film, I was left feeling let down and frustrated. The lackluster storyline, uninspired animation, poor voice acting, and mishandling of beloved characters all contributed to a film that failed to live up to its potential. Garfield deserved better, and so did the fans who were eagerly awaiting his return. This film missed the mark in almost every aspect, turning what should have been a delightful revival into a forgettable and frustrating experience.

This is probably going to end up being a guilty pleasure for me. Now, this isn't the best movie, nowhere close to my top 10 of the year. However, I thought it was a sweet movie. It gave me a smile. Yes, some of the humor is unfunny, a lot of times it can fall flat on its face, but I still had a good time. Again, I thought it was a sweet film! I love a good father-son story. Now they do have some things to fix, but if they could learn from their mistakes, I'd be down to see a sequel. What probably made me the happiest is that it reminded me of the Garfield cartoon I would watch when I was younger. So, it definitely had nostalgia in there for me.

It's a good movie (certainly Garfield's best) that shouldn't be taken seriously. You just have to have a good time with your family and enjoy it. There are some jokes that are more childish, but what can you do to it like that is the original children's series. There are also the odd jokes that the older ones can enjoy. The film leaves you with a beautiful message that many of us should take into account. It's not a great adaptation, because it takes several elements that aren't the same as the original series but that's okay, because you replace them with other elements that make the movie feel refreshing and different. Like any movie, not everything is good and this is no exception since there are some characters that I didn't like so much, such as the villain, which in my opinion is the weakest part of the film. It's a good movie to have a good time with the family.

Wow that was a painful 90 minutes. It felt a lot a longer. Even my son was bored to tears and he can turn an empty cardboard box into an adventure. Technically the cat looked like Garfield but the Garfield character was decidedly absent, and the entire domestic premise of the Garfield series. Jon was demoted to a side character, no Liz, no Nermal, pizza seemed to take precedence over lasagne! Read the comics, watch the 90s cartoons, maybe even the Bill Murray films. Well, not the Tail of Two Kitties. That was awful. Nearly as awful as this. 33 characters to go: It was poo, poop, poopy poo. Done.

I came to the movie to see the Garfield that I used to love from the comics from when I was a kid, and I definitely got that. The drawing style of all the characters was very recognizable and the slapstick humor that I wanted to see was present throughout the whole movie.

I must say the voice of Chris Pratt was better than expected and I think it did the character justice. Not a single moment did it not come across as unbelievable. The other voice actors were perfect and wonderfully exaggerated at moments, which fits the movie perfectly.

Jon didn't have a very big role in the movie, unfortunately, but when he was there he was like Jon was supposed to be. A bit goofy and funny.

Odie, however, was not very much like the character in the comics in my opinion. He used to be an abused sidekick that was basically always in the way and very stupid, but here he was the Robin that did everything for Garfield and he got credit for it as well. Modern times I suppose.

The plot is far fetched, the story is weird and has holes, but all that doesn't matter because it technically is a children's movie. I enjoyed the jokes and the animation quite a lot and so did my kids.

Don't compare it to the 2004 movie.

Look, I loved reading the Garfield comics growing up but unfortunately despite a few good moments, it's a bad hairball.

The animation is solid with cute character designs that reflect perfectly to the Garfield comics, setting and environment with good uses of colors, lighting and background designs. The sound design and the soundtrack is pretty good. But that's about it. Storywise, it's messy I suppose. Garfield and Odie are interesting characters however, the movie doesn't give them enough time to shine and includes new characters that are uninteresting and quite unbearable.

The voice performances were okay but Chris Pratt's voice performance is one of the most dullest and lifeless performances ever. I don't dislike Pratt as he's been in some great movies but as Garfield, he really is miscasted.

Sure, there are some okay humor moments and there are some parts that I thought were pretty interesting. But that's all I can say. I brought a few of my relatives siblings to tag along and they enjoyed it, so there's a plus.

Mark Dindal, you made The Emperor's New Groove and Cat's Don't Dance, you can do better then this! Oh wait, you made Chicken Little, never mind.

Not sure why this isn't doing well can't considered worse than the Bill Murray films that came out 20 years ago; this cartoon adaption was very enjoyable to me even for a 31 year old I love innocent movies and this was very funny which is always pleasant! I saw in 3D that was nice I rarely see any in that quality not to bad. I was surprised how there was a young girl that sat by me with some kind of breathing issue hope she's ok and the parent with her was in and out multiple times unfortunate when someone isn't into a film I felt like it was a lovely adaption maybe targeted for kids still quite good.

Kids will love this movie as its got all the staples of things they like; tug at the heart string scenes, hilarious and over the top characters plus plenty of humour. However, i do think that die hard Garfield fans like myself, who are fans of the original comic strips will be somewhat disappointed. The whole point of Garfield is that hes a very simple yet loveable character, in this movie they try to make him into a more complex cat with daddy issues. Its not bad, I just don't think Garfield fans will like it, but the kids will certainly be all over it. I took this movie with a pinch of salt and it was watchable enough. Unsure if I liked the voice actors used for some of the characters but of course nothing beats the legendary voice of the fabulous Lorenzo Music, he sure is missed!

Saló genuinely had more funny moments and was easier to sit through. Also is it just me or is it kinda messed up to make a kids' movie where the dad who abandoned his son as a baby comes back years later, has a completely reasonable explanation, loved him the whole time, and just becomes an active figure in his life again? Like, doesn't that feel like it would give a lot of kids false hope? Maybe im reading too much into a movie that references keyboard cat in the first five minutes but when a movie gives you absolutely nothing for an hour and a half it's hard not to overthink it. I miss when movies had real voice actors.

I had high hopes for the new Garfield movie, but unfortunately, it turned out to be a huge disappointment. From the very beginning, it felt like a blatant cash grab rather than a heartfelt tribute to the beloved comic strip.

The movie's biggest flaw is its soullessness. The charm and wit of Jim Davis's original comic strips are nowhere to be found. Instead, we get a hollow, lifeless version of Garfield that feels more like a caricature than the lazy, lasagna-loving cat we know and love. The jokes fall flat, the dialogue is uninspired, and the overall tone is more annoying than entertaining.

Even worse, the entire film feels like one giant advertisement. Product placements are shamelessly crammed into nearly every scene, making it hard to stay immersed in the story. It seems like the filmmakers were more interested in securing brand deals than in creating a meaningful experience for the audience. This relentless commercialism detracts significantly from any potential enjoyment.

The animation style, while technically competent, lacks creativity and originality. It feels like the animators were going through the motions rather than putting genuine effort into bringing Garfield and his world to life. The characters' expressions are often stiff and unconvincing, and the overall visual design is bland and forgettable.

The plot, if you can even call it that, is predictable and formulaic. It feels like the writers threw together a series of generic set pieces with little regard for coherence or narrative depth. There are no memorable moments or emotional beats-just a series of tedious scenes that fail to engage or entertain.

In summary, the new Garfield movie is a soulless, commercialized mess that fails to capture the essence of the original comic strip. It's a clear example of prioritizing profit over creativity, and it shows in every aspect of the film. Save your time and money and skip this one. Garfield deserves better, and so do we.

I came inti this movie with low expectations but to my surprise it wasn't actually that bad. Granted it don't think it captured the essence of the original comic strip but even then it was entertaining. Was it really that Garfield related? No it wasn't. It instead felt like an adventure featuring Garfield. For a Garfield movie 5/10 but for a movie 7/10. It was entertaining but some parts felt plain stupid. It still was entertaining nonetheless. Was it a must watch? Of course not! Did I leave the movie theater satisfied? Indeed I did. It's wacky, it's fun, what more could you ask for? I feel like it's received unfairly negative reviews and deserves much better. A good movie to waste your time with.

...where he plays the lead despite his voice not suiting the role. Garfield is sarcastic. This Garfield is not. Part of this is down to poor writing and mostly it's Crispy Rat. He can't emote in a voice that isn't his own. Whoever he has dirt on in Hollywood just needs to come clean. Crispy ruins movies.

Positives, it's colourful and it ends.

Negatives, everything else.

This feels like one of those films that needed to be made to keep hold of the rights. It certainly didn't feel necessary, inspired or have anything new to say. If you've seen the trailer with kitten Garfield in the Italian Restaurant, you've seen the best part of the film. You gain nothing by seeing the rest. Nothing.

Critics were dead wrong about this movie, it is fantastic. It's actually the saddest movie I've ever seen. I nearly cried 3 times watching it. Also it has lots of good humor, the heist plot is fun and everything about this movie is great so I'm sad that the reviews are negative. I hope this movie becomes a cult classic in the future like Bill Murray's Garfield. Seriously how can someone possibly hate this amazing masterpiece. The Godfather is very mediocre btw and critics are boring. This movie is amazing everything about it fantastic. If you hate this movie you might have watched a different movie. I'm convinced I watched a different movie than these annoying snobbish critics.

I'm not going to lie, I had a great time with this movie. The film was quick paced and entertaining. The jokes were funny and there was some legitimate heart and emotion in the story. The animation looks beautiful and I think that it's about time Garfield got a movie like this. Garfield and this world just fit animation so well, especially this style. This is much better than the live action movies. Chris Pratt honestly did a great job of capturing Garfield's personality and mannerisms. I know his casting was a little controversial but it definitely seems like he went all out and gave it everything he had to give us a really good performance. I feel like Pixar and the Spider Verse movies have gotten people to judge some animated films way too harshly, because no way can every single animated movie be that incredible. It's not a masterpiece but as a lifelong Garfield fan I was satisfied with this.

I am a Garfield lover and this movie was a disappointment. The whole time it was like a remake of the chicken run:dawn of the nugget movie. The whole plot was basically a steal from that film, it just had a different ending. Chris Pratt didn't sound anything like the original Garfield and his mood was way off. This movie was terribly executed and unnecessary characters were added in. This is a disgrace to Garfield image and all the films they have made to build him up. It made me upset to see such a great famous character be totally changed for one terrible movie. Please like if it was helpful! God loves you!