>in a fucking children's movie
Why the FUCK is this allowed?
>>64174687
they want you to become a furry
>>64174687
if this isn't voiced by Gisele they fucked up.
>>64174687
You gotta pander to muslim audience these days.
>them hips
I'd graze her fucking meadow all day..I actually kinda hope its a trap
>>64174971
shakira, actually
So parents have some sort of incentive in bringing thier kids to the movie.
>>64174687
Please, animated movies have had sexy/fan service characters since forever.
>>64174687
>implying that top covers all twelve of her nipples
Its like they don't even biology.
>>64175941
For a movie that's all about being more accurate with animals they surely fucked up.
>>64174687
That's literally just Lola bunny but as a goat.
Who gives a shit?
>>64176030
ummmmm
>>64175491
Just like Shakira irl ;^)
>>64176079
Use your words now, sonny boy.
>>64174687
with tits like those she couldnt even milk one child
>>64176220
I think he meant to say Lola bunny had bigger tits.
>only ONE pair of shitty tits
>no navel
Also the hair is unnecessary.
0/10
>>64176422
Not anymore.
You hear in press releases and interviews and so on about how the animators spent over a year studying animal anatomy and movements, how they render up to 9 million hairs on giraffes, how a combination of their own active design and probably some internal program they made designed 800,000 characters (seriously, they claim this) And for what? 48 Hrs. with furries? What a waste, man. I'll just watch 48 Hrs. again. What's the point of them even being animals? It couldn't be because it's the main part of the story, that's going to be a conspiracy that Nick and Judy uncover. So what we're getting out of this is a couple of stupid-ass puns, product placement under the guise of "parody", and a couple of animal-specific jokes like Flash the sloth. I can't possibly see what the big payoff could be from all the hard work everyone's put into this film. It just feels pointless.
>>64176634
>adult detected
Loser. I bet you can't even tell why kids love the taste of cinnamon toast crunch
>>64174687
Would you prefer Shakira Bird?
>>64175046
I don't think you know much about Islam
>>64176732
THIS IS MICHAEL S. ROGERS, DIRECTOR OF THE NSA, HE SEES EVERYTHING
>Your grandmother e-mailed you four days ago, why haven't you replied?!
BUT CAN HE SEE WHY KIDS LIKE THE TASTE OF CINNNAMON TOAST CRUNCH?
>it reveals an intricate network of IP addresses?
GET REAL, DRONE! THERE'S SUGARY CINNAMON SWIRLS IN EVERY BITE!
>I see...
RIIIIIIIIGHT~
CINNAMON TOAST CRUNCH, THE TASTE YOU CAN SEE
>>64176732
Heh, heh. That's the fiendish simplicity of it all, anon. Soon, we all be furry--!
