Is this movie just a flick, or kinó in disguise?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30KSb_e3L2o
>>66971443
Cinemathèque tier
>>66971443
What the fuck? Is it 2005 again?
A Talking Cat!?! is kino
Nin lives is a flick.
>>66971443
>That's me
>No, -that's- me
>>66971561
I still considering the idea that this is some kind of meta-movie, like the trailers in Trophic Thunder, poking fun at the "person turns into an animal" dumb family movies
>>66971443
Literally The Shaggy Dog with a cat.
>>66971443
unadulterated kino
>>66971626
This is the only thing that makes sense.
>>66971443
A Talking Cat?!?!
>no eric roberts
>no sinister fourth wall breaking monologue, followed by a meow to a human character
wait, is this part of the sandlerverse? it has that "click" character
>>66971443
So they're trying to make their original garfield
>>66971925
Shieet I never thought about that, maybe you're right. Maybe it's part of the Paul Blart-verse too
http://youtube.com/watch?v=5g1SLGRM6qU
Is there a reason the mid 2000's had so much of this shit?
my working theory is that Spacey accidentally murdered an underage gay prostitute and was blackmailed into making this movie
>>66971661
That dog has weird eyes
>>66971661
>Raise the Woof
>>66972039
The exact same shot of a cat falling from a skyscraper window is used in OP's trailer
What is Hollywood trying to tell us?
>>66972039
CG was becoming accessible enough to do it and look halfway reasonable (for the time at least, I mean).
I mean animal movies have always been A Thing but the fact that you had to use real animals and that animals, especially cats, are pretty abysmal fucking actors made them hard to make and also created a possibility for animal abuse which is pretty not chill.
Thing is, at the time they really overestimated the market for these movies, as well how much less people like cgi animals and did enough to burn everyone out on the concept for a while.
Literally a money laundering movie.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Rfzy9XcvmVU
>>66972039
>Bill Murray took the role because he thought it was written by Joel Coen
>it was actually written by Joel Cohen
You can't make this shit up
>Spacey played his entire role via Skype said one of our sources
>>66973445
Still one upping Eric Roberts who drunkenly left all of his ATC! lines on an answering machine
>>66971443
Spacey's still living in the afterglow of like his third career peak, he'll probably survive this.
Name ONE talking cat movie that doesn't also include a talking dog.
I can name ten or twenty cat-free talking dog movies just off the top of my head.
>>66972263
He was joking when he said that you literal autist
>>66973690
A Talking Cat!?!
>>66973690
>>66973788
anon's anus status: buttered
>>66973445
literally phoning it in
>>66974977
>>66971443
this looks like an early 2000s movie that was put on the backburner for way to long and someone got finished
>>66971443
it even has that giant font that looks like candy
its a self-aware kino masterpiece
Step aside plebians.
The true apex of kino filmography has been here yet you all failed to see it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m76z5mgv5_A
>its a "Kevin Spacey got caught having sex with a child prostitute in Thailand and got blackmailed to make a dumbass movie"-episode
>>66975650
Of all the things you could blackmail a famous actor into doing, doing voiceover work in a family comedy seems like the most pointless.
>>66976095
Who cares about money. Money is nothing if you don't have power. Wouldn't being able to force Kevin Spacey to play a CGI cat make you feel powerful as fuck?
This has to be an intro trailer to a new Tropic Thunder.
It's the only thing that makes sense.
>>66976190
If you wanted power you'd put him in some role where he had to do humiliating and physically exhausting shit, like a Mrs. Doubtfire remake where the title character was an Olympic gymnast. Letting him phone in his dialogue on skype just wastes a few of his afternoons.
>>66973690
I haven't watched it in a while but I'm pretty sure Otie did not talk in the Garfield movie.
>>66973788
>>66974545
Sh-shut up. Name TWO more.
>>66971443
Is this a parody of a crappy comedy from ten years ago?
>>66971443
