Things you like and don't like from Ferngully II

[Nilla Joy]

Now while you're reading this, you're probably thinking "Oh it's been so many years since I've watch Ferngully and the sequel, I dunno how it went" and yada yada yada! Well fear not members of all ages! If you guys still have the orginal movie on DVD, that's fine but if you're having trouble viewing the sequel somewhere, it can be found on Youtube.

Now techically, this topic is about dicussing some certain minors to the 1998 sequel of Ferngully II: The Magical Rescue. And since I still remember some parts (after viewing it on Youtube) what are some of the things that you like and didn't like from the sequel? Because everyone knows direct-to-sequels aren't always the best, but there's no right or wrong answers on people's opinons and point of views.

In my own point, the most highest annoying thing on the sequel was the casting...and Batty's missing antanne. Let's not also forget about the hands they gave him. What was up with that?! That's all I can highly think of. The reason I pick the casting was because new voices can be a little annoying if you're used to the orginal ones they pick in the first place.

And probably the only thing I like about the sequel was you get to see more of Pips and Batty in this one than you do with the orginal one cause the other one was too focus on Crysta and humans and this and that. Also another good thing about this was there wasn't any romance going on like most DTV sequel has, but since Zak didn't appear in this one, I guess the makers wanted a better connection between Pips and Crysta. I dunno really. *shrugs*

[FaPingMulan]

Nicely said Nadine.
One of the things that really got me angry is the fact that Zak does not appear in the sequel which I am sure doesn't surprise a lot people other than that I am not that picky about the movie besides the fact I didn't like the songs too much except for the one that Pips and Crysta sang.
The voices or animation didn't bother me too much and I liked how you got to know Pips and Batty much more than you do in the first film and I like the new character Budgi even know she reminds me way too much of Penny from Bolt Lol and uh I guess that's it

[Dilemma]

Well basically I thought the only bad thing about FernGully 2 plot was kinda week. I mean this kinda plot has been done before with bad guys kidnapping animals to make a profit. Another thing I didn't like about this movie was the god awful voice casting. These people sounded nothing like the characters we know and love. Especially Batty his voice actor was terrible in this movie. I felt the same way about this movie as I did with The Return Of Jafar. I really miss Robin Williams. I mean I did like Return of Jafar. But anyway back on topic here. I just didn't really care much for the sequel. I thought the plot was weak the voice acting was terrible. So yeah this sequel bombed in my opinon.

[FaPingMulan]

That's fine Dilemma here everyone is in titled to there own opinion so long as you kill or threaten anyone who thinks differently and stuff Lol

[Ji]

I think this movie is just a complete let-down. I was really disappointed...

[FaPingMulan]

I don't blame you I thought it was for years too but last month I went back and watched it and found a few things I liked about it which made the movie not seem horrible to me anymore

[nightworm]

When I first watched it, I didn't think the sequel was too bad. Though my Mom said Batty wasn't as funny as he was in the first one and I think she was right. We both really missed Robin Williams. Other than that, I don't have any complaints about the movie, except I think they could've at least brought Hexxus and Tim Curry back!

[FaPingMulan]

Yeah I wonder what it would've been like with Hexxus in it again voiced by Tim Curry but I do agree that second isn't too bad at all and it might of been better had Robin Williams voiced Batty again

[Nilla Joy]

I re-look at the voices that replaced the orginal ones and they're not really that half bad when you get used to them. The people that replace the orginal actors from the Balto sequels were good too. I guess that would really depend how well they can act to make it sound less corny and stay into character.

If you watch Pips in the sequel, whoever voiced him was just as good as Christian Slater did, but I think Christian made Pips sounded really more older in the orginal. And I find Crysta's new voice in the second movie a bit too high girlish squeakish in my taste.

[Hexxus_Leveler]

I've yet to see the sequel, but I'm afraid to watch it because I'm a sound engineer, and thus my ears are trained to recognize people by their voices... when the voices change, it's like watching a whole new character. If Batty's not Robin Williams, my brain would tell me it's not Batty. Weird, I know, but that's how my brain works. ROFLhouse.

[HeXXus]

Really? That's interesting. But you know, in a way- that's not too far off. Because some people would argue the characters really weren't like themselves at all- just like how your brain would tell you that with a difference in voices ( I've seen people say that. XD on the comments of the movie on youtube.)

I thought I had posted on this. xD But, okay..I'll take a crack at it.

So, the first thing I noticed about the movie was the jump in animation style from the first movie to the sequel. I'll admit that I much prefer the style from the first movie, but as the second one was a DTV, it meant there wasn't a huge budget, but even so people spent a lot of time animating it. Thus, I wasn't -too- bothered by the animation.

I think the idea of introducing new human friends to the Ferngully folk was an interesting idea- I kind of liked that, actually. I missed Zak as well, but it was good to know he wasn't the only human out there kind enough to give a crap about the environment and nature at some point. The whole thing about pips and them liking some human things like tv was cute, I thought. And it was an interesting idea to give Batty a bigger role. I mean he had a decent role in the first movie, but he seemed a tad more important in the sequel?

And more pips is always good.


but..Onto what I didn't like.

Yes, it definitely had weak elements. I mean I understand why they approached it that way. Budget constraints, a certain time they needed to have it finished, and it was for kids. But I was really disappointed that they dumbed this movie down to a level where it was hard to really get fully into unless you were a little kid. The first Ferngully movie was for children, right? I was a kid when it came out. And sure, some elements of the first movie are arguably dumb and kiddish, but it still had a deep meaning, complex characters, etc. The sequel seems to be treating children like they can't handle the same level of complexity or scary villains.

That villain wasn't scary. Even my little sister wasn't scared by that. The bad guys were waayy overly klutzish/just not good at what they did ( At least from what I can remember?)

Hexxus was just an amazing Villain. He gave so many kids so many nightmares, and a reason NOT to pollute. But he wasn't so scary that he was a mistake. Kids love to be scared, and we all know that. And hell, there were people like me who LOVED Hexxus. When I was a kid, he didn't scare me- he was my favorite thing ever. ( Says something about me I guess. .-.)

But, back on track- yeah. I'm not sure what it was, but their villain wasn't anywhere near the level of Hexxus. Maybe they thought today's kids couldn't handle something nightmare-inducing like Hexxus?

Or maybe the point was to show a human villain to try shoving down our throats again that mankind is a heinous evil and we don't realize it. But, I do think they could have done a bit more in that respect. Maybe another type of common human villain seen in environmental films. Or, if you have to do the 'human kidnapping animals for profit' thing, at least make the villain like the one in Rescuers down under? Now HE was kind of scary. The one in Ferngully 2? Ehhh. Now, I wasn't a kid when I saw the sequel, so maybe that's why I don't like this one so much. Maybe kids love it, I don't know.

Budgie was okay, but her grandfather/that old guy really worked on my last nerve the more he showed up. And I do...wonder how a fruit bat can hold a human girl up like that. I know I shouldn't try imposing logic on a movie for kids, but really. xD

[FaPingMulan]

You actually brought up a lot of good points. It would've been nice having a better villain seeing how when I was a kid I was always creeped out by Carface in the first All Dogs Go To Heaven which was also a kids movie but maybe that's going a little bit to extreme for a movie like Ferngully 2 but taking more time on the plot and villain I think would've made it a better movie. I will not diss DTV sequels since there are many I like but this isn't one of them

[HeXXus]

Oh, and I wouldn't dream of suggesting that if you like Ferngully 2- it's bad. I admit I am a little nitpicky when DTV sequels take a turn like this, but I never mean to offend anybody who might like them. So if I do in anything I post people, just let me know and I'll try to be more delicate next time.

You're right, not ALL DTV sequels are bad. Some are, and it really seems the bad ones are all people like to talk about- so DTVs and sequels in general have gotten a bad rap. In fact, there is even a sequel that I like better than the original movie. ( American Tail: Fievel goes west is the one. I fully admit I prefer it to the first american tail- though I didn't care for the 3rd and 4th. oh, and i like rescuers down under better than the rescuers as well.)

I think, for me, my problem is that nothing really develops that much. The plotline, the characters..They develop a little, maybe. But not a whole lot.

One of the things I liked about the first Ferngully, was that Zak had a complete change of character. He underwent an evolution in his personality, and matured by the end of the film- and Ferngully isn't that long a movie. We saw he didn't give a crap when things started out, but by the end of the movie he did care, and he was remorseful for the things he'd done. ( Now, of course- some can argue he wouldn't have changed at all if not for meeting a hot little female friend, but...the point remains. His character developed. We got to see him mature and become a better person, presumably, by the end of the film. A more environmentally aware person- as was..well, the point of the movie anyway.)

When I look at the sequel here- I just don't see that. I see some pretty flat, boring characters. Now that's not to say the NEVER showed any personality or learned from mistakes/etc, but they didn't get nearly enough time to grow into characters that stood out. To me, The Magical Rescue was a good thing to kill however long it was, and break up some boredom. It was entertaining, but it will never be as effective as the first movie was. Nothing really stands out and demands to be remembered to me. The rescuers down under conveyed the same environmental message as the magical rescue, and did it a heck of a lot better. ( This is another sequel i prefer better than the original, down under I mean..I'm not sure if it was DTV or not)


And that lack of characterization and development was one of the things that probably disappointed me the most. This is the problem when it comes to DTVS. Some DTVS are great and don't have this problem, but the ones that everybody considers bad have this same problem- the lack of characterization and anything to really remember or take from them.

I mean, I'm comparing this DTV to a sequel I really like- AT: goes west.

In goes west, they also had a side character (Tanya) get more development and focus than was usual. (though fievel was still pretty much the star). This movie gave her a lot more personality, I thought- there was character development in a lot of the characters-some minors included, and even the villain had some unexpected developments. He was your typical classy, arrogant, selfish villain. Okay, not much there, right? But he got very charismatic as things went along, and he even had a very interesting point in the plot- where Tanya's singing seemed to have some kind of power over him; to turn him into a respectful gentleman and even care about her- a mouse's- well being.

And I know it's not exactly a DTV since it was in theaters, it's still a sequel- and the characterization thing is commonly a problem in sequels. But some, like this one, manage to escape that problem.

The villain in this one, like I said- barely had anything to him. or them. I think there were multiple ones? wow, see what I mean? I watched this a few months back on youtube and I can barely recall any of it.

And people can come back to me and say ' But Shauni, Hexxus wasn't a very complex villain! He just existed to destroy things, and was fairly single-minded in his goals. Where's his characterization? Aren't you being hypocritical?'

okay, first of- that'd be correct. Hexxus is a fairly simple character- simple goals, no real reasons or anything.. And that's admittedly dangerous to kind of never have a complex villain. But there's glaring differences between Hexxus and the Magical rescue's villains.

Hexxus does manage to make up for lack of characterization and such by being so darn charismatic. The fact he gave people nightmares as a kid or even still manages to creep people out really says something, I think. A good villain is the kind that can manage to do that- to make you fear, even for a second- that they could be real.

Now, that's all probably and mostly due to Tim Curry. In my honest opinion, I don't think Hexxus would have been that memorable a villain if not for his voice actor- who was just so seasoned and darn good at playing creepy villains in the first place.

But yeah, the villain in magical rescue- eh. He didn't make me feel scared or sorry for the baby animals at all. I never once thought the villain(s) could actually pull anything off. But with Hexxus, Cat R Waul, and that dude from rescuers down under- yeah, they made me worry. They're the kind of guys who -could- accomplish their goals and give you a reason to feel for your protagonists.

And the heroes and heroines themselves...really didn't get much development either. I really didn't feel the need to root for them the entire time. To like them or remember them for any real reason. Which is a shame to me, because Budgie wasn't that bad. But she wasn't that great either.

One could totally point out similar problems in the first movie, but- they didn't dumb down nearly as much, and there were noticeable changes in SOME of the characters- and it was the personalities and development, voices, etc that made Ferngully: The last rainforst so endearing to those who remember it.

The magical rescue? It's one of those movies you can just change the channel on- only watching if there's nothing else and because you're so bored.



...k I'll shut up now .xD

again, sorry if I offended anybody. I can be a little too honest with my opinions on stuff like this at times.

And sorry I rambled and pretty much reiterated stuff from my first post, lol.

[Nilla Joy]

Wow...that was a lot to read over Shauni. But you were wrong about The Rescuers Down Under. I check for it's infro and as it turns out, it's not really a DTV. It was actually a theater release when it came out in 1990. That probably would explain why it may have been one of those sequels that did better than the original, but you won't find too many second films like that compare to the first one. If it hadn't been for The Rescuers Down Under, Disney wouldn't have made a lot of sequels.

But due to it's little rating respone at the box office, this is why all of their sequels are set onto direct-to-DVD. (Or as before, video before DVDs were invented) I will admit, I did thought The Rescuers Down Under was better than the first movie (The first Rescuers movie I like, but their villian Medusa freak me out too much as a kid, thus it was one of those Disney movies I would watch from time to time, but not always growing up.)

[FaPingMulan]

I never knew the Rescuers Down Under was a theatrical release that was quickly put to dvd that's interesting but getting back to the topic I think you managed to point out something I had forgotten to point out Shauni with the fact that characters that though some of them were okay they were very flat characters again bringing up Zak as being more of a dynamic character in the first film who under goes a big change from what we see at the beginning of the film to what we see at the very end of the film.
This does not mean that movie was entirely horrible but it could've been way more better developed again