The Fox and the Hound

Post by **ShyViolet** » November 28th, 2005, 11:37 pm

I'm sorry but I HATE House of Mouse.

Post by **Meg** » November 29th, 2005, 7:56 am

I've only watched part of an episode, but I wasn't really fond of what I saw.

Post by **Macaluso** » November 29th, 2005, 10:54 am

ummm house of mouse is awesome okay? okay.

Post by **Meg** » November 29th, 2005, 4:08 pm

No. You're bossing me around again!

Post by **Dacey** » November 29th, 2005, 4:34 pm

I meant "House of Mouse" style as in not taking itself too seriously.

Post by **Christian** » November 29th, 2005, 4:45 pm

Maybe ShyViolet doesn't like that style.

Post by **Dacey** » November 29th, 2005, 4:52 pm

We're getting off-topic again.

Post by **Christian** » November 29th, 2005, 5:00 pm

Okay, back to The Fox and the Hound 2 discussion again.

Post by **Zoltack** » November 29th, 2005, 5:06 pm

I was really hoping that this movie was going to continue right after the original but when I found out it was a crappy mid-quel I was like "What the hell?" We already have enough mid-quels. We don't need another, at least that's how I see it. I guess they did it because it would of been hard to get Mickey Rooney and Kurt Russel to play the parts again. But that's not an excuse. In Bambi II they're using Patrick Stewart to be GP seeing how the original actor died a long time ago. What I'm saying is can't they find someone else to do the parts? But seeing how they're young it doesn't really matter. I love Rescuers Down Under because they bring most of the original cast back. That's what made that movie so terrific. That and it had a pretty good plot too.

Post by **Dacey** » November 29th, 2005, 5:18 pm

I think they're using the kids because they're more popular than the adult Tod and Copper.

Post by **Zoltack** » November 29th, 2005, 5:29 pm

I know they're using kids which, is stupid. I mean where they\ hell are they going to start the movie? When Copper goes off hunting with the Grandpa in "Willi Wonka and the Chocolate Factory."

It just boggles the mind. It would be 100% better if they made a sequel, not a mid-quel.

Post by **ShyViolet** » November 29th, 2005, 5:31 pm

The re-released Fox and the Hound in 1987, which was when I first saw it. (I was like nine) I thought it was a "new" movie, I didn't find out it was made in 1981 till much later.

Post by **Zoltack** » November 29th, 2005, 5:34 pm

I thought it was made before that like in the mid 70's. I think it was 1974. I'll find out myself. Okay you were right. Nevermind.

Post by **Dacey** » November 29th, 2005, 5:35 pm

It was made in 1980. Or was it 1981?

Post by **Zoltack** » November 29th, 2005, 5:36 pm

No it was 81.