ÉVALUATION IMDb
5,0/10
50 k
MA NOTE
Jon et Garfield visitent le Royaume-Uni. Confondu avec un autre chat, Garfield se retrouve à gouverner un château. Son règne est bientôt mis en péril par l'infâme Lord Dargis, qui a des proj... Tout lireJon et Garfield visitent le Royaume-Uni. Confondu avec un autre chat, Garfield se retrouve à gouverner un château. Son règne est bientôt mis en péril par l'infâme Lord Dargis, qui a des projets immobiliers pour le domaine.Jon et Garfield visitent le Royaume-Uni. Confondu avec un autre chat, Garfield se retrouve à gouverner un château. Son règne est bientôt mis en péril par l'infâme Lord Dargis, qui a des projets immobiliers pour le domaine.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Prix
- 4 nominations au total
Bill Murray
- Garfield
- (voice)
Vernee Watson
- Tourist #2
- (as Vernée Watson Johnson)
Bryce Lenon
- Police Sergeant
- (as Bryce Lennon)
Judith Shekoni
- Tour Guide
- (as Judi Shekoni)
Avis en vedette
"Garfield: A Tail of Two Kitties," directed by Tim Hill, is the sequel to the 2004 film, bringing back Bill Murray as the voice of Garfield. This time, the lasagna-loving feline finds himself in England, where he is mistaken for a royal cat named Prince. The plot thickens with Garfield enjoying the luxurious life while his friends Jon (Breckin Meyer) and Odie get entangled in his adventure.
The film is light-hearted and filled with comedic moments typical of Garfield's character. However, much like its predecessor, it relies heavily on slapstick humor and predictable gags. The storyline, inspired by "The Prince and the Pauper," offers a few charming moments but doesn't stray far from formulaic family movie tropes.
While children might enjoy the antics and visuals, adult fans of the original comic strip might find it lacking in the clever wit and depth that make Garfield timeless. Overall, "Garfield: A Tail of Two Kitties" provides some entertainment and nostalgic value but ultimately delivers a middling experience.
The film is light-hearted and filled with comedic moments typical of Garfield's character. However, much like its predecessor, it relies heavily on slapstick humor and predictable gags. The storyline, inspired by "The Prince and the Pauper," offers a few charming moments but doesn't stray far from formulaic family movie tropes.
While children might enjoy the antics and visuals, adult fans of the original comic strip might find it lacking in the clever wit and depth that make Garfield timeless. Overall, "Garfield: A Tail of Two Kitties" provides some entertainment and nostalgic value but ultimately delivers a middling experience.
1st watched 7/6/2006 - 5 out of 10(Dir-Tim Hill): OK family comedy with the obnoxious over-eating computer-animated cat "Garfield" playing a dual role, sort of. The real Garfield is accidentally switched with an uppity prince-like cat in England which brings many fish-out-of-the-water scenarios for both cats(called "Kitties" in the title). To myself as an older person familiar with the other mediums used for Garfield(aka. Sunday papers and television), the computer animation was a deterrent when you're used to the cartoon character as well as not having the original television voice(Carlton the Doorman on Rhoda) in the role of Garfield, who was "purrfect". But Bill Murray doesn't do a bad job and it's fun for the kids for the most part. Some of the best scenes include a song where the animals cook up a batch of Lasagne for Garfield and some adult-focused quips from Murray added to the fun. There were some early scenes that were supposed to be funny that fell flat for both the kids and adults in the audience. There were times in the theatre where there was complete silence which seemed a little odd when there was supposed to be laughter. This was not a good sign for the movie right off the bat. It did become better later but there seemed to be too many attempts to emulate other popular animal movies like "Babe" by adding many animals having talking parts as well as what I've already mentioned to make a unique experience that could have been had if more attempts were made to follow the original cartoon concept.
Am I really expected to review this? Are there any doubts as to my opinions regarding the film? Seriously? Sigh. All right. Whatever. Here: If you loved the first one then go see this; otherwise you'll want to avoid it like Kevin Federline avoids work.
I just don't have the energy to tear this to shreds. It'd be the equivalent of beating up a five-year-old - way too easy to be any fun. After all, it's the five-year-old demographic that the film is targeting. Well, plus the old person audience who thinks all forms of talking animals are cute.
Little kids will likely enjoy it. I was in a theater full of 'em, and they cackled at every burp and flatulence joke, and they howled every time Billy Connolly (trying hard to summon John Cleese) got bit in the crotch by a dog or slammed in the head by a household appliance. Meanwhile, I just stared stone-faced at the screen, as if I were at a Paris Hilton poetry reading.
I'm sure some of you parents will enjoy it (it's a slight step up from the original), but the majority will most likely be bored beyond comprehension and should probably start trying to convince the wee one that he needs to see Cars again.
All of you fathers who think Jennifer Love Hewitt's presence will be your saving grace, well, bad news - she's hardly in this at all. She'll provide you a few minutes of solace but will quickly and cruelly be whisked off screen so that we can be entertained by such images as Garfield bathing in a bidet and a weasel climbing up Connolly's trousers.
Yeah.
If that sounds like suitable entertainment to you then by all means, slap those Hamiltons on the counter. It's your retirement savings that you're gambling with, not mine.
THE GIST
Eh. Garfield: A Tale of Two Kitties is strictly for those who were fans of the first movie, die-hard fans of Garfield, or those two young to form completely coherent sentences.
I just don't have the energy to tear this to shreds. It'd be the equivalent of beating up a five-year-old - way too easy to be any fun. After all, it's the five-year-old demographic that the film is targeting. Well, plus the old person audience who thinks all forms of talking animals are cute.
Little kids will likely enjoy it. I was in a theater full of 'em, and they cackled at every burp and flatulence joke, and they howled every time Billy Connolly (trying hard to summon John Cleese) got bit in the crotch by a dog or slammed in the head by a household appliance. Meanwhile, I just stared stone-faced at the screen, as if I were at a Paris Hilton poetry reading.
I'm sure some of you parents will enjoy it (it's a slight step up from the original), but the majority will most likely be bored beyond comprehension and should probably start trying to convince the wee one that he needs to see Cars again.
All of you fathers who think Jennifer Love Hewitt's presence will be your saving grace, well, bad news - she's hardly in this at all. She'll provide you a few minutes of solace but will quickly and cruelly be whisked off screen so that we can be entertained by such images as Garfield bathing in a bidet and a weasel climbing up Connolly's trousers.
Yeah.
If that sounds like suitable entertainment to you then by all means, slap those Hamiltons on the counter. It's your retirement savings that you're gambling with, not mine.
THE GIST
Eh. Garfield: A Tale of Two Kitties is strictly for those who were fans of the first movie, die-hard fans of Garfield, or those two young to form completely coherent sentences.
I braced myself for 90 minutes of unfunny and weak cat jokes.
We were totally, and I mean totally, surprised: a really well-made film with lots of genuine laughs and the kids were all enthralled. Talking animals, a great turn by Billy Connolly (Who got my wife's vote for best dressed man in the movies this year - whoever did the tailoring on this really did a good job). Excellent sets (Castle Howard is perfect for this), and just plain fun all round.
Garfield and his doppelganger are very well animated: you really can't fault it.
Nothing too scary, nothing too rude, and lots of pratfalls, good one-liners, and fun to had by all. A nice dose of sentimentality -- all in all, and I hate myself for saying it, one of the most enjoyable films we've seen in a while - whether for kids or not.
We were totally, and I mean totally, surprised: a really well-made film with lots of genuine laughs and the kids were all enthralled. Talking animals, a great turn by Billy Connolly (Who got my wife's vote for best dressed man in the movies this year - whoever did the tailoring on this really did a good job). Excellent sets (Castle Howard is perfect for this), and just plain fun all round.
Garfield and his doppelganger are very well animated: you really can't fault it.
Nothing too scary, nothing too rude, and lots of pratfalls, good one-liners, and fun to had by all. A nice dose of sentimentality -- all in all, and I hate myself for saying it, one of the most enjoyable films we've seen in a while - whether for kids or not.
This is an entertaining film, and is it better than the first movie? Yes, much better! The stunning location of the English castle was a delight, as was the lovely Jennifer Love Hewitt. Don't forget the adorable dog Oadie, who was one of two reasons(Jennifer Love Hewitt being the other) for watching the first film. Billy Connelly was too OTT, but it didn't help with the material he was given. The script was still a tad uninspired, but an improvement. Bill Murray is a lot more bearable in this movie, but he does sound a little bored. The supporting voice cast do a commendable job too, Tim Curry the standout with his aristocratic voice, he was perfect for the voice of Prince. I laughed a lot at this movie, its predecessor is a far cry from that. There are a few cheap gags such as the dog Rubble and the trousers, and some clever ones such as the mirror sequence, inspired by I think the Marx Brothers. Thank you for an entertaining movie, and it doesn't deserve the low rating. 7/10, Bethany Cox
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesSir Billy Connolly admitted in an interview that when he was offered the role of Lord Dargis in this movie, he wasn't aware that Garfield, le film (2004) existed.
- GaffesWhen Jon is driving to the castle to find Garfield, he's driving on the wrong side of the road. In the UK they drive on the left side. Jon was on the right side.
- Autres versionsThe U.S. DVD includes both the PG-rated theatrical version and an extended version (obviously unrated, but not labeled as such). The theatrical version runs 1:17:45, while the extended version is approximately 8 minutes longer at a runtime of 1:25:35. The theatrical version is presented in 4:3 fullscreen, while the extended version is presented in 16:9 widescreen.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Troldspejlet: Episode #34.16 (2006)
- Bandes originalesThe Angels Sang
Written and Performed by Ronnie James
Courtesy of Smashtrax Music LLC
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Garfield: A Tail of Two Kitties?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Garfield: A Tale of Two Kitties
- Lieux de tournage
- Castle Howard, York, North Yorkshire, Angleterre, Royaume-Uni(Castle Carlyle: exteriors of house, bridge and lakes)
- sociétés de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 60 000 000 $ US (estimation)
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 28 426 747 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 7 288 977 $ US
- 18 juin 2006
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 143 325 970 $ US
- Durée1 heure 22 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
What was the official certification given to Garfield: Pacha royal (2006) in Mexico?
Répondre