Happily N'Ever After (2007)

The Worst Film Ever

It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

I was very excited when I first heard about this movie since the actors are pretty good and the plot sounded excellent, the way it was all carried out is not that good. The characters, even though they are played by very good actors (Sigourney Weaver!) lack substance and I found myself unable to relate to them. They are not unique in any way and they are not the kind of characters that I will remember a month from now in any way.The lines are not catchy and I couldn't find a single line in the whole movie to catch my attention. There are even parts when the lines are kinda corny and that ruins the whole bad ass attitude the movie is trying to display.

This is below the bottom of the barrel. Happily N'Ever After is that kind of movie you watch once and never want to revisit EVER again. This happens with GOOD movies when you want to watch that movie a second time and it's even better than the first time, but this is the exact opposite!! Who honestly thought that plagiarizing the Shrek premise was a good idea? Who with the right mind set think that way?! Nobody! Shrek was classic but this was and still is Shrek's crap! This makes other horrors like Shark Tale look like masterpieces and believe me, that's not saying enough. The movie has to be seen to be believed.Horrible CGI, horrible acting, horrible characters, horrible script, horrible humor that's not even funny AT ALL, and most of all A HORRIBLE movie experience!!!! This is the worst cartoon I've ever seen in my life!!! It'd take some real effort to make me hate a movie even more than this one.

On the same day that I watched "Happily N'Ever After", I also watched "Howl's Moving Castle". If you read my user comment for that movie, you'll see that while I liked it overall, I had a few minor problems with it. However, I kind of regret saying anything bad about "Howl" after watching "Happily N'Ever After" afterwards.Where to start with this movie? How about with the look of the movie. This is one of the UGLIEST animated movies I've ever seen. The colors look dark and drab, even when the action is taking place outdoors in the middle of the day. The design of the characters and backgrounds is extremely lazy. It looks like it's from a low-budget kiddie TV show instead of feature-film material.The script is just as bad as the look of the movie. While there are a couple of mildly amusing witty lines, apparently the screenwriter and the director thought that characters screaming and running around while spouting wisecracks would be entertaining. As you might have guessed, this was a bad decision. While I did have some sympathy for the character of "Rick", the other characters from Cinderella to her evil stepmother were unlikable and/or uninteresting.After seeing this movie, I am stunned that a sequel (released direct-to-video) to this movie has been released. This means that this movie actually was popular enough to warrant such a thing! We are approaching the apocalypse, people.

If you can compartmentalize your movie viewing, you will be able to negotiate through this.The thing to ignore is the thing we are supposed to place foremost, all the dialog, acting, story and pacing. Its just dreadful. Enough said about that.But. It has two things that interested me.One is simply the idea. It is a movie of a fairy tale inside a movie about manipulating fairy tales, inside a movie narrated by someone who seems to be outside both movies (he actually gets to stop the film physically) but at the same time trapped in the innermost movie. There's magic to explain some of this, but only a part. Its a very clever concoction. But the other thing was some of the characters. Well, they vary so; I guess I really mean the two women in front, Ella (Cinderella) and her redhaired stepmother. Its how they are rendered. Ella seems to be the only character whose face seems outside the cartoon world she inhabits. She's clearly a version of Audrey Hepburn with each of her attractive feature made a little more so. Its really quite good.The bodies are another thing. Not since Betty Boop's boobs were stilled by the censors, have we seen a young body as naturally sexy as this. There's nothing seductive or intended or cheap or erotic about it. Its just that all the parts move as they should, under modest clothes. I really was amazed, especially at the attention paid to her rear end.The step mother is something else. She moves with exaggerated erotic intent. She has huge bosoms and a nearly invisible waist. And then again huge thighs. Where the younger just walks, this puffy dominatrix swings. There's clearly some intent by the filmmaker here to get some sort of message across about the undesirability of overt sexuality. It zoomed right past me just in my astonishment at Ella's motion.Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.