because our culture is so far beyond satire it’s terrifying
Christ, it’s more like a Just Shoot Me Thought for the Day, and the only thing that is saving my sanity here is that unless God exists and he’s even more of a cruel bastard than we already thought, this is a premature April Fool’s joke (via Pajiba): 20th Century Fox is developing a film based on the E*Trade talking babies. No. I am not making this up. Actress and writer Katie Dippold (“Parks and Recreation,” “MADtv”) is penning the script. And no. I’m not kidding. The film is a “mission movie,” about a group of talking babies trying to make their way across the playground. I cannot believe that someone is making a movie based on the E*Trade babies. A talking baby movie is bad enough, but one that’s based on a television commercial campaign? Of course, even if this is a put-on, it’s rather telling that we could be fooled by this, what passes for entertainment having sunk so low that this is not implausible. If it isn’t a joke, we’re doomed. Either way, *sob.* This has been your WTF Thought for the Day. support
Disqus commentsblog comments powered by Disqus |
posted:
Wed Mar 31 10, 1:32PM categories: movie buzz permalink 12 pre-Disqus comments Disqus comments tip jarshare
read morerelated· wtf: AOL is still in the dialup business? · WTF? Natasha Richardson 1963-2009 · question of the day: What is your favorite movie scene ever? · my outrage over the TechCrunch AOL ‘Source Code’ mess (aka: this is why we can’t have nice things) · what he said: Dustin Rowles at Pajiba... · trailer break: ‘While She Was Out’ redband (NSFW, probably) · your WTF of the day: what Darth Vader eats, I guess · deep thought (re our ratings systems) · wtf: ‘Clash of the Titans 2’ will be converted to 3D · wtf: Harvey Weinstein doesn’t want you to see the version of ‘The King’s Speech’ that just won Best Picture bloggyprevious post: trailer break: ‘Marmaduke’ next post: March 31-April 2: DVD alternatives to this weekend’s multiplex offerings |
|
|
search
follow
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in case of site outages or other emergencies, I'll update my status on Twitter and Facebook)
|
||
follow FlickFilosopher.com no matter where you are online
|
||
share and enjoy
shop to support
support FlickFilosopher.com when you click through here and buy almost anything at:
• Amazon U.S.
• Amazon Canada
• Amazon U.K.
• Amazon Germany
• Amazon France
• Amazon Spain
• Amazon Italy
• Chapters/Indigo (Canada)
• Amazon U.S.
• Amazon Canada
• Amazon U.K.
• Amazon Germany
• Amazon France
• Amazon Spain
• Amazon Italy
• Chapters/Indigo (Canada)
pre-Disqus comments
posted by Nathan (Wed Mar 31 10, 1:46PM)
If true, we can only hope that it meets the same fate as Cavemen
posted by bitchen frizzy (Wed Mar 31 10, 1:50PM)
Oh, don't be so pessimistic. I thought the same thing when they started making movies based on amusement park rides, and as it turned out we all loved it.
Personally, the talking babies weird me out. It's like they're possessed or something. I don't like any ads with talking babies. Am I the only one, though? Everyone else seems to think they're adorable.
posted by bronxbee (Wed Mar 31 10, 1:55PM)
@bitchen frizzy: you are not alone. i hate those commercials. i hate the smarmy "voice" of the baby... i just hate the whole thing. and i hated that talking baby movie that came before: Look Who's Talking... yuck and double yuck.
although, i do like the babies on Rug Rats. animated talking babies i like. also, muppet babies.
but not E*Trade babies. no.
posted by Remy Michael (Wed Mar 31 10, 2:59PM)
I really have to wonder if they'll get Lindsay Lohan to voice one of the babies. Maybe she gets all the Look Who's E*Trading Now profits as a settlement.
posted by Dave (Wed Mar 31 10, 5:20PM)
Didn't they try making a TV show out of the last computerized talking baby ad "Bob" and it died a quick death if it even came out at all. My memory is a little rusty. Oh well I too hate those ads with a white hot burning passion and can only hope someone at 20th century fox comes to their senses before they actually start filming.
And I thought signing Tayler Lautner to star in a 3d Stretch Armstrong movie was insane.
posted by Emrys (Wed Mar 31 10, 5:52PM)
I can't really get too upset about this because talking babies have been a staple of pop culture for eternity.
I don't even think their mouths moved in Look Who's Talking.
Complaining about this is like complaining that Edward Cullen has too much in common with Count Chocula.
posted by bitchen frizzy (Wed Mar 31 10, 6:02PM)
Didn't care for Look Who's Talking, either.
I'm better when they're mouths don't move. Much creepier when they have CGI mouths plastered on their faces.
Like Bronxbee said, cartoon babies aren't a problem.
posted by bitchen frizzy (Wed Mar 31 10, 6:03PM)
That should be "their", of course. Caffiene is wearing off.
posted by Michael (Wed Mar 31 10, 6:41PM)
I'm curious as to whether or not my body could, physically, withstand the amount of dope I'd have to smoke to consider seeing such a film.
posted by Newbs (Wed Mar 31 10, 8:25PM)
Speaking as the only person in the entire country who loved the Caveman series (also derived from commercials), I'm gonna go ahead and reserve judgment. The E-Trade commercials are pretty silly, but that one where the baby pukes while he's talking is hilarious.
Of course, you can't script that!
posted by MaryAnn (Wed Mar 31 10, 10:26PM)
You can CGI it, though.
I find realistic (ie, noncartoon) talking babies creepy, too.
posted by e (Wed Mar 31 10, 10:43PM)
Pretty sure I just read somewhere they're looking into a Look Who's Talking sequel or reboot....