Good modeling, poor garish, unappealing design. And this lacks quite possibly the most important point of animation, life. Instead of using life, they used realistic models instead. I feel for the artists forced to work on this. Next on thwir list of characters to ruin, Bugs Bunny.
I note with fear and loathing that the movie (I wouldn't denegrate the word "film" by using it here, and certainly wouldn't use the term "animation"), is being entirely promoted by the celebrity of the voice talent (and I use the word "talent" loosely too).
What more needs to be said?
OK, one thing -- I'm by no means a Howard Stern fan, but about the only time I listened to him he had Dan Aykroyd on as a guest. Stern's first question to Dan was, "who has bigger boobs, you or Fran Drescher?"
Well recently I saw this really great video of Pope Zappa explaining how executives became so bad. I was amazed how close his prognosis was to yours (he blames hippies). As for how it gets to this point... I don't think there are any artists left to be stifled by executives, just computer programs and algorithms.
And sorry if that video was linked here before, it seems it would have been.
As far as I know, they try to take the classic character designs, a photograph of a real animal, and try to combine the two so it meets halfway. The results, if you hadn't noticed, are generally hideous.
Cringeworthy. I think that would make anyone who's actually seen a real Yogi Bear cartoon vomit badly.
I can't imagine any executive seriously approving such hideous designs. Even they should know better, especially if they were old enough to have grown up with the real Yogi Bear cartoons.
My God, it's the Garfield movie all over again. Dan Aykroyd? Seriously, DAN AYKROYD?? Not that Aykroyd is a bad comic actor, but it underscores the kind of faux-populist, bean-counting, unimaginative studio thinking that totally misses the point of the character on so many levels. It's like, "OK, we've pretty much committed the whole budget on the CGI and can't afford an A-list celeb for the lead voice. Is there a much-loved, amiable has-been we can employ instead on the cheap who's bound to say 'yes'? I know, is Dan Aykroyd doing anything this week?"
BTW, that toy Fred looks like that because the Flintstones got fisted right up the ass in a big way by the filmmakers back in '94. I see the scars haven't healed yet.
Seriously, I don't even bother with this crap. Its not worth your time, energy, or money. Any live action movie based on an old cartoon or comic book I just pretend doesn't exist. I'll just go straight to the source material, and that's enough for me. I dont need a live action anything, or a live action/cgi combo movie. No thank you, I'll stick to the original comic books and cartoons, and thats it. I think we get dumber and less creative just by looking at this junk, so I avoid them ALL like the plague.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't ever allow them to do this to Ren and Stimpy!!!!
If history has taught us anything they have taught us to never bring animated characters into a live-action world. Can you believe there doing this with Bugs Bunny?
This is certainly one of the most of cringe-worthy films I have glanced at in a short while. Makes me more determined than ever to make my own films. Hope all is well Mr K.
Do I see this wrong or has yogi a differend number of fingers on his Paws? the shot whit the dubbel paws up the screen left paw has 5 fingers but the right paw has 4...
"This is just getting going: WB hired Elf and The Spiderwick Chronicles writer David Berenbaum to pen Bugs Bunny, but Deadline says there isn’t even a producer on the film at this point. So: very early stages."
Surely getting the right people on board to produce and direct should be the FIRST thing you need to do?
Ardy's right Frank Zappa said many of the things you are saying today, more than twenty years ago. It seems to be a general problem not just in cartoons but general entertainment.
What the heck, I may as well add that Tom Cavanagh is an awful choice for Ranger Smith. There is, in fact, nothing about Cavanagh that is like Ranger Smith. It's sort of uncanny.
It's a bit like they wanted to deconstruct an old HB cartoon, remove every single aspect of the cartoon that made it pleasurable and special, and reduce it to a thing completely void or charm or joy.
Normally I just enjoy reading this kind of post and the public flogging that follows, but here, well I loved Yogi Bear, still do; and now I just want to kick somebody in the balls.
Dan Akroyd is a really hot headed actor if he thinks he can do a better take on the character than Daws Buttler. He wouldn't listen to the tapes?!?! Wow, that makes me even more mad.
Quick sorta-related question for you here John; what is the non-CGI Disney feature which you personally dislike the most?
I'm guessing it'll be something like The Emperor's New Groove, which came to define much of the animated 'tude of the last decade by introducing new means of cutting costs through the characters (which Disney had to do after wasting $30 million and then starting over from scratch). Kuzco is so laid back as a human that they barely need to animate him at all sometimes, and despite the expansive background setting I can never get over how insular the movie feels (being a buddy comedy and all). But Kuzco is supposed to be an emperor, while the heavily-downsized cast (by Disney standards) and short running time means his empire never really gets to feel like one.
i dont know why so many people are expressing such disgust and outrage over this, weve been down this road before, many, many, times! we all know what this means and how it will play out:MILLIONS OF DOLLARS GENERATED IN DOMESTIC SALES, FOREIGN MARKET SALES, DVD SALES, HAPPY MEALS TOYS, ACTION FIGURES, T-SHIRTS, UNDERWEAR, TOYS AND GAMES AND OTHER SUCH JUNK! THIS ISNT A MOVIE ITS A MARKETING SCAM!the only way they will stop doing stuff like this is if the general public stays home and keeps their collective money it their pockets, use the recession were in as an excuse! but if you must see this, spend $5 bucks on a bootleg, that guy could really use the money, not these hollywood hucksters!
There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always— do not forget this, Krisfalusci— always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing more alien and more grostesque for the vague resemblance to leadership. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of meddling, the sensation of trampling on an idea that is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a computer generated Yogi Bear making the dreamworks face— forever.
I read an article talking about how they chose the crappy semi-realistic CGI style. They person being interviewed said the artists working on the character designs couldn't get the 3D Yogi to look the same as the original drawings from different angles. Why didn't they just use an old Yogi toy as reference? Or why didn't they just make it look good? Its possible to make a 3D character look like the original Yogi, with cartoony eyes and without all the gross hair. I think its really ironic you posted a picture of a real bear with a Yogi hat on a few years ago, its like you predicted this crap.
It would still be a bad idea, though, cause all the characters, both bears and humans, are much better as cartoons.
And there are plans to do the same thing to Bugs Bunny, Pepe le Pew, Marvin the Martian, Speedy Gonzales and Tom and Jerry! Man, I hope they reconsider it before it's too late.
Okey dokey, so now since most of you have gotten the typical rabble rousing out of your systems, tell me what you're going to do about this. Seriously, are you going to keep complaining or are you going to just ignore it so you can focus on making something that will really get people's attention?
You guys, of all folks, should know that complaints alone do nothing. A better generation of cartoons comes from a better generation of artists, which won't happen if we can't even focus long enough without being compelled to state the obvious.
There will always be dissenters, just like among the people of China. But like them, we will still be the prisoners of these pigs and our efforts neutralized.
Another example of Hollywierd practices at work, and why so much (but not all) CGI work's hit or miss:
A recent project had a game being simultaneously tested by A: large bunch of warehoused game contractors, narrowly focused on tasks, not collaborating and spending lots of time looking for next job .vs. B: small group of testers who got help and encouragement from their leaders, collaborated constantly and helped each other over rough spots.
Historical A:B comparison; Hanna Barbera/Filmation/your favorite big studio .vs. Spumco and (Spumco prototype) Bakshi TV animation.
Result: Group B beat the pants off Group A in making and getting good product delivered on time.
Didn't matter long term for us because all test teams were fired by client, who gets to start over should another project be undertaken. Sound familiar? :-)
And yes Zartok-35, like CGI Scoobie before him, FrankenYogi's evolution's likely due to producers selecting a frame of the morph sequence between Cartoon Yogi and real Bear "Yogi".
Which leads to my question: what CGI creation is properly expressive? Like good morphs they're darn hard because CGI muscles are complex, finicky things! I remember JK liking some aspects of "Cloudy with Meatballs", but don't know if there's anything else liked.
You know, puppets, cel animation, live effects, whatever..none of that inhibits my suspension of belief...
But CGI does. Like, I watched Avatar and sure I can't take my eyes off it, but not in a good way. My brain kept struggling to make what I'm seeing cohesive but they just couldn't.
It just sucks because its affecting both animation AND horror. My great loves are being rendered unwatchable.
Raven: It's because you know you're looking at something swish, expensive and generated with the precision of a machine, so the bar for your expectations is automatically raised. But the practical design elements are still coordinated by humans, and if there's even the slightest hint of things being done on the cheap, or textbook errors like the light-sourcing on the CGI figures not matching up with the real world around it, it all collapses like a bad souffle.
I was prodded the other day to revisit the sequence of Jessica Rabbit performing on stage and interacting with the human cast; and 22 years later, after so many CGI and hybrid features, it hasn't dated a bit. Of course it's heavily rotoscoped, but the movement, the perspective and the viewing angles are all bollock-shrivellingly impressive because real human beings had to DRAW it all.
There is some kind of energy that existed in the golden age of animation, that is sadly in scarcity in this modern age. It seems to me that animation was made for the sake of itself. Now most animation lacks the same kind of luster because it's potential is interpreted all to literally. Animation is now such a vehicule to tell a story that any opportunity for experimentation and creativity is pushed out. I believe THAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THIS NEW YOGI BEAR MOVIE.
IT'S NOT THE FACT THAT IT'S IN 3-D. It's possible to be just as creative and expressive with 3-d animation as it is with 2-d. I am an animator of both 2-d and digital 3-d. My preferred medium to work in is the traditional hand drawn animation, but even so that's doesn't mean I don't enjoy both kinds. There is something about technicality of 3-d animation that makes it so alluring to work with and view. Animation seemingly becomes more than just an art, but a science as well. THOSE WHO REJECT 3-D ANIMATION ARE TRAPPED IN A CONSERVATIVE, ANTI PROGRESSIVE KIND OF LOGIC, AND NEED TO PEN THEIR MINDS A LITTLE MORE.
Looking especially at the video game industry, I have found confidence that not only can 3-d animation be equally as creative as what can be found in the golden age of animation, but can take a step into a uncharted territory.
Also by the time the original Yogi Bear came out the golden age of animation had already waned away and was replaced by a new age of cheap, made-for-tv, limited animation that one can see today. I think Yogi bear fits in more with the less creative modern style of animation.
Someone should make a documentary detailing the decision making process in one of these films
words fail
maybe this will make up for it
58 comments:
Compared this to your own Yogi style, i prefer the your's. At least they look real cartoons characters. The realistic one is pretty ugly.
Good modeling, poor garish, unappealing design. And this lacks quite possibly the most important point of animation, life. Instead of using life, they used realistic models instead. I feel for the artists forced to work on this. Next on thwir list of characters to ruin, Bugs Bunny.
HOLY FUCK this is SO deep in the Uncanny Valley and yet now I want to SEE it just to see HUMAN BOO BOO in motion.
I've waited so long for your word on this movie. The disgust in the few words you typed was just biting enough that it was indeed worth the wait.
Words don't fail me.
I note with fear and loathing that the movie (I wouldn't denegrate the word "film" by using it here, and certainly wouldn't use the term "animation"), is being entirely promoted by the celebrity of the voice talent (and I use the word "talent" loosely too).
What more needs to be said?
OK, one thing -- I'm by no means a Howard Stern fan, but about the only time I listened to him he had Dan Aykroyd on as a guest. Stern's first question to Dan was, "who has bigger boobs, you or Fran Drescher?"
Well recently I saw this really great video of Pope Zappa explaining how executives became so bad. I was amazed how close his prognosis was to yours (he blames hippies). As for how it gets to this point... I don't think there are any artists left to be stifled by executives, just computer programs and algorithms.
And sorry if that video was linked here before, it seems it would have been.
As far as I know, they try to take the classic character designs, a photograph of a real animal, and try to combine the two so it meets halfway. The results, if you hadn't noticed, are generally hideous.
Indeed, more information is needed.
I don't know, this reminds me a lot of your own Yogi Bear cartoons. Must be the black lips.
Cringeworthy. I think that would make anyone who's actually seen a real Yogi Bear cartoon vomit badly.
I can't imagine any executive seriously approving such hideous designs. Even they should know better, especially if they were old enough to have grown up with the real Yogi Bear cartoons.
Those guys just look like some demonic bears from hell, THATS NOT THE YOGI I REMEMBER!
Also have you heard of gnomeo and juliet? It's another 3d film along the lines of "Tangled"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj-ziHTF5ms
Are Disney just trying to be dreamworks now?
Hey Guys! Look it's a dead horse! Quick someone grab the nearest baseball bat!
look at those hands on yogi and his teeth they look like there ready to kill
My God, it's the Garfield movie all over again. Dan Aykroyd? Seriously, DAN AYKROYD?? Not that Aykroyd is a bad comic actor, but it underscores the kind of faux-populist, bean-counting, unimaginative studio thinking that totally misses the point of the character on so many levels. It's like, "OK, we've pretty much committed the whole budget on the CGI and can't afford an A-list celeb for the lead voice. Is there a much-loved, amiable has-been we can employ instead on the cheap who's bound to say 'yes'? I know, is Dan Aykroyd doing anything this week?"
Oh lordy, it's the bad case of "Horrible-CGI-detailed-eyeliosis."
Someone should find a cure for this disease, cause it's affecting everything.
BTW, that toy Fred looks like that because the Flintstones got fisted right up the ass in a big way by the filmmakers back in '94. I see the scars haven't healed yet.
Corporate fascist culture aint pretty.
Seriously, I don't even bother with this crap. Its not worth your time, energy, or money. Any live action movie based on an old cartoon or comic book I just pretend doesn't exist. I'll just go straight to the source material, and that's enough for me. I dont need a live action anything, or a live action/cgi combo movie. No thank you, I'll stick to the original comic books and cartoons, and thats it. I think we get dumber and less creative just by looking at this junk, so I avoid them ALL like the plague.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't ever allow them to do this to Ren and Stimpy!!!!
If history has taught us anything they have taught us to never bring animated characters into a live-action world. Can you believe there doing this with Bugs Bunny?
http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/08/12/say-it-aint-so-warner-bros-to-produce-live-action-cgi-hybrid-bugs-bunny-film/
Bastardizations of classic characters. I'm going to get my pitchforks anyone second that?
This makes the situation even worse http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1302067/trivia.
Law and Order is a better animated show then this upcoming abomination, in that
it is well written
the characters have "specific expressions."
Have you ever seen this show? If only most of the ("writer cartoons") could be half as entertaining
They forgot to mention "Co-Starring all those stock expressions that hardly anyone in real life can make!".
This is certainly one of the most of cringe-worthy films I have glanced at in a short while. Makes me more determined than ever to make my own films. Hope all is well Mr K.
AHHH! WHY, WHY, WHY? WHAT HAVE THEY DONE TO YOGI?
Do I see this wrong
or has yogi a differend number of fingers on his Paws?
the shot whit the dubbel paws up the screen left paw has 5 fingers but the right paw has 4...
Did this movie come from Fred's gut? I see the size of that turd caused a blow-out.
John, why don't you focus on something good, like Bugs Bunny War Rally.
That has to be the most "realistic" cartoon ever in terms of showing body language.
How did Clampett do it?
Uhhh, my link didn't work. Is it okay if I try again?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZazEM8cgt0
lost for words???
let me help
'souless c*nts'
you know it, I know it
From the article on that Bugs 'Bomination:
"This is just getting going: WB hired Elf and The Spiderwick Chronicles writer David Berenbaum to pen Bugs Bunny, but Deadline says there isn’t even a producer on the film at this point. So: very early stages."
Surely getting the right people on board to produce and direct should be the FIRST thing you need to do?
How did we get to this point?
That has to be one of the most hideous things I've ever seen. Almost as hideous as the CGI Smokey the Bear that the Forest Service is doing.
Ardy's right Frank Zappa said many of the things you are saying today, more than twenty years ago. It seems to be a general problem not just in cartoons but general entertainment.
Another picture to watch. Me and a few friends love watching bad things for fun. It's great for coming up with in jokes between friends.
This is Obviously some new definition of Three Dimensional that I am unfamiliar with. You can barely make Yogi out from the backgrounds.
But, I think Dan Aykroyd does a pretty good job with the voice, same with Justin Timberlake as Boo-Boo.
everything we ever knew will slowly turn into a remake/cheap romantic comedy
What the heck, I may as well add that Tom Cavanagh is an awful choice for Ranger Smith. There is, in fact, nothing about Cavanagh that is like Ranger Smith. It's sort of uncanny.
It's a bit like they wanted to deconstruct an old HB cartoon, remove every single aspect of the cartoon that made it pleasurable and special, and reduce it to a thing completely void or charm or joy.
Normally I just enjoy reading this kind of post and the public flogging that follows, but here, well I loved Yogi Bear, still do; and now I just want to kick somebody in the balls.
Ow man their eyes look realy dead.
It's night of the living dead forest creatures!
When will they stop thinking that we are retarded!?
Dan Akroyd is a really hot headed actor if he thinks he can do a better take on the character than Daws Buttler. He wouldn't listen to the tapes?!?! Wow, that makes me even more mad.
Just threw up into my soup. Thanks.
Whoever let through that piece of character design was definitely NOT smarter than the average bear.
Quick sorta-related question for you here John; what is the non-CGI Disney feature which you personally dislike the most?
I'm guessing it'll be something like The Emperor's New Groove, which came to define much of the animated 'tude of the last decade by introducing new means of cutting costs through the characters (which Disney had to do after wasting $30 million and then starting over from scratch). Kuzco is so laid back as a human that they barely need to animate him at all sometimes, and despite the expansive background setting I can never get over how insular the movie feels (being a buddy comedy and all). But Kuzco is supposed to be an emperor, while the heavily-downsized cast (by Disney standards) and short running time means his empire never really gets to feel like one.
i dont know why so many people are expressing such disgust and outrage over this, weve been down this road before, many, many, times! we all know what this means and how it will play out:MILLIONS OF DOLLARS GENERATED IN DOMESTIC SALES, FOREIGN MARKET SALES, DVD SALES, HAPPY MEALS TOYS, ACTION FIGURES, T-SHIRTS, UNDERWEAR, TOYS AND GAMES AND OTHER SUCH JUNK! THIS ISNT A MOVIE ITS A MARKETING SCAM!the only way they will stop doing stuff like this is if the general public stays home and keeps their collective money it their pockets, use the recession were in as an excuse! but if you must see this, spend $5 bucks on a bootleg, that guy could really use the money, not these hollywood hucksters!
There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always— do not forget this, Krisfalusci— always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing more alien and more grostesque for the vague resemblance to leadership. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of meddling, the sensation of trampling on an idea that is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a computer generated Yogi Bear making the dreamworks face— forever.
I read an article talking about how they chose the crappy semi-realistic CGI style. They person being interviewed said the artists working on the character designs couldn't get the 3D Yogi to look the same as the original drawings from different angles. Why didn't they just use an old Yogi toy as reference? Or why didn't they just make it look good? Its possible to make a 3D character look like the original Yogi, with cartoony eyes and without all the gross hair. I think its really ironic you posted a picture of a real bear with a Yogi hat on a few years ago, its like you predicted this crap.
This kinda stuff would've scared me as a little kid.
Dan Aykroyd would be much better as Ranger Smith.
It would still be a bad idea, though, cause all the characters, both bears and humans, are much better as cartoons.
And there are plans to do the same thing to Bugs Bunny, Pepe le Pew, Marvin the Martian, Speedy Gonzales and Tom and Jerry! Man, I hope they reconsider it before it's too late.
I, uh, I...
...Er, I appreciatte the effort made by the 3D animators?
...I mean, horrible designs aside, just trying to animate something with that level of detail on the computer should be pretty damn difficult...
Yaayy, it's the post I've been waiting for! I've been wanting to see John tear this movie down a peg.
He does so in a noble, subtle way. Good job.
Funny how the more "real" it looks the less alive it looks.
Okey dokey, so now since most of you have gotten the typical rabble rousing out of your systems, tell me what you're going to do about this. Seriously, are you going to keep complaining or are you going to just ignore it so you can focus on making something that will really get people's attention?
You guys, of all folks, should know that complaints alone do nothing. A better generation of cartoons comes from a better generation of artists, which won't happen if we can't even focus long enough without being compelled to state the obvious.
Nice reference Khato.
There will always be dissenters, just like among the people of China. But like them, we will still be the prisoners of these pigs and our efforts neutralized.
Thnx for sharing FrankenYogi with us, JK.
Ross, only way I can object to this recreation is keep my $10 - 16 in pocket and not go see it.
I do remember my Disney animator acquaintances tell me they took forever to draw eyes on their character, as eyes are critical for conveying emotions.
Another example of Hollywierd practices at work, and why so much (but not all) CGI work's hit or miss:
A recent project had a game being simultaneously tested by A: large bunch of warehoused game contractors, narrowly focused on tasks, not collaborating and spending lots of time looking for next job .vs. B: small group of testers who got help and encouragement from their leaders, collaborated constantly and helped each other over rough spots.
Historical A:B comparison; Hanna Barbera/Filmation/your favorite big studio .vs. Spumco and (Spumco prototype) Bakshi TV animation.
Result: Group B beat the pants off Group A in making and getting good product delivered on time.
Didn't matter long term for us because all test teams were fired by client, who gets to start over should another project be undertaken.
Sound familiar? :-)
And yes Zartok-35, like CGI Scoobie before him, FrankenYogi's evolution's likely due to producers selecting a frame of the morph sequence between Cartoon Yogi and real Bear "Yogi".
Which leads to my question: what CGI creation is properly expressive? Like good morphs they're darn hard because CGI muscles are complex, finicky things! I remember JK liking some aspects of "Cloudy with Meatballs", but don't know if there's anything else liked.
You know, puppets, cel animation, live effects, whatever..none of that inhibits my suspension of belief...
But CGI does. Like, I watched Avatar and sure I can't take my eyes off it, but not in a good way. My brain kept struggling to make what I'm seeing cohesive but they just couldn't.
It just sucks because its affecting both animation AND horror. My great loves are being rendered unwatchable.
Raven: It's because you know you're looking at something swish, expensive and generated with the precision of a machine, so the bar for your expectations is automatically raised. But the practical design elements are still coordinated by humans, and if there's even the slightest hint of things being done on the cheap, or textbook errors like the light-sourcing on the CGI figures not matching up with the real world around it, it all collapses like a bad souffle.
I was prodded the other day to revisit the sequence of Jessica Rabbit performing on stage and interacting with the human cast; and 22 years later, after so many CGI and hybrid features, it hasn't dated a bit. Of course it's heavily rotoscoped, but the movement, the perspective and the viewing angles are all bollock-shrivellingly impressive because real human beings had to DRAW it all.
Longtime lurker here. Anyone seen the Tintin stuff yet? Eek.
http://www.empireonline.com/magazine/
http://geektyrant.com/news/2010/11/6/three-new-images-from-tintin-reveal-more-characters.html
There is some kind of energy that existed in the golden age of animation, that is sadly in scarcity in this modern age. It seems to me that animation was made for the sake of itself. Now most animation lacks the same kind of luster because it's potential is interpreted all to literally. Animation is now such a vehicule to tell a story that any opportunity for experimentation and creativity is pushed out. I believe THAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THIS NEW YOGI BEAR MOVIE.
IT'S NOT THE FACT THAT IT'S IN 3-D. It's possible to be just as creative and expressive with 3-d animation as it is with 2-d. I am an animator of both 2-d and digital 3-d. My preferred medium to work in is the traditional hand drawn animation, but even so that's doesn't mean I don't enjoy both kinds. There is something about technicality of 3-d animation that makes it so alluring to work with and view. Animation seemingly becomes more than just an art, but a science as well. THOSE WHO REJECT 3-D ANIMATION ARE TRAPPED IN A CONSERVATIVE, ANTI PROGRESSIVE KIND OF LOGIC, AND NEED TO PEN THEIR MINDS A LITTLE MORE.
Looking especially at the video game industry, I have found confidence that not only can 3-d animation be equally as creative as what can be found in the golden age of animation, but can take a step into a uncharted territory.
Also by the time the original Yogi Bear came out the golden age of animation had already waned away and was replaced by a new age of cheap, made-for-tv, limited animation that one can see today. I think Yogi bear fits in more with the less creative modern style of animation.
This post has been a touchstone for all debate and concern regarding this film...
Saw this and thought of you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6w0r-ScEG4
Johnny K.,
Yogi Bear: The Movie is being shown on the Brazilian cinemas. It was premiered here in Brazil on last Friday.
Post a Comment