mike-hicks-36579

So bad that the theatre was giving refunds to those who were walking out. People might want to find a copy on the bootleg sites and preview before taking their kids. They will probably decide to just let them watch the cartoon on their home televisions.

The lead actors have the skills normally found in the third level roles.the directing is sophomori, and the movie depends heavily on sub-standard CGI. The sound is good. The costumes are creative, but this is supposed to be a medieval tale. The costumes do not match the setting. The entire story is radically changed. They should have just made a new movie with a new title and left "Snow White" alone.

So very bad in so many ways. This film has some really good actors playing really bad roles to collect really big checks. The score would stand as a "career worst" for Burt Bacharat for many years.

The seemingly unlimited number of subplots (gold / greed, self fulfillment, spiritual cleansing, communal living, good vs evil, immortality, outlining one's past, etc.) help to hide any overall theme.

The wardrobes, bad scripts, bad music, and cultural insults anchor this film firmly in the 1970s, as it is truly a polyester leisure suit of movies.

I was glad to see TCM had the courage to air this, as I would have lived unaware of this rotten tomato. I cannot understand why they gave it 2.5 stars. This is one of the movies I have seen on that network that deserved one (or fewer) stars.

This movie could be best described as The Socialist Manifesto illustrated by Reubens. The filmmakers created a beautiful film that shows the value of what we must to preserve - albeit with highly questionable scientific, ecological, biological, and social data. The conclusion / findings were obviously pre-determined, as the information selected for the movie re-enforced the open border solution (but then we must keep in mind that two members of the crew were children of parents who entered the country illegally). They included politicians who vilified the President without producing any information about the negative affects of illegal immigration.

In my opinion, they should have focused on the river and an honest assessment of the ecological impact. Having a bird-watcher talking in a very sad voice about the impact a wall would have on bird populations is a bit silly, as the impact would be minimal on the bird populations. Having someone point out that Americans will not be able to enjoy the pristine northern shore of the river, then show people fishing on a heavily littered southern shore that is bare of all flora and fauna doesn't really make the case very well.

Maybe their next movie can focus on how we could increase the rate of legal immigration and temporary workers, eliminating the need for fences and walls.