FAS has upgraded our forum security. Some members may need to log in again. If you are unable to remember your login information, please email food.allergy.supt@flash.net and we will help you get back in. Thanks for your patience!


Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 365 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:
Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture Type the letters shown in the picture Type the letters shown in the picture Type the letters shown in the picture Type the letters shown in the picture Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
Please spell spammer backwards:
Spell the answer to 6 + 7 =:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

By posting you acknowledge you are subject to our TOS, rules, and guidelines .


Topic Summary

Posted by: nameless
« on: July 31, 2013, 03:53:29 PM »

I found cartoon Smurfs a little odd...

...I find 3D sculpted Smurfs interacting with humans absolutely creepy.

Adrienne
Posted by: SilverLining
« on: July 31, 2013, 03:06:04 PM »

I was trying to find out what exactly it was and googled.  Thanks for posting bleh.

It is Smurfette's birthday in this movie.  So maybe papa smurf will get sued and we won't have to deal with another smurf movie.
Posted by: bleh
« on: July 31, 2013, 02:08:59 PM »

Quote from: nameless on July 31, 2013, 11:19:35 AM
Quote from: bleh on July 31, 2013, 10:40:25 AM
“A husband and his wife at a birthday party shout at their son to spit out a bite of corndog fried in peanut oil, because of a dangerous peanut allergy; we later hear that the boy's throat opened up and he began breathing again after treatment, but that the parents may sue the party-giver.”

From what I found online earlier, I believe that's what happened in the movie.


Sue the party-giver? I'd like to know more details...did the parents what was in the food, etc? EGADS!

Oh wait --- was that the plot line or something that happened in real life?

Adrienne


http://www.kids-in-mind.com/s/smurfs2.htm

I found that peanut oil quote at the site above. I am guessing the smurfs were at some party and a kid had an allergic reaction?
Posted by: Macabre
« on: July 31, 2013, 12:04:21 PM »

I don't know how the reaction is played--I assume for laughs, given the description. But the portrayal if FA parents--yikes.  Not that I expect parents to get favorable treatment in many kid films. But this overthetopness makes me cringe.
Posted by: Macabre
« on: July 31, 2013, 12:02:34 PM »

Adrienne I think the smurf parents are suiting the smurf part host.

Just smurfy.
Posted by: CMdeux
« on: July 31, 2013, 11:38:17 AM »

Quote from: SilverLining on July 31, 2013, 10:45:33 AM
smurfs were always mean little things.  Always annoying.

:rofl:

Now that is funny.  Probably way funnier than anything in the movie, it sounds like.

Posted by: nameless
« on: July 31, 2013, 11:19:35 AM »

Quote from: bleh on July 31, 2013, 10:40:25 AM
“A husband and his wife at a birthday party shout at their son to spit out a bite of corndog fried in peanut oil, because of a dangerous peanut allergy; we later hear that the boy's throat opened up and he began breathing again after treatment, but that the parents may sue the party-giver.”

From what I found online earlier, I believe that's what happened in the movie.

Sue the party-giver? I'd like to know more details...did the parents what was in the food, etc? EGADS!

Oh wait --- was that the plot line or something that happened in real life?

Adrienne
Posted by: SilverLining
« on: July 31, 2013, 10:45:33 AM »

smurfs were always mean little things.  Always annoying.
Posted by: bleh
« on: July 31, 2013, 10:40:25 AM »

“A husband and his wife at a birthday party shout at their son to spit out a bite of corndog fried in peanut oil, because of a dangerous peanut allergy; we later hear that the boy's throat opened up and he began breathing again after treatment, but that the parents may sue the party-giver.”

From what I found online earlier, I believe that's what happened in the movie.
Posted by: Macabre
« on: July 31, 2013, 10:19:57 AM »

I saw this today. I don't have time to try to learn more just now. I don't know about you, but I don't think I can find any peanut reaction funny in light of the recent death.

http://globalnews.ca/news/752469/what-the-critics-are-saying-the-smurfs-2/

Also not filled with blue cheer was Claudia Puig of USA Today.

“This insipid, and sometimes awkward, blend of animation, computer generation and live action wastes a ton of talent and lacks a true sense of whimsy,” she wrote. “Feeble efforts are made to keep adult viewers entertained, but jokes and asides fall flat. And whose idea was it to milk a child’s allergic reaction to peanuts for laughs?”

http://www.mlive.com/movies/index.ssf/2013/07/review_the_smurfs_2_brings_bac.html

Thrown in is a peanut-allergy gag that does not follow through to its inevitable near-death conclusion, numerous instances where Gargamel is the object of excruciatingly painful slapstick and lines such as “Get a shroom!” It’s surely enough to justify employing the five screenwriters who took a whack at this thing. The film is also an unwieldy 105 minutes long, stretching the original’s run time by 20 minutes, but the scene in which the Smurfs toot in the bathtub just absolutely could not be left on the cutting-room floor. I cannot recommend the movie for anyone over the age of seven, or those unfamiliar with the ingestion of hallucinogenics.