If it gives Fluttershy employment…

@avclub-0b85257d7bd70a512bb467cbc693e76d:disqus : Roger Rabbit and Nightmare Before Xmas were shuffled that way (and Nightmare got shuffled back when it became a hit).

If he didn't want it to look like a kids' movie, why'd he even release it as Disney? Release it as Touchstone then.

The Asylum likely will have them covered on that front.

Dragon cost $165 million and made a slightly disappointing $43 million opening weekend but only dropped 33% the next week. John Carter cost $250 million, made $30 million opening weekend, and then dropped 55%. It doesn't have the legs in theaters (it might just make a killing on DVD, though).

From what I've heard, it was Andrew Stanton's fanboying that made him think people were more familiar with the books than they were.

And while I'm at it, since the Pixar guys do the dubbing and are responsible for pressuring Disney into releasing them at all, why not market the Ghibli films as "Disney and Pixar present" rather than just "Disney presents"? Cars 2 aside, Pixar's name is still something of a quality assurance, one befitting the Ghibli…

Given the director, they probably could have called John Carter "Pixar's first live-action film" and it would have made $100 million more.

@avclub-3545aa4f5986b04034fe083aa9712d21:disqus : It was, but there were also a few cuts made to the sexual and violent anime section so it wasn't violence alone.

The movie's release (and with a PG-13 at that!) seems to be responsible for people finally being comfortable releasing Battle Royale on DVD in America finally.

I'd say the action scenes in The Incredibles significantly own.

No, he knows exactly that he's going to hate it. It's from the director of Wall-E, the movie that killed culture, remember? So he'll probably talk about how the lesser critical scum are finally catching on to Stanton's Speilberg-betraying sentimental hack work without the corporate manipulation of the Pixar machine…

If they didn't want to mention Wall-E and Nemo directly, they could have at least referred to "Double Academy Award-Winning Director Andrew Stanton" (and also "Written by Pulitzer Prize-Winner Michael Chabon" and "Based on the Classic Series by the Creator of Tarzan").

Neil Patrick Harris turned out OK. Much, much more than OK, in fact.

Spirited Away's easily my favorite Ghibli film. Arrietty's probably second best and most entertaining of the non-Miyazaki films of theirs (since Grave of the Fireflies is a masterpiece but not what you'd exactly call entertainment).

Now, why aren't more people seeing The Secret World of Arrietty? Saw it Friday and it was amazing.

Now why couldn't they buy one two years ago when they had Inglorious Basterds, by far the best film that year, in the running?

Seriously? Why would you want a gateway to a weak author and worse person? Ender's Game is great but it's all been downhill from there as far as his writing goes, and I can't even recommend people buy Ender's Game; use you local library so you're not giving money to a guy who spends it on taking rights away from gay…

Percentage-wise Dick adaptations are better off than Seuss adaptations. Blade Runner's a classic of science fiction cinema, and Total Recall, Minority Report, A Scanner Darkly, and The Adjustment Bureau are all varying degrees of well-liked.

I was expecting Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, one of the classic "unadaptable" books, to be on one of these two lists, but wasn't sure which one it would end up with. I'd say its more successful than not but I'd say it's a case where the book works way better by nature of its medium, similar to Watchmen.