Pretty much how I feel about the Dinosaurs DVD that I bought

Oh, I’m keeping the damn thing, I used to love this show, but this is how I feel about one aspect of it that I used to love and was my one reason for watching it when I was little. This is from Scott Keith’s Blog of Doom:

And then there’s the Baby. Probably the character most closely
associated with the show over the years (heck, he’s on the DVD’s
cover), he’s also the most irritating character on the show when viewed
with some perspective. Although “I’m the baby, gotta love me” and “Not
the Mama” might have been funny for the first few episodes with a week
between them, when viewed in sequence as part of a set like this one,
you just wanna strangle the little bastard.

I completely agree with everything he said about it. What I used to think made the show move now completely stops the show and makes you wince everytime you see that damn baby. Note to everyone, the same guy who voiced Baby Sinclair, Kevin Clash, also did the voice for Splinter and Elmo.

21 thoughts on “Pretty much how I feel about the Dinosaurs DVD that I bought

  1. socramforever says:

    Well, I remember having a video of the behind the scenes of Turtles 2: Secret of the Ooze (which now sounds more porno graphic than before) and it was him, then I saw a making of of Dinosaurs when it was coming out and it was the same guy. Then like three years ago I saw that it was the same guy in something on tv. So it was a like 2 + 2 + 2 type of thing.

  2. socramforever says:

    what do you think of Subtitles in movies, like Secret of the Ooze, Rise of the Machines, Judgment Day…

    I think the era of the Subtitle is over, and they should just have a number. I used to be all about the subtitle, but now I’m kind of like, it makes it cheesy.

  3. flammable says:

    Yeah, I think subtitles have become redundant…they need to find a new way to make movie titles seem more interesting.

  4. socramforever says:

    you mean beside the use of a number after the title?

    I’ve always liked the idea of having a new name for the new movie. Like the James Bond movies. Goldeneye, Tomorrow Never Dies, The World is Not Enough, Die Another Day, Casino Royale…ect. I mean, it follows the same characters but its a completely different movie (same formula) from the last one, and you don’t really need to see what happened the episode before, you just pick up right where it left off and you’re fine.

  5. flammable says:

    Yeah, mostly…except when they do things like replace Q.

    I like that idea, it’s not James Bond 007: Goldeneye. It’s just Goldeneye.

  6. socramforever says:

    Yeah, but the only reason why they replaced Q was because the original guy died in a car accident. I don’t even think Q is in the new movie.

  7. flammable says:

    Oh right, he died. At least he didn’t get fired! Poor Pierce Brosnan. 🙁

    To make matters worse, I bet he would have gotten fired if he didn’t die. The guy’s screwed either way!

    So they even ditched John Cleese? I can understand that one. I like Cleese, but it’s hard to imagine him stepping into someone else’s character.

  8. socramforever says:

    he may or may not be in the next movie, but they said that they’ll be bringing the Q character back eventually!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.