My apologies if you actually watched that trailer. It jumped me in a darkened theater. I literally cannot fathom watching 85 more minutes like those 2. No, that is the privileged role of the professional movie critic. I wonder if movies like this make them question why they ever started down their present career path in the first place.

One thing’s for sure: These movies certainly make them cranky. I love it when critics get cranky. And who can blame them? This movie features a character named “Chupadogra.” The only question is how Marmaduke has managed to score as high as an 8% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Here are a few of the choicest comments:

“There is a special place in hell for filmmakers who deliberately force audiences to endure a worse dog movie than both “Marley & Me” and “The Shaggy Dog” remake put together.”
(Edward Douglas,
Rankings like this are why I don’t watch dog movies. Ever.

“As talking-dog movies go, Marmaduke makes Beverly Hills Chihuahua look like Up.”
(Carrie Rickey, Philadelphia Inquirer)
Having barely survived Beverly Hills Chihuahua myself, I hope for the sake of the species that this remark is uncalled for.

“The flea-bitten screenplay seems to have been plucked from the wastebasket of recycled ideas and rewritten by someone whose third language was English — after Danish and Dog.”
(Joe Williams, St. Louis Post-Dispatch)
Dude, what have the Danes ever done to– Ohhhh . . .

Marmaduke was designed to be as nondescript as possible in its mediocrity. I have seen the enemy and I have already forgotten what it looks like.”
(Simon Abrams, Slant) An excellent, literate review.

“Based on the comic strip about a big Great Dane who does things a dog does while its human owners say exactly what he’s doing, Marmaduke tells the story of a big Great Dane who does things a dog does while he says exactly what he’s doing. […] The movie’s verbal jokes are comprised of cultural references and puns. Although, does replacing certain syllables of words with “bark” actually constitute a pun? Whatever it is, it’s used whenever possible.”
(Mark Dujsik, Mark Reviews Movies)

“Really the only people who ought to see Marmaduke are very young children and very chemically altered adults, and since neither of those groups are all that capable of buying movie tickets, any amount of money this movie makes will be too much.”
(Katey Rich, Cinema Blend)

“When one of the last sounds you hear in a work of family entertainment is a Great Dane passing gas, there’s only one conclusion to be drawn. The movie hates your family.”
(Wesley Morris, The Boston Globe)

“No animals were used, and no humans were entertained in the making of this movie.”
(Matt Pais,

“This tale of a philosophical Great Dane who speaks with Owen Wilson’s voice is not entirely without merit. Well, actually, it is, but never mind.”
(Liz Braun, Jam! Movies)

Well, you get the idea. Still, given the complaints about uninspired, dog-related puns . . . there are a surprising number of them crammed into all of these reviews. Anyway, I’ll wrap this up with a word from Roger Ebert. He always puts things into perspective:

“And then … but enough. Why am I writing, and why are you reading, a review of a talking animal movie?”


~ by Jared on June 3, 2010.

One Response to “Marma-puke?”

  1. HAHAA. The one from Wesley Morris at the Boston Globe made me laugh out loud. That is a fantastic way to put it. I have no desire to see a talking animal movie ever again. I have seen far too many as it is.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: