At least for the most part. I found his character ultra annoying especially when he cried in part 2. He was bitching about how his dad has the best job ever and he can't tell anyone. When I was that age not only did I never tell anyone what my dad did but I never once heard anyone boast about what their dad did.
Dragonzord! Mastodon! Pterodactyl! Triceratops! Saber Toothed Tiger! Tyrannosaurus!
I think it's sad that they can't write a good part for Charlie. Get rid of the writers if they can't come up with good storylines. I'm sure there are plenty willing to take their place with fresh ideas and strict adherence to past storylines. All of the original people belong in the movies when possible. You would think they would figure that out when doing sequels. Look at how lame it was trying to do The Mummy without the correct actress. It would have been a better movie without a substitute.
shareI think I read that Eric Lloyd wanted to focus more on school. But still, he sucks big time. I was more pissed they got rid of Bernard so they could give that crappy Disney actor Spencer whatever a bigger part.
Dragonzord! Mastodon! Pterodactyl! Triceratops! Saber Toothed Tiger! Tyrannosaurus!
[deleted]
Spencer Breslin was only funny as a little kid. He's not funny anymore and he's horrible in this version.
share[deleted]
I didn't find either Charlie or Lucy extremely annoying; sometimes kids do like to talk to one another about what their parents do. And if your dad were freaking Santa Claus, I'm sure it would get to be a tough secret to keep. XD Charlie's physical presence wasn't really needed in the third movie until the end, though, so I didn't miss it too much.
I thought the biggest mistake they made was losing the awesome Bernard. He was always my favorite--a total delight in the first two! I can stand Curtis in conjunction with him, but on his own, the latter got on my nerves a bit. Still, I adore the three movies as a trilogy. They're just absolutely brilliant; every actor shines. I just want to know where in the heck Bernard was throughout the whole third installment; it would have been even better with him around...
Also, I find the various depictions of Jack Frost interesting.
Here, he's a devious, jealous, power-hungry bad guy who changes in the end thanks to a magically warm hug. ^w^
In "Jack Frost," he's a sweet, somewhat naive young man--well, not exactly a human man, though he does become one for a time.
In "Frosty's Winter Wonderland" and "Rudolph & Frosty's Christmas in July," he's the same exact person who's gone from being an envious troublemaker to a wintertime friend--very much like Martin Short's live-action version.
In "Here Comes Peter Cottontail: The Movie," there's revealed to be a female counterpart to him (Jackie Frost), but we don't actually see him, and only one reference to him is made...so he could be either of the other two Rankin-Bass Jack Frosts in that case. It's hard to see the younger one growing up to be the "jealous-then-nice" one; they're quite different, in looks and personality...two in carnations of the same concept/name/person/icon.
And in the new "Rise of the Guardians," it seems he's represented as a fun-loving, independent boy who doesn't much care for responsibilities, rules, or restrictions.
Sheesh...four of 'em! Will the real Jack Frost please stand up?! XD
I like that most holiday movies, such as this, seem to have been strongly influenced by the classic animated holiday specials, and their depictions of the various icons/deities/beings who preside over the days, seasons, and nature. (Likewise, I imagine this year's Hotel Transylvania took some inspiration from Mad Monster Party.)
Glad you mentioned they totally didn't get rid of him he just had a shorter part, and I don't know if Eric Lloyd didn't want to be in this movie, or had agreed to a shorter part.
share