This is a new low for Hollywood. Usually when a film is made based on an existing property, there is “artistic license” taken to be sure, but it usually has at least has some similarities with the source material.

Inspector Gadget, Flinstones, Casper, etc. Not great transitions, but still.

This Underdog seems to have nothing to do with anything “Underdog” other than the character’s names. It might as well be a movie about electricians who barf singing maggots and still be titled “Underdog”

:C

Even Krypto would succumb to this Stinking Piece of Brown Kryptonite. Now there IS NEED TO FEAR, BECAUSE BLUNDERDOG is here! Not Man nor Bird, or even Frog — Can keep this from being a bow office dog. We probably will also see a Shoeshine Boy who won’t know his Schlitz from Shine-ola.

This is PATHETIC. Leave it to Disney to ruin a great cartoon. The CG Underdog doesn’t even talk in rhyme!

Hollywood hates cartoons.

The only thing they got even marginally right is the “U” on his chest.

So why even make it in the first place?????

I can’t stand this lack of EFFORT on the part of Hollywood anymore. It seems as if no one is TRYING to be creative. Instead, we get these CG laden, live-action drek-fests whose only similarity to their original proerties is the name.

God, it’s no wonder so many artists are constantly pissed off. The people with the cash couldn’t recognize originality or talent if it slapped em in the face.

Oh, and I’m guessing Harvard jocks have taken over Hollywood. Otherwise, how in the hell does patrick Warburton KEEP GETTING WORK PLAYING THE SAME LARGE STUPID MEAT PUPPET WHO SPEAKS IN DRAWLING CAVE-SPEAK???

The last cartoon based live-action film that payed any respect to the original source is “The Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle”

It’s worse enough to have Underdog’s owner be practically 16 years old! Usually, these films portray the owner as a little kid!

This is the perfect story to tell my grandkids, “Hey children! THAT movie was filmed in my college town!” THAT will earn me a lot of respect. :P

Good lord!

EVERYTHING is such a controversy these days!

Guys, this is UNDERDOG you’re talking about.

It’s not like they were screwing up ROGER RAMJET. Let’s hold our scorn until we see the GOOFY GRAPE mo-cap feature, OK?

How utterly replusive. How gross to “steal” the original character names… and have not one (not ONE) homage, at least! I’m astounded they used the theme…and the famous “U”!

I dare say that probably not a ONE of we “animaniacas” will go! Yukkie-Poo! It’s up up up….and away we WON’T go!!

I get the sense that this was made for the same audience that went to see “Cats and Dogs.” But it could’ve been worse: they could’ve cast Danny DeVito as Simon Bar Sinister.

the cartoon was campy anyway, this should be quite an improvement. looks like a kids’ movie and i’m betting the kiddies will get a kick out of it.

One wonders what our children may miss in way of classic animation, simply because unfair associations will be made between (as the spacey lizard said) Inspector Gadget, Flinstones, Casper, etc. to their original form.

Were my first experience with Underdog to be this, then I may hesitate in exposing myself to anything sharing the title, preceding or not.

Woof (but not a good woof)

This isn’t the work of genius, to be sure, but I think I’d rather sit through this movie than 2 hours of the TV cartoon. Or 3 hours of the latest Pirates of the Caribbean for that matter.

It is funny that they made it at all. Does the name “Underdog” mean anything to anyone under 40?

Yeah, I saw the trailer at the cinema when being dragged by my girlfriend to see Pirates 3. Not good.

Robert A. Porrazzo says:

“So why even make it in the first place?????”

Tax write-off to compensate for all the moolah from Pirates 3, of course.

Yeesh. I was never a fan of the original series, but this makes Total TV’s creation look like Proust.

Why wasn’t this movie just entitled “SuperDog”, or “CanineWonder”, or “SteriodBeagle”, or “PowaDoggRulezInDaHoodYoMamaSNAP”….? It has almost nothing to do with the real “Underdog” namesake.

This must have been produced by the same team responsible for “Baby Looney Tunes” or “Loonatics Unleashed“… because it has the character names, but absolutely no relation to the properties that are being raped.

Again…. those with the money to produce remain clueless as to what they’re doing.

Uh…I’m going to go out on a limb and be the guy that thinks it didn’t look half bad. Sure it looks NOTHING like the original cartoon, but would kids today want to see something that looked like that? Remember this IS a kids movie, and I have a feeling they’ll be laughing their heads off at this one. The CG dog is respectable, some of the jokes actually made me laugh (c’mon, Patrick Warburton people). Also I saw some of the preproduction art and it looked quite nice. Other than the gripe that it’s nothing like the original, I think it looks fun and I’d let my kids see it.

They had a midget evil scientist, how bad could it be? Besides, it’s not like the original Underdog was a work of genius or anything. A shoeshine dog who is a crime fighter and a reporter dog that has the hots for him. Yeah, that’s a brilliant idea. Just remember, whatever you grew up with you’ll think is great.

The original “Underdog” series worked (barely) but at least it KNEW it was a joke. Throwing billions of development bucks at it forty three years later and trying to fit it into the Joseph Campbell ‘hero’ mold indicates that we DO see humans sniff each other’s butts, every single day in corporate Hollywood.

This is a Disney film?

Walt would bitch slap the guys who made this movie. Watch your step at the theaters, or you might step into it.

I hate concepts getting raped. But judging by the audience reaction to this trailer. That reaction being, unbridaled glee. The producers of this dog turd are going to make buckets and buckets of money. All I can do is look away and pretend it doesn’t exist.

It is kinda balls that they went with the tagline, “One nation under dog”

im at a loss

> I hate concepts getting raped. But judging by the audience reaction to this trailer. That reaction being, unbridaled glee. The producers of this dog turd are going to make buckets and buckets of money. All I can do is look away and pretend it doesn’t exist.

Heck, after Jerry mentioned Krypto, I’d rather black Underdog’s name out of my mind and sub it with Krypto for the entire thing to get the bad taste out of my head! A live-action/CGI Krypto film would’ve been more effective that this piece of fake dog doo!

If it wasn’t called underdog I wonder if anyone would make the connection? The only similarities I see are the names and the blue & red costume.

Well they could’ve at least given him his original voice… but they went with the overused “cocky, young guy voice”… was that Toby Maguire? The thing is, kids WILL enjoy it if only because they’ve never seen the original Underdog and have no reason to complain about. Kids are very forgiving when it comes to what’s pushed on them as entertainment. As grownups watching media created for kids, we gotta take it with a grain of salt. To make movies that appeal to kids AND grownups is a lot harder to do and is a big reason why studios like Pixar do so well… they put in the effort. But for most studios, just getting kids distracted for 2 hours is enough to make them a profit. Most parents don’t exactly care for animation regardless of how good it is and don’t practice any kind of quality control when it comes to what their kids watch. Honestly, animation fans and artists are the only ones who care about this kind of stuff and we’re a very small fraction of the audience. If anything, the independant scene needs to grow because mainstream isn’t going back to a “quality over quantity” frame of mind for a good while… if it ever was like that, which it probably wasn’t.

You know, I would’ve been okay with a CG-animated movie, something that could be faithful to the original material to an extent (and not have to worry about the “rules” in a live-action movie).

I may go and see this movie. I mean, it looks really cute and even exciting (I love dogs anyway), but . . . that’s just not my Underdog. It looks more like AIR BUD with superpowers (and is more in common with the new Garfield movies, where the animals other than Garfield himself are nothing like the originals), with only rote tributes to the original series.

And this is what I hate about Hollywood cynicism; the original UNDERDOG had anthropomorphic characters co-exist with each other. But in a live-action film, that would be considered to be too “unbelievable,” so all animals (except for Underdog) have to be real, naked animals (who’d only talk to each other in secret). I think the real Sweet Polly Purebred would blush if she saw herself naked in this movie . . .

The lack of effort comes from the exec side on this one. Technically speaking, the characters don’t look like they were simple to pull off. Focus your anger in the right direction.

This reminds me of the Fantastic Four sequel, believe it or not. In that film, the filmmakers decided that the character Galactus was just too silly to film, so Galactus in their sequel will instead be a talking cloud. The Silver Surfer wasn’t silly, but Galactus was silly.

My point is that Hollywood always thinks that they know better than the fans of a cartoon or comic book. Even though they’ve been popular for decades, and are pop culture institutions, they were apparently unfinished until some untalented or heavy-handed director and producer found them in the wilderness and took them in.

I vote with my wallet. I just do not support films like these. Period. I’d think we would all do the same, but if you’re on the fence I’d remind you that if this POS makes any money at all we’ll just get a Go-Go-Gophers fart comedy movie next year and a Roger Ramjet action film the year after that, and is there really anybody out there who needs that?

My son is 10. I couldn’t (nor would I) pay him to see this film.

It made me feel like I threw up in my mouth just a little.

The next time I go to see a film and have to sit through a trailer of THIS I might ask for a refund just for wasting a few minutes of my time. Ugh.

With the release of this movie, every cartoonist and cartoon enthusiast dies a little inside. I’ll never be able to look at Underdog the same…

Wasn’t John Lasseter placed in charge of approving or rejecting all future Disney films? What the hell is this?

I know nothing about the original cartoon. Where I grew up we did not get to see them. So I’m looking at this in a non-biased fashion and it still stinks. Maybe I’m too old, but all this stuff looks so much the same, it is very hard to get excited. My kids might, I’m not. I have friends who worked very hard on this film and even they just shrug their shoulders. More product to generate money.

You have to wonder why they would bother with an established character like this. I mean, anyone who remembers Underdog is going to hate this movie, because this is a retarded version. But for anyone who is too young to know Underdog, then why bother calling him Underdog? Why not make him ‘Fantasti-Dog’ or something? By calling him Underdog, all they are doing is alienating a group of people.

Congratulations, Disney! You’ve managed to do what Simon Barsinister, Riff-Raff, Batty Man and Tap Tap the Chisler always dreamed of doing…finishing off Underdog for good. Though I bet even Simon wouldn’t have been willing to sink to these depths.

No worse than any of the other terrible recent projects that Disney has released in recent years. I’d rather they spend their time and money cleaning up and releasing all the movies that made Disney great and forget about making any new content. I’m sure they could float forever on what they’ve already got.

On the positive side, at least they didn’t spend their time censoring the dog’s anatomy, as they did with the live action Dalmatians movies…

Yeah, suddenly I’m rooting for Overcat. Vincent, I pray you’re wrong, but in the previews, first thing my 12 Y.O. niece said was…”COOL”.
Good Lord, WHERE DID I GO WRONG?

Wow, everything I hate about bad movie trailers…combined into one movie trailer!

This is indeed my lucky day.

Y’know. I too said when I first heard about this that why even call it Underdog and that they should take the money and make a Flash series.

But I can’t get too worked up over this. Revisiting the Original Underdog years later the cartoon didn’t live up to my inner 6 year old’s taste buds……..and a new cartoon series would’ve (or will) probably been (or will be) retooled as is George Of The Jungle anyways ( An original cartoon which does stand the test of time).

This will quickly move to DVD and be forgotten no matter if it’s good or bad.

I think there’s a lot of bandwagon jumping on this one. If Jerry had said he loved the trailer I’m sure the reaction would be much less negative on the talkback. Personally I don’t think it looks that terrible. In fact it looks like a much better quality kids flick than they usually get tossed at them. I guess since I didn’t grow up with Underdog, I don’t see what the big deal is. Now if they did this to Ducktales or the Smurfs, maybe I’d be a little more upset. I guess it’s a generational thing.

… I think John Lasseter is in charge of the animation division at Disney, and this would qualify as live action.

Rumour has it, that the working title for ‘Happy Feet’ was infact ‘Tennessee Tuxedo 2007′.

You know: fifty years from now some crass studio will make a live action PowerPuff Girls film and the generation that grew up loving the cartoon will howl at the injustice and how the filmmakers got it all wrong.

Hey Sean D. Funny you should say that. We are working on 3 commercials right now and lots of the old London school animators are here at my studio. When we take a breather we look at exactly those old films and get inspired and inspired again. The magic is undeniable, and will last forever. But corporations need to accumulate.

Allright , who missed the focus group results?…Penguins are what’s selling…where’s our Tennesee Tuxedo musical ? c’mon guys…gotta make those meetings! Who’s our new Mr. Whoopee?..does chumley get the girl?…

but at least execs have stopped editing enormous belches into their trailers. i’ll give them that.

Bill I’d love to wrong on this one. An empty purse might make the folks in charge stop and think.
I mean Underdog. What makes this dog an Underdog? Is he having to shine shoes?

> On the positive side, at least they didn’t spend their time censoring the dog’s anatomy, as they did with the live action Dalmatians movies…

Heh, you know I wasn’t going to say anything about that, but I’m glad someone other than me noticed that! Let alone I was a stickler for realizing the CG version of the pooch made the mistake of making him ‘gender-neutral’ as well (if such a term is even used, I probably just made it up, but it’s too common a thing to notice in most cartoon animals anyway).

With this trend of making live/CGI adaptations of classic animated characters, what next, CGI adaptations of classic live action films, how about a CG version of “My Dinner with Andre�!

This is the sort of thing that “works” as a skit… that is, a parody commercial presented as part of a show. Why would anyone try to make a real, full-length feature out of this? Well, a tax write-off, apparently.

Please bury this Disney. This is not going to help the new positive image you are trying to create in the animation world. I realize that this deal was probably done before John Lasseter came aboard and was killing projects like this - but please pretend he did and just put this out straight to dvd. Okay, you can release it in theaters in other countries, since as Uli pointed out most of them didn’t show ‘Underdog’ on t.v. (and after this film they won’t want to know anything more about ‘Underdog’) I certainly hope that Disney doesn’t fund Duchau in making “Hong Kong Phooey” which he’s been pitching all over the world.

To answer some of your questions:
It IS the same director as “Cats And Dogs”, the voice is Jason Lee- not Toby McGuire, and Lasseter MOST LIKELY DID NOT look at this project at all.

It’s a dog eat dog world, but this dog has no chance. I don’t know who was smoking what when this idea took growth. Hopefully not some tainted doggy snack.

I saw the trailer that ran with “Pirates”. Packed house, and all through that trailer I heard sighs, groans, and one “Aw, come on!” I only heard one chuckle, at the tagline, “One Nation Under Dog”. (Hardly original, that line was used in a Green Day song years ago!)

This looks like one of those movies where the association with the cartoon hurts more than it helps. It might have been a fun kid movie and a good way to show off new CGI gimmicks, if just called something else. The only references to the original I caught were the name, costume and villain’s name. Why call it “Underdog” when it has nothing to do with the cartoon?

Maybe they should make a movie about a superpowered live-action fruit bat and call it “Batfink”. At least in that case they’d be improving on the original!

Why do we keep having these talking pet features? Why can’t we get back to the more unusual animals like penguins. Now there is an animal that can’t be overexposed. (Apparently)

I dunno. I usually agree with ya Jerry… but I think this is overreaction. No different than the Transformers adaptation, or moving from Spider-man the comic book to the good first one (not the shit last one).

It’s beloved by us, but who knows what it is anymore? Maybe it’ll piss on it like the Grinch but… maybe it’ll have a sense of humor about itself. Who knows?

I’m more concerned about the Silver Surfer but that’s me. See, the Fantastic Four is LITERATURE. (tongue in cheek).

All the best…

- Steve

Ian Copeland,

Cartoon Network’s Sam Register co-produced a POWERPUFF GIRLS anime (without Craig McCracken’s involvement), titled THEY’RE HERE!! POWERPUFF GIRLS Z. From what I saw, those are *not* the Powerpuff Girls, just Sailor Moon ripoffs with the name “Powerpuff Girls” slapped on them. The show itself does not have the spirit of the original. I call it PPGINO (PowerPuff Girls In Name Only; much like the 1998 Hollywood remake of GODZILLA, which fans call GINO.)

It makes this UNDERDOG movie seem relatively faithful to the original material, not that this will justify that it will do the original material any justice.

Travis Gentry said: “I think there’s a lot of bandwagon jumping on this one. If Jerry had said he loved the trailer I’m sure the reaction would be much less negative on the talkback.”

I disagree Travis. Don’t confuse Jerry’s readers with those on John K.’s blog. Brew readers tend to think for themselves and form their own opinions accordingly.

I never really liked Underdog and his insipid rhyming, but it’s still sad to see such creative bankruptcy in Hollywood.

I must be getting old, because most movie trailers of kids movies just make me groan. The Underdog was a cartoon that we never got here in the UK (at least not from what I know) so it won’t connect with anyone here much at all, so there’s a small chance this will be a direct to DVD for us. Hopefully.

Daniel says:
The thing is, kids WILL enjoy it if only because they’ve never seen the original Underdog and have no reason to complain about. Kids are very forgiving when it comes to what’s pushed on them as entertainment.

I say:
It seems that is exactly the reason why you all like the original Underdog:)
Not being from the USA, I never heard of Underdog.. And with reason I guess.. Because though the new one doesn’t seem all to great.. The old one kind of sucked in the same way too..
They’re both just nothing special. Not really bad, but just not very special.
They’re probably both forgotten in a few years after their release, except by the kids who accidentally see it.

Pete is right. I hardly call this “bandwagon jumping.”

Despite my bad feelings about this remake, I do have some nice things to say about it.

Greg, re: Hong Kong Phooey— as I understand it (not entirely verified), Du Chau simply wanted to make a film about a kid with a wisecracking dog superhero for a pet, and to convince a studio to pick it up, decided to pitch it as a variation on a presold property.
The original intend was to pair the idea with Hong Kong Phooey. But when either Turner/Hanna-Barbera or an intended production house didn’t take to such a radical revision of the source material, he simply retrofitted his pre-existing story to Underdog and started over from square one at a new studio. Du Chau’s Hong Kong Phooey movie *became* his Underdog movie, and this time he was lucky enough to pitch to people who either didn’t know how unfaithful he was being to the brand—or didn’t care.
It really didn’t matter what cartoon it was based on; it was all about Du Chau figuring out a way to make his own story, and that’s what’s wrong with this picture. I’d love it if someone can tell me that the version of events I’ve heard is inaccurate.

Hollywood IS creatively bankrupt when a major studio can’t improve on the sorry likes of “Underdog”, but creativity had nothing to do with this business deal from the get-go. There are fifty freighters en route to the USA from China brimming with ugly, realistic Underdog plush toys. Should this Disney guano yield a fast box office bonanza, we’ll see some other studio’s “answer”, such as a 3-D CGI “The World of Commander McBragg”, slapped together for 2009. There really is no reason not to come up with original material when ‘revivals’ are so wrongheadedly re-imagined.

Meh. I wasn’t going to add anything to this (who has time to read all these comments?) but I figured one more voice might have some impact (I doubt it). I’ll second (or 50th?) Shmorky’s early sentiment - Hollywood hates cartoons. As for “jumping on the bandwagon”, I’d bemoan this atrocity regardless - I saw the trailer at the theater and was astounded at how bad it was. I don’t know what the opinion was here about the Transformers movie but that trailer looked like freaking Citizen Kane in comparison. Admittedly, I don’t think I could watch much Underdog now, but in my memory of childhood, Underdog was high art and the characters and song remain part of my everyday psyche and cultural referrence. Disney could have captured a huge market if they played this right (a good retro-style 2d cartoon with sophisticatedd non-flatulence humor is too much to ask for, I suppose), but instead they’ve alienated all the fans and I don’t see how anyone not familiar with the character would care.

Matthew you must have been sitting in front of me and my gal, because your quoting us verbatim.

If I can be assured of no “Commander McBragg,” I may agree to see it.

since when do movie studios NOT make movies for money? you’re acting like this is some kind of underlying scheme that they have and they’ll fool us all! haha. i think it’s a cute concept, remember homeward bound? that was a very successful talking animal movie!

Oddly, I think “Commander McBragg” would be a much better film.
Such an open-ended concept. An old man reminiscing about his bizarre otherworldly adventures.
Get someone with a creative mind like Terry Gilliam or Henry Selick to direct it, and it’s possible it could end up being great.

It sure would be better than this “boy and talking dog film #358″

Can this be an intentional way of grabbing a franchise and just kill it?
It was either this or a CGI cartoon movie of Underdog. (Which btw, I would’ve preffered to watch it that way).

Dave, that is an interesting story, thanks for sharing. I think I just get p.o.’d when there are really people who care about making good films like the Birdman, which bring a respectability to the medium, and then someone greenlights this fast food project to make a quick buck (OR so they think!). There is still alot of the old guard producing films and many of them will only make an animated film if it was a successful book, or comic book, or whatnot and will not consider a fresh, original project - even if it is 100 times more entertaining in concept and script! Thank god Pixar broke that mold and have had soooo much success with homegrown product!

…If there is a Hell, it awaits those who not only proposed this film, but anyone at Disney who greenlighted, supported, and eventually approved this film for release. Anyone associated with it is doomed to Eternal Damnation.

And yeah, that probably applies to the poor dog, too.

I like Mark’s idea. “The World of Commander McBraggâ€? is bullet proof, an idea so good it would be damn near impossible to screw up.

Wait. Check that. You could easily sink the project by casting Will Ferrell in the lead.

Ya know, Im going to say it just to say it.

Nobody sets out to make a crappy movie.

I would be willing to bet that the people involved in Underdog remembered fondly from when they were a kid, and desperately wanted to bring it to a new generation.

I think the people who made Spiderman 3 and Shrek the 3rd truly believed they were making a good film… even if I (or you) didn’t.

In the end, this movie - and its success - will lie on the opinions of “the rest of America” that pays to see these things, as opposed to waiting for their ASIFA copy.

Me? I liked Hot Fuzz. But I’m guessing more people will see “Live Free or Die Hard.”

“Oddly, I think “Commander McBraggâ€? would be a much better film.
Such an open-ended concept. An old man reminiscing about his bizarre otherworldly adventures.
Get someone with a creative mind like Terry Gilliam or Henry Selick to direct it, and it’s possible it could end up being great.”

Terry Gilliam already beat you to it, only he made a movie based on the Commander McBragg source material: the tall tales of Baron Munchausen.

Greg,

“Dave, that is an interesting story, thanks for sharing.”

You’re welcome—but as I mentioned, I’m not sure how accurate the details are, so please don’t take my word on this as gospel.

“I think I just get p.o.’d when there are really people who care about making good films like the Birdman…”

Like who?

I am very uncomfortable with the way “rape” is being used in the comments section here. Can the violation of a human being truly be compared to a lame adaptation of an old cartoon character?

It seems insensitive.

> …If there is a Hell, it awaits those who not only proposed this film, but anyone at Disney who greenlighted, supported, and eventually approved this film for release. Anyone associated with it is doomed to Eternal Damnation.
> And yeah, that probably applies to the poor dog, too.

And I thought ‘all dogs go to Heaven’. :-)

> I am very uncomfortable with the way “rape� is being used in the comments section here. Can the violation of a human being truly be compared to a lame adaptation of an old cartoon character?
> It seems insensitive.

I dunno, the typical fanboy rants I see elsewhere can get really bad on these things, so ‘rape’ might come off less threatening in the end (I think most stuff done lately out of Hollywood seems like it’s raping the classics I grew up on often).

Dave, I was speaking of Bradley J. Bird the IV.

Steve, I hear what you’re saying about everybody wanting to do justice to the original, but then I realized that most Europeans who commented here had never even seen the original series, which probably includes Fredwah DuChaoow.

The “kids will watch anything” argument makes my blood boil. Just because someone is a minor doesn’t mean he should have to watch unadulterated pap.

I saw the trailer in the theater. It was mildly amusing, but the behavior for the character did not seem to be based on Underdog.

I think the people who see it will enjoy it, but I’m not sure how many that will be.

this is very depressing. butchering one of my favorite cartoons. i hope it fails horribly. then i might still believe in karma

Oh, yay. Another CG talking-animal movie. Way to think outside the box, Disney.

I gave up on animal talkies a decade ago when a trailer for Babe came on before the feature Apollo 13. As I strained to not throw my popcorn at the screen during the trailer, a fat lady sitting behind me giggled, “Oh, that’s a _must-see_!”

My then-9-year-old son turned to me with a wide-eyed WTF expression upon hearing that.

I’ll bet that lady’s first in line to see this new Underdog movie.

> Oh, yay. Another CG talking-animal movie. Way to think outside the box, Disney.
> I gave up on animal talkies a decade ago when a trailer for Babe came on before the feature Apollo 13. As I strained to not throw my popcorn at the screen during the trailer, a fat lady sitting behind me giggled, “Oh, that’s a _must-see_!�
> My then-9-year-old son turned to me with a wide-eyed WTF expression upon hearing that.
> I’ll bet that lady’s first in line to see this new Underdog movie.

While I don’t have a problem with seeing it in hand-drawn/traditional animation, seeing it in CG/Live-Action combos can get pretty weird and hard to get used to, let alone ‘ugly’ might be a good work to put it (you never have to worry about that at all watching a drawing but seeing it on a real-anatomically correct organism is enough to turn your insides-out).

Funny you should link to that particular clip for Underdog’s identity.

Y’know, it actually looks a lot better than many of the other dog and cat movies that hollywood has made in recent years.

But you are most definately correct in saying that it is not Underdog.

Lets just hope the character isn’t put through the meat grinder as badly as Catwoman was.

Is this a case for PETA?

as I recall this may be the film that has PETA and the HSUS behind it?