🍪 En cliquant "Ok", vous acceptez le stockage de cookies sur votre appareil afin d'améliorer la navigation sur le site, d'analyser l'utilisation du site et de nous aider dans nos efforts de marketing.
OK also Disney recently posted like the posters for the new Ariel movie showing the characters and a lot of people are in raged with flounder because do you think we all know flounder is supposed to be like a chubby cute little fish they have some skinny little skinny bones scary ass little fish for the movie and they could've literally made a special look like anything they wanted to like it's not no real fish but they chose to go that route which I want to Barb's at about like I honestly am to you like that founder honestly freaks me out a little bit Lie so I don't have you about that
No I think there's nothing wrong with this flounder it's like The Lion King film you know it's gonna be realistic I think I don't get the backlash I think it's fine there's nothing wrong with his face
I've seen the flounder CGI that looks like flounder from the animation and it's terrifying I prefer this fish over that it was such a jump scare and it honestly looks monstrous so having an accurate fish is so much better
I guess they're trying to just make him look more realistic but it's like a movie about mummies like it doesn't need to be very realistic that they could've made him look so much better and I feel like they should've done that like they could've they could've just made him look more like the cartoon
So I'm not bothered by the founder's appearance. I mean if you know anything about aquatic life, that's how flounders look. So I get that people think their child is being robbed and everything. But I think at this point Disney is just trying to go for realism as opposed to cartoony stuff. And how flounder looked in the cartoon might not come across as well on screen with a lot extra stuff.