1/10
Not necessary...
17 November 2000
I don't even need to see it to believe it! The whole Rugrats empire has gone too far. A second movie IS NOT necessary at ALL. Here goes... little scaredy cat Chuckie Finster goes to a wedding and gets depressed that he doesn't have a mom (deceased). A brother of the father Chaz calls up and says there's a malfunction at Euroreptarland (a licensed Japanese Godzilla-type "Reptar" theme park in Paris) and make's a mistake, saying that Chaz can bring family and friends (I don't know why they could have settled it all with a nice, long mini-series). That was the cunning way to a plot of garbage. Chaz had an idea that he could find love in gay [not today's meaning :-P] Pareee. All the babies and company go to Paris and get into a typical Scooby Doo situation (Stupid meddling kids...). Two new characters come into view, a new Rugrat, Kimi, and the step-mother of Chuckie, which has yet to be determined. They make a big deal about a minor character instead of a new Rugrat. But hey, I'm only a 12-year-old who loathes many popular cartoons (Pokédie!)) A Rugrats movie is the way to introduce a new character to the show (miniseries...). They have also stereotyped the French enough to call it discrimination. Streetside cafés, monuments (like the dog doing his busines on the Eiffel Tower, ala Big Daddy), the language (like saying Oui, Oui meaning an amber bodily waste), their fashions and appearances, food, etc. etc. What the $%#@ did Nickelodeon do to them? Infiniti thumbs Way, Way DOWN!
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed