Puss in Boots: A Furry Tail

Puss in Boots: A Furry Tail is a 2011 children's animated film based off a fairy tale with the same name and directed by Darrell Van Citters.

Plot
Continuing where the original Puss in Boots story ends; King John and his Queen are living unhappily ever after. The Queen has kidnapped Puss and hidden him in the dungeon where his only hope is the help of three blind mice. King John is desperate to find Puss to help him deal with Dracul, the evil sorcerer, who is coming to see his brother Demagorgon, whom Puss ate to get their castle.

Why It's NOT A Furry Tail

 * 1) Despite the name, it feels more like a sequel then an original film.
 * 2) The animation is extremely lazy. Zooming in to the character's torsos whenever they walk and their legs are hidden by various objects, the shadows of the princess and the knight talking instead of using their actual bodies, even the sword-fighting scene is awkward and boring. They even zoomed out and show a picture of the castle when Puss' cage door was opening. There is little to no signs of movements in the animation. Not to mention there are only six animators.
 * 3) On that subject, while the character models look decent, they look like rejected Pink Panther characters, even the King looks like Big Nose.
 * 4) False advertising: The cover implies that the film is CGI animated, but the movie actually uses flash-style animation.
 * 5) It's not even visually interesting and it's a huge example of why show, don't tell exists.
 * 6) The characters never. stop. TALKING.
 * 7) The film is just bland in general.
 * 8) Only four locations were used throughout the entire film. Not to even mention the locations look rushed. The colors are off the line-art and looked like an artist had only three hours to draw four locations.
 * 9) The dialogue is unnecessarily long to pad out the running time.
 * 10) Dracul, the supposed villain, is pointless.
 * 11) The voice acting, (with the sole exception of Puss) is not well-done underneath the overcompensating stereotypical French accents.
 * 12) Even the only action scene in the movie doesn't feel exciting, as it’s just looping animation of swords striking each other. Not even some dramatic tension or editing to make it feel more interesting was added, Puss just wins the fight effortlessly.
 * 13) The characters, excluding Puss, are unlikable. The king doesn't do much and sat there for filler, the three blind mice aren't even necessary and Queen Marie is very annoying, acting like a salty wife who is just there for the money, acting horribly to Puss and even King John throughout the film.
 * 14) The jokes in the film feel forced. It comes out of nowhere unexpectedly in dialogue, and not in a good way. Not to mention it doesn't set up the audience for a punchline.
 * 15) It also insults the original Puss in Boots, as its saying that Queen Marie never like the King and only care about the money, and is shown to be in love with the Knight.
 * 16) The pacing is very slow.
 * 17) The sole purpose of this movie's existence, is that it tries to cash-in around the same time as the DreamWorks version of mh:greatestmovies:Puss in Boots.
 * 18) No real climax.

Redeeming Qualities

 * 1) While a rip-off. The art style is great and reminiscent of old cartoons such as Pink Panther, with unique character designs that can distinguish characters from each other and colors that are pleasing to the eye.
 * 2) There are some funny moments here and there.
 * 3) The film is very tolerable. You can sit through it without pausing every 5 seconds.
 * 4) Puss is actually very charismatic and a likable protagonist.
 * 5) The idea of continuing where the original fairy tale ends, does sound interesting.
 * 6) Although this is a mockbuster, it doesn't completely rip-off the DreamWorks film.

Trivia

 * Gaiam also licensed to Hulu, through GT Media, a 1999 independently-made adaptation of the Puss in Boots fairytale, directed by Phil Nibbelink and starring the likes of Micheal York and Dan Haggerty.

Videos
J8I-UUHgV_I tmODjYvROb4