<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FilmJabber Movie Blog &#187; hoodwinked 2</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.filmjabber.com/tag/hoodwinked-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.filmjabber.com</link>
	<description>Movie news, previews, reviews, photos, trailers and opinions from Erik Samdahl.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 04:54:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Will Hoodwinked 2 Be As Bad As the First Hoodwinked?</title>
		<link>http://blog.filmjabber.com/2008/02/27/will-hoodwinked-2-be-as-bad-as-the-first-hoodwinked/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.filmjabber.com/2008/02/27/will-hoodwinked-2-be-as-bad-as-the-first-hoodwinked/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:11:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Erik Samdahl</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hoodwinked]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hoodwinked 2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movie]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.filmjabber.com/2008/02/27/will-hoodwinked-2-be-as-bad-as-the-first-hoodwinked/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Continuing to prove that there is no God, The Weinstein Co. has announced that they will be distributing a sequel to the animated film Hoodwinked!, failing to realize a lack of demand for low-budget, Shrek rip-offs that are about as entertaining as a sack of potatoes that have been left rotting, petrified, then turned to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Continuing to prove that there is no God, The Weinstein Co. has announced that they will be distributing a sequel to the animated film <a href="http://www.filmjabber.com/movie/preview/2242/"><strong>Hoodwinked!</strong></a>, failing to realize a lack of demand for low-budget, <strong>Shrek</strong> rip-offs that are about as entertaining as a sack of potatoes that have been left rotting, petrified, then turned to dust over a million years.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.filmjabber.com/movie/preview/3087/"><strong>Hoodwinked 2: Hood vs. Evil</strong></a> is the lame title of this sure-to-be lame movie, a clear indication from the beginning that one, especially parents with small children, should avoid this film at all costs and probably restrict your children to only watching late night, adult programming television to lessen the risk of them ever seeing a preview full of bad special effects and pathetic humor and potentially wanting &#8211; or even begging! &#8211; you to go see it.</p>
<p>I gave the first <strong>Hoodwinked!</strong> movie a pleasant D+ (read my <a href="http://www.filmjabber.com/movie/details/2242/review/"><strong>Hoodwinked movie review</strong></a>) for a variety of reasons, as seen in such comments from my review as &#8220;<em>Hoodwinked</em> sucks butt&#8221; and &#8220;Unfortunately, it pales in comparison [to <em>Shrek</em>] in every possible way&#8221;. Let&#8217;s not forget these equally Shakespearean quotes: &#8220;The graphics in <em>Hoodwinked</em> are terrible&#8221; and &#8220;The movie isn&#8217;t funny.&#8221;</p>
<p>Sadly, this is what we get when a studio spends $15 million on a film and they get $50 million back in ticket receipts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.filmjabber.com/2008/02/27/will-hoodwinked-2-be-as-bad-as-the-first-hoodwinked/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
