"Fauna" wrote:[QUOTE=Daichi;76728]Obviously not.
...Over the freakin' Hedge? This is going to be the worst family comedy ever.
Yeah, part of me wishes they had someone out to see what we're saying, and maybe stop that Tanner thing. Seriously, naming this man "Dr. Tanner" not only makes him a lame, watered-down westernization (is "ten-mah" so hard to say?), but he now reminds me of Full House. EEK.
"Dragonrider1227" wrote:But as I said before, we've got a series about a little boy who flies around in his underwear so I don't think the pantie thing is a real issue![]()
It is when it involves little girls and dozens of creepy otaku with scanners. Like Daichi, I too ran into some scary Uran stuff.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but that would be there anyway. The core intention for having little girls like Uran drawn that way is innocence. It's not thier fault some sickos decide to take it another way. And my point still stands that the main character is a 9 year old boy constantly appearing in tiny underwear but a little pantie flash is the problem? And as for the Dr. Tanner thing, yeah, it's a dumb name and didn't need changing but as they say, "What's in a name?"