<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<reviews itemIdentifier="FLIP_FROG-FIDDLESTICKS">
  <review>
    <reviewbody>Flip the Frog sings and dances his way into our hearts in this, his first cartoon. That's all, really, but he does it in such a cute and engaging way, surrounded by other cute characters such as an insect band and a piano that plays itself with its front legs. Engaging and cartoony.
Ratings: Camp/Humor Value: ****. Weirdness: ****. Historical Interest: ****. Overall Rating: ****.</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>Meet Flip the Frot</reviewtitle>
    <stars>4</stars>
    <reviewer>Christine Hennig</reviewer>
    <createdate>2005-10-30 15:16:26</createdate>
    <reviewdate>2005-10-30 15:16:26</reviewdate>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>Did you think you could sweep your theft under the carpet by simply censoring mention of it? Below is the review that was deleted by Archive.org:
++++++++
Did the people who copied this article from http://www.toonopedia.com/flipfrog.htm and pasted it here happen to notice the article is COPYRIGHTED?

Did they care?

It's been my experience they don't. (This is not the first time they've stolen from me.) Archive.org has no apparent respect for property rights. My page about unauthorized use of my copyrighted intellectual property (http://www.toonopedia.com/terms.htm) was inspired by an earlier encounter with this den of thieves.

Interestingly, this page does not appear findable through Google. A friend happened to run across it. This makes me wonder how many other articles these people have stolen from me.

Thieves of this sort often feign surprise that anyone would object to their predatory practices. I should feel complimented that they thought my work was worth stealing. Yes, of course, just like a man should feel his taste in women complimented when someone demonstrates that his wife is worth raping.

The ultimate result of this attitude is to discourage excellence. I know very well my work is worth stealing -- I constantly have to deal with thieves like Archive.org. It would be a lot easier to simply do a half-assed job, and hope the people who steal because they're unable to create aren't so badly tempted.

Remove my property from this immediately. If you want your readers to have the benefit of my hard-won expertise and my hard work in applying it to this topic, LINK TO ME. Let them go to MY site, which is AUTHORIZED to carry my work. You may not simply take it for yourself.

I will check back in a few days, to make sure this article has been removed.

And while you're at it, remove everything else you may have stolen from me. Next time I catch you stealing my work, I will prosecute.

Sincerely,
Donald D. Markstein
Sole owner
"Don Markstein's Toonopedia"</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>Theft</reviewtitle>
    <stars>1</stars>
    <reviewer>Donald D. Markstein</reviewer>
    <createdate>2005-11-01 04:39:56</createdate>
    <reviewdate>2005-11-01 04:39:56</reviewdate>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>FLIP is a great one.  It's not funny like a lot of the classic stuff but it has that weird old-timey atmosphere by the ton.  It's fun to have playing in the background.

As for Maksen's review below, who knows what crawled up his butt.  His web site was credited on the description.  What is the difference if someone reads a few words here or at his place?  Toonpedia.com is nice, but it's all based on the work of others.  Does he pay Warner Bros and Disny to use all those pictures of their cartoons?</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>5 stars for the cartoon</reviewtitle>
    <stars>5</stars>
    <reviewer>Landscaper</reviewer>
    <createdate>2005-11-01 11:10:15</createdate>
    <reviewdate>2005-11-01 11:10:15</reviewdate>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>Like many old cartoons, this one has its merits.  I enjoyed it from beginning to end.  However, I did not enjoy the rant from Donald below.  A previous reviewer said it well...did he get permission to show the copyrighted material at his site??</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>Fiddlesticks</reviewtitle>
    <stars>4</stars>
    <reviewer>Danial</reviewer>
    <createdate>2005-11-11 22:49:56</createdate>
    <reviewdate>2005-11-11 22:49:56</reviewdate>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>The one thing I've not seen mentioned with regard to this animated gem is its hilarious punch line.

"MICKEY MOUSE" is PLAYING SECOND FIDDLE at the end of the cartoon.

Gosh, you "grown-ups" can be exasperating sometimes...what with all the anger and spite and for heaven's sake...MISSING the joke and the enjoyment that this bit of celluloid was intended to bring to the planet.

Put on your play clothes and go outside.

You're all driving me nuts.</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>Phenomenal Punch Line for Classical Musicians</reviewtitle>
    <stars>5</stars>
    <reviewer>LindaTeedotcom</reviewer>
    <createdate>2005-11-20 12:21:41</createdate>
    <reviewdate>2005-11-20 12:21:41</reviewdate>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>From what I have been able to figure out Ub Iwerks started off with Walt back at the Micky Mouse era. I find his works to be insperational.

I enjoyed these Animations as I do most of the old traditional animation.

I don't see "micky mouse" in this animation at all. Just a mouse that shares a simmilar apperance, But then how else would you draw a mouse?

As for the Donald Duck and his NASTY temper (scroll through the reviews. You'll find the guy) His site is not very interesting.

Never once did see the animations, or any document (html) linking to ANY animations he claims was skillfully aquired from him.

Another thing that I find hard to understand is his arrogance. Especially when he appears to LACK the understanding Public Domain. Sure he may claim to OWN the works, however once it is in Public Domain it is there WITHOUT copyright. IE: Night of the Living Dead (horror movie) is PUBLIC DOMAIN. YET it is still pressed to DVDs and sold in the Dollar bins at various stores.

(NOTE: I do not claim to understand all the implementations on Public Domain)

So Donald, Watch Out I'll ask my firend Micky Mouse to pull cards from your mouth as you stomp up and down with that flamboyant temper!

Anyways, I hope you all enjoy this amazing clip as much as I do.</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>Great Traditional Animation</reviewtitle>
    <stars>5</stars>
    <reviewer>James D Man</reviewer>
    <createdate>2005-11-24 17:41:53</createdate>
    <reviewdate>2005-11-24 17:41:53</reviewdate>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>The frog is cute, but there's not much plot. A lot of the appeal of the cartoon seems to be "hey look, we can make a frog dance" kind of stuff.</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>Cute but dull</reviewtitle>
    <stars>2</stars>
    <reviewer>kickstand</reviewer>
    <createdate>2006-01-23 09:16:32</createdate>
    <reviewdate>2006-01-23 09:16:32</reviewdate>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>cartoony....</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>ditto christine H</reviewtitle>
    <stars>2</stars>
    <reviewer>samrees</reviewer>
    <createdate>2006-03-18 14:32:53</createdate>
    <reviewdate>2006-03-18 14:32:53</reviewdate>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>I enjoy original, but simple animations from "back in the day". They really show how far toons have come ... from simple hand drawn - frame-by-frame ... to today's use of computers and creation engines.

As far as Don and this being stolen from your site? Well I went to his site and found that the article (written words) are so differant that Don really needs to stop being jealous and realize that the I'Net has enough room for everybody...</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>What Article Don?</reviewtitle>
    <stars>5</stars>
    <reviewer>Da'Judge</reviewer>
    <createdate>2006-11-02 01:46:22</createdate>
    <reviewdate>2006-11-02 01:46:22</reviewdate>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>vcghjcgj</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>Flip The Frog</reviewtitle>
    <stars>5</stars>
    <reviewer>-js.</reviewer>
    <createdate>2006-12-11 21:48:38</createdate>
    <reviewdate>2006-12-11 21:48:38</reviewdate>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>1930 kids were probably highly entertained by this one - sound, color and animation on film were all pretty much in its infant stages, and the whole spectacle of the thing must have been delightful.
As for us 21st-century jaded types, all we can say is, "Isn't anyone going to SAY anything?"
This film plods along even in comparison to a Silly Symphony, and adding the presence of a too-familiar-looking rodent (one that surely raised Iwerks' ex-boss' eyebrow) doesn't add anything.
Historically, it's a keeper; aesthetically, you're better off with "The Skeleton Dance".</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>Seen it...okay, what's the fuss?</reviewtitle>
    <reviewer>Meester_Fonnyboy</reviewer>
    <reviewdate>2008-07-18 00:53:50</reviewdate>
    <createdate>2008-07-18 00:53:50</createdate>
    <stars>2</stars>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>It's an okay cartoon ... a classic period piece where cartoons were used to promote music ... think early MTV...but 11,000 downloads last week? Someone must be hot-linking to it. There is better animation than this one in the archive: the Fleischer Superman cartoons, for starters.</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>Why does this stay in the top 10 downloads?</reviewtitle>
    <reviewer>LeGrande</reviewer>
    <reviewdate>2009-03-11 03:35:29</reviewdate>
    <createdate>2009-03-11 03:35:29</createdate>
    <stars>3</stars>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>Doesnt the theme song sound JUST LIKE Alfred Hitchcock Presents???</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>the theme song</reviewtitle>
    <reviewer>Freebmovies</reviewer>
    <reviewdate>2009-07-17 15:08:12</reviewdate>
    <createdate>2009-07-17 15:08:12</createdate>
    <stars>3</stars>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>Very few particularly creative ideas. Doesn't feel as though they tried particularly hard and just relied on the fact that it had sound. Disappointing.</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>Quite poor</reviewtitle>
    <reviewer>somebodyatthedoor</reviewer>
    <reviewdate>2010-07-24 20:52:44</reviewdate>
    <createdate>2010-07-24 20:52:44</createdate>
    <stars>1</stars>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess you're around 50ish, possibly older, and completely unfamiliar with how the internet works.

You see, people submit content to archive.org, the content is checked as best it can be, to ensure it is public domain, and then put on with the provided description. It is not up to archive.org to ensure that someone didn't steal the description from someones cartoon fanpage, that, however large, contains far less information than what is available on wikipedia.

Archive.org does not make money from your silly little description of Flip the Frog, and only a complete jerk would really think of someone lifting a brief description like that as "stealing".

Get a life.</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>Dear Donald Markstein...</reviewtitle>
    <reviewer>IanKoro</reviewer>
    <reviewdate>2010-08-27 13:21:54</reviewdate>
    <createdate>2010-08-27 13:21:54</createdate>
    <stars>4</stars>
  </review>
  <review>
    <reviewbody>Great historically important cartoon. 

Marky Marksteinbrennerberg, You should consider it a compliment that your "Markinally"-informed review snippet was ever included here to begin with.

Yes it's true they should have asked. But you were "raped" over this, you say? Comic books, your life? 
Stop cheapening both you sniveling mama's boy, maybe create something instead of thinking yourself and expert on the creations of others.

Did I say...

GREAT TOON!</reviewbody>
    <reviewtitle>GREAT HISTORY Screw Donald Markstein-berg</reviewtitle>
    <reviewer>angroid</reviewer>
    <reviewdate>2010-12-28 14:02:14</reviewdate>
    <createdate>2010-12-28 14:02:14</createdate>
    <stars>5</stars>
  </review>
  <info>
    <num_reviews>16</num_reviews>
    <avg_rating>3.50</avg_rating>
  </info>
</reviews>

