0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 100 votes, average: 0.00 out of 100 votes, average: 0.00 out of 100 votes, average: 0.00 out of 100 votes, average: 0.00 out of 100 votes, average: 0.00 out of 100 votes, average: 0.00 out of 100 votes, average: 0.00 out of 100 votes, average: 0.00 out of 100 votes, average: 0.00 out of 10 (0 votes, average: 0.00/10)

Charlie’s Mother-in-Law ()

4.9 (32)
  • Country:
  • Genres: ,
  • Release: 1963-04-16
  • Director: Paul J. Smith
  • Writers: Al Bertino , Dick Kinney
  • Language: English
  • Stars: Grace Stafford , Grace Stafford , Paul Frees (1920–1986) , Paul Frees (1920–1986) , Paul Frees (1920–1986) , Nancy Wible
  • Runtime: 6 min
  • Awards: N/A
  • AKA: Charlie's Mother-in-Law , Charlie's Mother-in-Law (United States of America)
  • Plot: IMDb user tvam is right! This is a super awful short! It is a complete waste of money, a complete waste of talent, a complete wast of time and a complete waste of celluloid! Now I know you people who are reading this are thinking, is he going to do it. Answer: Yes! Because back by popular demand, it is time for "Matthew Rants!" So I saw this cartoon as a kid and I did not enjoy it. I saw it nine years ago dubbed in Portuguese (via YouTube) and it is still awful! It starts out as the Mother-in-Law nagging at Charlie to do some chores and stuff and out of annoyance he wants to get away from her and go fishing with his friends, but no matter what happens, it backfires. When he hid in a piano, it was zipping down the hill and down the road and he runs into a policeman and he asks him about why is he speeding. Charlie said that he wants to get away from the Mother-in-Law. He doesn't believe him and when she arrived, she starts nagging at the policeman, he covers his ears and lets out a big yell of quiet so she can shut up and now he believes the long-suffering bear. As a result, he gives her a ticket and Charlie comes out clean. What's wrong here. First of all, the story is awful and predictable. I mean it is so predictable that you don't need a crystal ball to tell me about what will happen next. When Charlie's plans will go wrong, when the mother-in-law is going to abuse him, when the policeman is going to yell, ad nauseam. While the animation and design is trying to cater to kids who watch UPA and Hanna-Barbera, the bad story is trying to bring out some sort of sexist message on woman-bashing. While the villain is the Mother-in-Law, the policeman (or policebear), treats her like garbage. When the Mother-in-Law starts giving him flack, she was babbling her long loud lecture that is sounds like a tape-recorder being played in high speed. Whoa! What is this social commentary?! I think this was made in a time when the Sexual Revolution of the 1960's was going on back the then until the 1980's. It was awful back then and it is awful today! What is with all the yelling, crashing, destruction and gender bashing?! Just because you are using sound, that doesn't need you have to be loud and obnoxious for the sake of being obnoxious! Sometimes the mind desires peaceful and quiet things it needs a break. It is like taking too much of something you forget about the things you like to take, it becomes like alcohol! Anyway, this cartoon along other ones made by Walter Lantz Productions fail to hold the test of time. This is because they were mega predictable, super boring and ultra anger inducing. Stick to Looney Tunes. If IMDb has a rating lower than one it would have that it would have that rating. Bottom line: just avoid it.
  • IMDB:tt0147979
Buy Charlie’s Mother-in-Law Poster

Charlie’s Mother-in-Law Cast · · · ALL

Charlie’s Mother-in-Law Stills (0)

Add Stills