I was very excited when I first heard about this movie since the actors are pretty good and the plot sounded excellent, the way it was all carried out is not that good. The characters, even though they are played by very good actors (Sigourney Weaver!) lack substance and I found myself unable to relate to them. They are not unique in any way and they are not the kind of characters that I will remember a month from now in any way.The lines are not catchy and I couldn't find a single line in the whole movie to catch my attention. There are even parts when the lines are kinda corny and that ruins the whole bad ass attitude the movie is trying to display.

(may contain minor spoiler).i wasn't exactly impressed with this animated film,although the idea(that the scales of good and evil in fairytale land become unbalanced and the fairly tales don't work out the way they're supposed to)was interesting.however,it falls apart somewhere in the execution.i came dangerously close to being bored.there were only three reasons i didn't fall asleep.the voice talents of Andy Dick as Mambo,Wallace Shawn as Munk,and especially Sigourney Weaver as the Evil Stepmother.there were a few amusing moments with Mambo and Munk,and Weaver was perfectly cast.otherwise,the movie was pretty tedious.for me,Happily N'Ever After is a 4/10

to my surprise, many people give it a low mark. I like it very much. Why don't we accept a different story? Why Cinderalla must be a very beautiful girl with long hair? why prince must be a strong brave man? Why do we treat everything according to the standards we are taught? We actually have choices. I wonder why people don't like it, just because it tells a new story, without a brave handsome prince nor a beautiful hot Cinderalla. In most times, people have a negative attitude to new things, just like this movie. That's the reason why we need creativity. Years later, they will find that they are wrong.I adore the screenwriter a lot, because not every one has courage to write a sooooooooooo new story. To a movie, story is first, high-technology is the second, stars are the third. I don't know why Shrek is a hit. It's also an original movie. No handsome actor, only ugly Shrek, neither charming princess, only a fat ugly female-monster. But it got a good ticket box. The same story here only get a lower mark. Funny!

On the same day that I watched "Happily N'Ever After", I also watched "Howl's Moving Castle". If you read my user comment for that movie, you'll see that while I liked it overall, I had a few minor problems with it. However, I kind of regret saying anything bad about "Howl" after watching "Happily N'Ever After" afterwards.Where to start with this movie? How about with the look of the movie. This is one of the UGLIEST animated movies I've ever seen. The colors look dark and drab, even when the action is taking place outdoors in the middle of the day. The design of the characters and backgrounds is extremely lazy. It looks like it's from a low-budget kiddie TV show instead of feature-film material.The script is just as bad as the look of the movie. While there are a couple of mildly amusing witty lines, apparently the screenwriter and the director thought that characters screaming and running around while spouting wisecracks would be entertaining. As you might have guessed, this was a bad decision. While I did have some sympathy for the character of "Rick", the other characters from Cinderella to her evil stepmother were unlikable and/or uninteresting.After seeing this movie, I am stunned that a sequel (released direct-to-video) to this movie has been released. This means that this movie actually was popular enough to warrant such a thing! We are approaching the apocalypse, people.