Karry Best movie of this year hands down!

Lollivan It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Kodie Bird True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

Gary The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

example123456789 The rules of the modern animated show: 1-cheap flash animation, 2-unlikable characters, 3-annoyingly hysterical actions, 4-crass humor. And even Mickey Mouse, the most charming of all cartoons, the Charlie Chaplin of animation, sold his artistic soul to follow the trend of the worst empty era of cartoons history(2010-).Now, I love absurd shows like Dexter's Lab, Cow & Chicken, Ren & Stimpy, but just like any show after 2010, even this Mickey series tried to copy their modern and "subversive" style. The problem, anyway, is not the act of copying, but the way one does it: this Mickey series is just a carbon copy of that Cartoon Network humor and irony, and adds nothing. Watching this series there's nothing, NOTHING more; and that's why it doesn't even feel genuine in its gags and situations: it's so mechanically based on others already seen style that every time I guess exactly what will happen: the gag, the facial expression.. everything. It's really just a mechanical copy, with no Disney touch(with no touch whatsoever). I remember the old days: nobody had a more perfected and developed identity than Disney and its shows, even when they modernized themselves; but it's clearly not the case anymore. The point is simple: if this show had not characters with the look of Mickey, Goofy, and Donald in it, nobody cared to watch it.PS: Goofy from this series is one of the worst character of cartoon history

Aviana Zepplin (avizepp) My sister and I have been a fan of Mickey Mouse ever since we were young. When this first aired , I used to have very little interest in it. And after watching a few of the Mickey Mouse Shorts, I started to be interested in it.At times, the humor is funny, but sometimes not. The storyline for each episode is interesting and cool. And the characters are likable.From what we have today such as the stupid "I didn't do it" show, Mickey Mouse Shorts is one of the best shows/shorts in 2010-2015.(P.S: My sister's favorite episode is "New York Weenie", while I like "No Service")

Mitchell McRae I don't understand why. But maybe it was they thought it was too long? Well in the previous review I mentioned I agree completely with the other three hated it reviews. While I don't think this show is quite as bad as Shake it Up or Dog with a Blog it's still awful. It's at least better than the horrible shows Nick has been giving us since 2008 but it's still awful. And it's boring. And I mentioned last time I hate how this is rated higher than Gordy even though Gordy is so much better! If it were up to me the rating for this show would switch with Gordy's. Because come on people. Gordy was adorable and heartwarming. I mentioned last time if you think Gordy sounded dark well many of Disney's movies have dark parts. I named a few examples but does IMDb think I went on a tangent or something? I don't know, I'm trying to make sure they accept it this time. Long story short I hate this is rated higher than Gordy or Teletubbies and I already reviewed both explaining why both deserve higher. And Liv and Maddie has the same as Rabbids Invasion at TV.com. I don't know why. I'd be like if they rated SpongeBob the same as Breadwinners. But then again SpongeBob has awful episodes too but I think I went on a tangent about that too. I give this show a three because it's not as bad as Shake it Up or Dog with a Blog or any show on my list Worst new Nick shows since 2008. OK, this about it for me this time I don't want this review rejected. But to conclude I agree this is not a good show and I even didn't like the commercials for it. Whereas when I saw the commercials for Liv and Maddie I saw potential. So yeah I give this show a 2.75/10 and Liv and Maddie 9.75/10 because Liv and Maddie is so much better! And so's Teletubbies which I rate 8.75. That wraps this up please accept this IMDb this time!

MartinHafer One reviewer for this show clearly hated it. They describe it as 'despicable, detestable, deplorable desecration of Walt Disney's early works'. I can certainly understand WHY they felt that way, as the animation style is NOTHING like the classic Disney characters and it seems pretty cheap at first. And, I can certainly understand WHY they felt this way because the characters were doing many things that would make Walt spin in his grave like a rotisserie. Imagine having episodes with a zombie Goofy, Mickey and Donald trying to hide their nudity, dogs urinating, bites being bitten off Mickey's ear and a lot of very un-Disney-like violence!! It IS shocking and I could see how a purist would blanch at such things. However, I am NOT a Disney purist. Sure, I love the old cartoons but will quickly admit that Mickey's old cartoons were awfully sanitized--a bit too sanitized if you ask me. Rarely did Mickey have any sort of edge--that was left to Donald and, sometimes, Goofy. But here, Mickey is a rather impish character--more like you'd see in the very, very early Mickey cartoons and not the sweet and 100% wholesome guy you'd see in the 1930s to today! While the art style takes some getting used to, I can look past the cheap look. More importantly, as I sat and watched these cartoons during a recent Disney cruise (where they pipe them into the rooms), I found myself laughing louder than I ever have before with a cartoon. Imagine blending a bit of "Ren & Stimpy" with Mickey--that is what you'll find in "Mickey Mouse" (2013). I love them and want more!