Well, as promised, I have a short recommendation for Rise of the Guardians. I say recommendation, because I won't give a full review of it right now. I will give one a month from now, to allow the film to gestate, and allow more avenues of improving the movie to be considered. But, for now, here's some thoughts on it.
Dreamworks seems to have found it's niche. Making movies that Pixar wouldn't consider, making them focused on kids, but not talking down to them.
Rise of the Guardians is no How to Train Your Dragon; it has moments that weaken it, that are more for young kids than higher age groups... But it is still quite fun and enjoyable.
It's rating on Rotten Tomatoes, 73%, sounds about right. It is a solid C movie. Miles ahead of Brave though (another C movie).
If Wreck It Ralph is still in theatres and you haven't seen it, go see it first. If it isn't, and you still want to see an animated movie, Rise of the Guardians is good enough to entertain you.
Children will probably enjoy this movie a lot (along with parents), so I recommend it for families.
Individuals who are looking for a good movie to see and don't care what it is, go see Skyfall or something; unless you are a kid, a parent, or a fan of animation, you won't be as entertained.
However, don't mistake my distant praise of the movie for dislike; I do like it, and I really want it to succeed. This definitely seems like a movie that would make a great series, functioning as Dreamwork's money machine without resorting to idiocy (Shrek series... The Madagascar series...). Hopefully it will also prevent other movies from falling by the wayside (They are planning a sequel to How to Train your Dragon. My hopes are not high, rather they are rife with fear about how they may defile the original movie for me. Similar to how Brave and Monster University did the same with Pixar. But hey, Dreamworks already has a low reputation...).
TL;DR: Rise of the Guardians is good, go see it if you have kids to entertain. If alone with no interest in animated films, don't bother.
This has been Fixer Sue, putting off a review until December.
Reviews, art, comics, and videos by Fixer Sue. A "Fixer Sue" is a character inserted into a story to repair problems seen in the plot line. Usually used by fan-fiction writers to force their one true pairing, I use it to describe what I do in reviews: I don't just say that something could be better, I say how it could.
Friday, November 23, 2012
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
An outsider's view on the Horror genre and Jump Scares
I am not a fan of horror movies. At all. In case it was hard to tell, me favorite movies are Animated, which tend to be adventure, fantasy, or comedy based, never horror. I don't even particularly like blood, so I am not one to nitpick when an animated film lacks realistic battle-damage. But horror... To me it is just a get rich quick scam; film a movie in low lighting with bad editing and almost no story line, where all the budget was placed in gore, and loud noises.
When I ask fans of horror films why they like it, the more eloquent among them will explain that it is the adrenaline, akin to a roller coaster... (coincidentally, I hate roller coasters.)
But, not being a fan of the horror genre doesn't mean I can't understand them. I know how they work. Granted, most of my knowledge comes second hand, but there is more than one conclusion I can draw from seeing people's reactions.
So, I'd like to give an outsider's view on the Horror genre, and the plague that is Jump Scares.
To discuss this topic, I'll be focusing on one series in particular: Slenderman.
Slenderman is a creation of the image boards of the internet, and is known as a "Creepy Pasta." (Origin of the phrase ranges from "Copy Pastea" where something is copied and then pasted repeatedly, to just being a silly name.) It is about a tall, faceless man in a suit with tentacles. Generally he can't be seen, and can only be caught on Camera. When he is on Camera, he causes distortions, and makes editing go awry. He tends to drive those who see him insane, and is followed by other horrors (which I will not cover because I do not know enough about them.) He's basically Cthulhu, but without the wings or maelstrom.
Now, there are two versions of Slenderman: The one from Marble Hornets and Everyman Hybrid, and the one from the video game Slender. These two are distinct for a reason.
First, we'll cover the Slender version of Slenderman. In the game, you have a narrow field of vision, and are going around an enclosed park looking for papers with cryptic phrases about Slenderman. Creepy, and in line with the story... until Slenderman actually appears. Slenderman appears with a scare chord and screen static, in the form of a jump scare. If you continue looking at him, you lose. If he catches up to you and you see him, you lose. He's a bit like the Weeping Angels from Doctor Who, or the Boo's in Mario, but with the reverse (looking at him is bad, looking away is good).
Next, there is the Slenderman from Marble Hornets and Everyman Hybrid, two video series built around the stories. In both video series, a guy or group of guys are creating a movie/tv series, often with stylistic suck. Slenderman in those sometimes appears in the background; not doing anything. There are a couple distortions, but sometimes he just stands there and nothing happens. Sometimes it's even humorous, with one theory being that Slenderman just wants to be in the movie/on TV, especially so in the comedy video "Concrete Giraffes" by the creator of Yugioh the Abridged Series, where Slenderman even speaks and went to college with one of the main characters. But, it's the interpretation that is more interesting here. Is he evil? Or is he Benevolent? We never know, we just have him standing in the background, causing audio and visual errors, doing nothing...
Can you guess which one I have more respect for? The jump scares which are guaranteed to make people scream, or the guy in a suit doing nothing in the background and is sometimes funny?
The Latter. Why? Because you aren't afraid of Slenderman in Slender; you're afraid of the noise, the distortions, and the game over that comes with seeing him. It isn't him you're afraid of. In Marble Hornets and Everyman Hybrid however, while there are jump scares (can't avoid them...) they aren't the reason to fear Slenderman. Nothing is scarier. With nothing you don't know what he's going to do, when he's going to do it, or if he will at all... It is anticipation, foreboding, and the unknown that drives the fear of Slenderman.
I could make the same argument with pretty much any film, tv, or game series, I just chose to do Slenderman because of this fact:
Slenderman is no longer a cult phenomena. He is now mainstream, because of Slender the game. The reason for this, is because of "Let's Players" (people who play video games and commentate on them for entertainment) promoting it, since watching people scream is apparently hilarious. But, because Slenderman is now mainstream, everyone connects it to the game, and not the series... I realize I sound like a complete hipster while saying this, but Slenderman was something that, though I didn't really like, I respected on an intellectual level, and when he became mainstream, I lost that respect. It was no longer a psychological horror akin to the Cthulhu Mythos, it was the jack-in-a-boxes from Elf.
And that brings me to the Horror genre today... It isn't about actual fear, it is about having loud noises and a lot of gore.
"How would you make a horror film then?" a staunch 'horror' enthusiast may ask...
Simple. In the previous post, I mentioned a possible plot for James Bond, where no one was able to open the doors... That is exactly the kind of horror plot that could be done. Take away some aspect of life that we take completely for granted, and there is horror and fear to be found in there. Like what would happen if all the power in the world went out? What if Gravity was reversed? What if all the computers and electronics in the world came to life? It is perfectly possible to make a horror film that doesn't revolve around jump scares and gore; it just takes half a brain and the willingness to make something of quality, rather than feeding the mindless machine that is Horror fans.
This has been Fixer Sue, reminding you that my name means "One who fixes perceived problems."
When I ask fans of horror films why they like it, the more eloquent among them will explain that it is the adrenaline, akin to a roller coaster... (coincidentally, I hate roller coasters.)
But, not being a fan of the horror genre doesn't mean I can't understand them. I know how they work. Granted, most of my knowledge comes second hand, but there is more than one conclusion I can draw from seeing people's reactions.
So, I'd like to give an outsider's view on the Horror genre, and the plague that is Jump Scares.
To discuss this topic, I'll be focusing on one series in particular: Slenderman.
Slenderman is a creation of the image boards of the internet, and is known as a "Creepy Pasta." (Origin of the phrase ranges from "Copy Pastea" where something is copied and then pasted repeatedly, to just being a silly name.) It is about a tall, faceless man in a suit with tentacles. Generally he can't be seen, and can only be caught on Camera. When he is on Camera, he causes distortions, and makes editing go awry. He tends to drive those who see him insane, and is followed by other horrors (which I will not cover because I do not know enough about them.) He's basically Cthulhu, but without the wings or maelstrom.
Now, there are two versions of Slenderman: The one from Marble Hornets and Everyman Hybrid, and the one from the video game Slender. These two are distinct for a reason.
First, we'll cover the Slender version of Slenderman. In the game, you have a narrow field of vision, and are going around an enclosed park looking for papers with cryptic phrases about Slenderman. Creepy, and in line with the story... until Slenderman actually appears. Slenderman appears with a scare chord and screen static, in the form of a jump scare. If you continue looking at him, you lose. If he catches up to you and you see him, you lose. He's a bit like the Weeping Angels from Doctor Who, or the Boo's in Mario, but with the reverse (looking at him is bad, looking away is good).
Next, there is the Slenderman from Marble Hornets and Everyman Hybrid, two video series built around the stories. In both video series, a guy or group of guys are creating a movie/tv series, often with stylistic suck. Slenderman in those sometimes appears in the background; not doing anything. There are a couple distortions, but sometimes he just stands there and nothing happens. Sometimes it's even humorous, with one theory being that Slenderman just wants to be in the movie/on TV, especially so in the comedy video "Concrete Giraffes" by the creator of Yugioh the Abridged Series, where Slenderman even speaks and went to college with one of the main characters. But, it's the interpretation that is more interesting here. Is he evil? Or is he Benevolent? We never know, we just have him standing in the background, causing audio and visual errors, doing nothing...
Can you guess which one I have more respect for? The jump scares which are guaranteed to make people scream, or the guy in a suit doing nothing in the background and is sometimes funny?
The Latter. Why? Because you aren't afraid of Slenderman in Slender; you're afraid of the noise, the distortions, and the game over that comes with seeing him. It isn't him you're afraid of. In Marble Hornets and Everyman Hybrid however, while there are jump scares (can't avoid them...) they aren't the reason to fear Slenderman. Nothing is scarier. With nothing you don't know what he's going to do, when he's going to do it, or if he will at all... It is anticipation, foreboding, and the unknown that drives the fear of Slenderman.
I could make the same argument with pretty much any film, tv, or game series, I just chose to do Slenderman because of this fact:
Slenderman is no longer a cult phenomena. He is now mainstream, because of Slender the game. The reason for this, is because of "Let's Players" (people who play video games and commentate on them for entertainment) promoting it, since watching people scream is apparently hilarious. But, because Slenderman is now mainstream, everyone connects it to the game, and not the series... I realize I sound like a complete hipster while saying this, but Slenderman was something that, though I didn't really like, I respected on an intellectual level, and when he became mainstream, I lost that respect. It was no longer a psychological horror akin to the Cthulhu Mythos, it was the jack-in-a-boxes from Elf.
And that brings me to the Horror genre today... It isn't about actual fear, it is about having loud noises and a lot of gore.
"How would you make a horror film then?" a staunch 'horror' enthusiast may ask...
Simple. In the previous post, I mentioned a possible plot for James Bond, where no one was able to open the doors... That is exactly the kind of horror plot that could be done. Take away some aspect of life that we take completely for granted, and there is horror and fear to be found in there. Like what would happen if all the power in the world went out? What if Gravity was reversed? What if all the computers and electronics in the world came to life? It is perfectly possible to make a horror film that doesn't revolve around jump scares and gore; it just takes half a brain and the willingness to make something of quality, rather than feeding the mindless machine that is Horror fans.
This has been Fixer Sue, reminding you that my name means "One who fixes perceived problems."
Monday, November 12, 2012
Skyfall
... This movie... This is like Brave, but in Live-action. I don't mean storywise, I mean reaction wise... When I first went in and watched it, I enjoyed it, and thought it was a good movie. I'm no real fan of the Bond films, but it was enjoyable. But, after actually thinking on the movie for a bit I realized that there were actually quite a few things that now make me think otherwise...
From this point on, there will be spoilers.
The first thing that gave me pause in the film was when they had the badguy captured, and were trying to decrypt his codes. I don't care so much that their portrayal of hacking wasn't realistic, having a screen display a sort of spider-web of code instead of just thousands of lines of information, rather I care about how they go about decrypting it...They know the villain to be a manipulative bastard, and yet are trying to decrypt the code while being connected to M16. No shit he snuck a code in there to open all the doors! I'm just shocked he didn't blow up the entire building once the code was decrypted!
That's another thing; the villain blows up the office of the head of MI6. He does this by hacking into the building, and turning on the gas... One, why is such a thing connected to the internet? This is not Megaman nt Warrior, we do not have personal AIs to go into machines and kill anthropomorphized viruses, not everything is connected to the internet. Two, why do they have gas anyway? It is the 21st century, we have these things called fans, radiators, heaters... Why would they have gas anywhere but the garage and possibly the weapons lab?
That's another thing also; the villain is a super hacker. He claims at one point to be able to crash the stock market, with just a couple keystrokes. But, he doesn't do that. Instead of being a cyber terrorist, he focuses on hurting MI6 and it's leader... Sure, he has a personal vendetta, but wouldn't the idea of someone's world crumbling around them be better than just menacing them?
Consider this: what if instead of turning on the gas that is connected to the internet for some reason, he controls the doors of MI6? He's shown to be able to open all the doors, so keeping them closed would've been just as easy. Consider how many doors you walk through in a day; what if you were no longer able to open these doors? You'd probably be stuck in a room with no food, and if the room is hermetically sealed with regulated air supply (like there would be in a weapons development area) you'd probably run out of oxygen. That's an idea out of a horror or sci-fi story, yet is entirely plausible when doors can be opened and sealed via a computer.
Rather than Bond trying to find the villain to retrieve a list of agents, it could instead be Bond racing against the clock to free MI6. Meanwhile, the villain is forcing the boss of MI6 to watch as her people die around her, with her powerless to stop it. He wouldn't get his desired "satisfaction" from killing her (really, the dude's a sociopath. after killing her he'd probably just have started setting the world on fire) but he would get to watch her torment.
Changing the plot to that would've removed a lot of the problems revolving around the hacking and the insane planning. It isn't necessarily Bond-like, but it is a more believable plot, with less contrivances.
Speaking of contrivances... At the end, the Boss and some guy we meet in the last 20 minutes are escaping Bond's home, Skyfall (yeah, kind of a let down. Was expecting it to be a botched mission or something... not the name of Bond's childhood home.), and the guy is dumb enough to be waving around his flashlight, as if to say, "Here we are! Come kill us!" Oy...
Oh, and you know that gun Bond gets in all the preivews? one that they make such a big deal about? Bond never fires it. In fact, it is never fired at all. It is a Chekov's gun that fires off by not firing off, as absolutely insane as that sounds. Complete let down. The tiny radio was more useful than that gun...
Oh, to bring this up again (and as a way of showing what the movie did wrong) the list of the undercover agents all over the world, that plot thread disappears entirely after the badguy is captured. It is never brought up again, and never considered. It is a true-blue MacGuffin. A useless item to be sought after simply because the plot demands it.
And just one last note... This movie feels padded by about 30 minutes. This is because the end sequence feels a bit like it is happening after the big climactic battle. The badguy interrupts the hearing about the missing files, and attempts to kill the Boss, only to be stopped by the agents and Bond. There is also a very brief, Blink-and-you-miss-it-but-is-brought-up-later scene where the guy who is going to replace the Boss intercepts the bullet that was meant for her. This entire scene feels like it should've been the end of the badguy, and the wrapping up of subplots... But nope, we need to trek across the country to Bond's old home, so that they can kill him. THEY COULD'VE DONE THE SAME WITH A GAS ROOM AT A REMOTE LOCATION. They didn't need to go to Bond's home to set up a trap! They set up crumbs for the badguy to follow, and he followed them like a lemming! Sure you wouldn't get to kill the Boss that way, but if you're going to contrive circumstances just so that the Boss will die, you could have done so 30 minutes before hand!
One last nit pick... Where does the bad guy hire his goons? Do they have lives, families, friends outside their job? Did he clone them with her computer skills? Why does no one want to explain why the badguy always has mooks?!
*sigh* Skyfall is a popcorn movie. You'll enjoy it while watching it, but you won't want to see it again. If you like Bond films, go watch it. If you enjoy random action like in the Furious 5 movies, go watch it. If you like deep, intricate plots that make perfect rational sense even after watching them, go read Death Note.
This has been Fixer Sue. Don't be surprised if a week from Friday I'm gushing about Rise of the Guardians; also don't be surprised if I'm actually raging about Rise of the Guardians, it could go either way now.
From this point on, there will be spoilers.
The first thing that gave me pause in the film was when they had the badguy captured, and were trying to decrypt his codes. I don't care so much that their portrayal of hacking wasn't realistic, having a screen display a sort of spider-web of code instead of just thousands of lines of information, rather I care about how they go about decrypting it...They know the villain to be a manipulative bastard, and yet are trying to decrypt the code while being connected to M16. No shit he snuck a code in there to open all the doors! I'm just shocked he didn't blow up the entire building once the code was decrypted!
That's another thing; the villain blows up the office of the head of MI6. He does this by hacking into the building, and turning on the gas... One, why is such a thing connected to the internet? This is not Megaman nt Warrior, we do not have personal AIs to go into machines and kill anthropomorphized viruses, not everything is connected to the internet. Two, why do they have gas anyway? It is the 21st century, we have these things called fans, radiators, heaters... Why would they have gas anywhere but the garage and possibly the weapons lab?
That's another thing also; the villain is a super hacker. He claims at one point to be able to crash the stock market, with just a couple keystrokes. But, he doesn't do that. Instead of being a cyber terrorist, he focuses on hurting MI6 and it's leader... Sure, he has a personal vendetta, but wouldn't the idea of someone's world crumbling around them be better than just menacing them?
Consider this: what if instead of turning on the gas that is connected to the internet for some reason, he controls the doors of MI6? He's shown to be able to open all the doors, so keeping them closed would've been just as easy. Consider how many doors you walk through in a day; what if you were no longer able to open these doors? You'd probably be stuck in a room with no food, and if the room is hermetically sealed with regulated air supply (like there would be in a weapons development area) you'd probably run out of oxygen. That's an idea out of a horror or sci-fi story, yet is entirely plausible when doors can be opened and sealed via a computer.
Rather than Bond trying to find the villain to retrieve a list of agents, it could instead be Bond racing against the clock to free MI6. Meanwhile, the villain is forcing the boss of MI6 to watch as her people die around her, with her powerless to stop it. He wouldn't get his desired "satisfaction" from killing her (really, the dude's a sociopath. after killing her he'd probably just have started setting the world on fire) but he would get to watch her torment.
Changing the plot to that would've removed a lot of the problems revolving around the hacking and the insane planning. It isn't necessarily Bond-like, but it is a more believable plot, with less contrivances.
Speaking of contrivances... At the end, the Boss and some guy we meet in the last 20 minutes are escaping Bond's home, Skyfall (yeah, kind of a let down. Was expecting it to be a botched mission or something... not the name of Bond's childhood home.), and the guy is dumb enough to be waving around his flashlight, as if to say, "Here we are! Come kill us!" Oy...
Oh, and you know that gun Bond gets in all the preivews? one that they make such a big deal about? Bond never fires it. In fact, it is never fired at all. It is a Chekov's gun that fires off by not firing off, as absolutely insane as that sounds. Complete let down. The tiny radio was more useful than that gun...
Oh, to bring this up again (and as a way of showing what the movie did wrong) the list of the undercover agents all over the world, that plot thread disappears entirely after the badguy is captured. It is never brought up again, and never considered. It is a true-blue MacGuffin. A useless item to be sought after simply because the plot demands it.
And just one last note... This movie feels padded by about 30 minutes. This is because the end sequence feels a bit like it is happening after the big climactic battle. The badguy interrupts the hearing about the missing files, and attempts to kill the Boss, only to be stopped by the agents and Bond. There is also a very brief, Blink-and-you-miss-it-but-is-brought-up-later scene where the guy who is going to replace the Boss intercepts the bullet that was meant for her. This entire scene feels like it should've been the end of the badguy, and the wrapping up of subplots... But nope, we need to trek across the country to Bond's old home, so that they can kill him. THEY COULD'VE DONE THE SAME WITH A GAS ROOM AT A REMOTE LOCATION. They didn't need to go to Bond's home to set up a trap! They set up crumbs for the badguy to follow, and he followed them like a lemming! Sure you wouldn't get to kill the Boss that way, but if you're going to contrive circumstances just so that the Boss will die, you could have done so 30 minutes before hand!
One last nit pick... Where does the bad guy hire his goons? Do they have lives, families, friends outside their job? Did he clone them with her computer skills? Why does no one want to explain why the badguy always has mooks?!
*sigh* Skyfall is a popcorn movie. You'll enjoy it while watching it, but you won't want to see it again. If you like Bond films, go watch it. If you enjoy random action like in the Furious 5 movies, go watch it. If you like deep, intricate plots that make perfect rational sense even after watching them, go read Death Note.
This has been Fixer Sue. Don't be surprised if a week from Friday I'm gushing about Rise of the Guardians; also don't be surprised if I'm actually raging about Rise of the Guardians, it could go either way now.
Friday, November 2, 2012
Wreck-it Ralph
YOU DID IT DISNEY! Welcome back to the top! We missed you dearly!
Wreck-it Ralph is fantastic! Go see it! If you like video games at all, go see it! if you like animation, go see it! If you like being annoyed by little kids while at the movie, you're insane!
Wreck-it Ralph is expertly written... It is a little slow at the beginning, but after the first 10 minutes or so, it picks up speed and becomes excellent.
This movie... it is a little hard to describe. I want to say it's like Pixar at it's best, but this is better... It's like it broke off from being a film solely for kids, and became something much more enjoyable. I would almost describe it as a Dreamworks movie, but it has a massive amount of heart behind it...
This movie feels like Disney. Disney at it's best.
I can barely find anything negative to say about the film, let alone anything to fix. (Apart from the whole thing about big-names like Sonic and Eggman on covers of the posters, when they only have 30 seconds of screen time at most.) The only thing I can possibly say is that the relationship between Felix and Calhoun feels a bit forced... But that's small potatoes compared to how well all the other characters are written.
Unlike Pixar's Brave, I want to get this movie on DVD & Blu-ray the day it comes out, hell maybe possibly go see this movie in 3D while it is still in theatres.
I know it seems like I should say more, but I don't want to spoil the movie in any way.
This is looking to be a good month; Wreck-it Ralph is brilliant, and Rise of the Guardians is coming out on the 21st. So while people are scurrying to buy all the black-Friday deals, I'll be watching Dreamwork's latest... And because it's black Friday I may even get to have an empty theatre! :D However, a review for it will not appear for a while... You'll see come December.
Though I am so happy to see Disney doing great again, I can't discount Dreamworks too much. One of the previews was a Dreamworks movie I hadn't heard of; The Croods. So far, it looks like Brave's female characterization done right, with Journey to the Center of the Earth done right as well. The best part: the designs. They didn't try to make them be attractive for the sake of being attractive, the characters look more like actual cavemen. Looking forward to seeing how it turns out!
Then there is Pixar... it seems to almost like dragging it's name in the mud now. They are re-releasing Monsters Inc in 3D. The cash cow goes Moo, and then prints money. The only film so far that looks like it has a shadow of a hope for Pixar, is "The Untitled Pixar movie that takes you inside the mind." Set for release in 2015.
Unless that movie is one of the trippiest things ever and just basically goes all out on creating something not seen in animation ever before, there isn't likely to be a winner from Pixar for a couple years... Get off your cash cattle Pixar, and start trying to find your name again.
But, to end on a happier note...
This has been Fixer Sue fanboying over the latest animated movie.
Wreck-it Ralph is fantastic! Go see it! If you like video games at all, go see it! if you like animation, go see it! If you like being annoyed by little kids while at the movie, you're insane!
Wreck-it Ralph is expertly written... It is a little slow at the beginning, but after the first 10 minutes or so, it picks up speed and becomes excellent.
This movie... it is a little hard to describe. I want to say it's like Pixar at it's best, but this is better... It's like it broke off from being a film solely for kids, and became something much more enjoyable. I would almost describe it as a Dreamworks movie, but it has a massive amount of heart behind it...
This movie feels like Disney. Disney at it's best.
I can barely find anything negative to say about the film, let alone anything to fix. (Apart from the whole thing about big-names like Sonic and Eggman on covers of the posters, when they only have 30 seconds of screen time at most.) The only thing I can possibly say is that the relationship between Felix and Calhoun feels a bit forced... But that's small potatoes compared to how well all the other characters are written.
Unlike Pixar's Brave, I want to get this movie on DVD & Blu-ray the day it comes out, hell maybe possibly go see this movie in 3D while it is still in theatres.
I know it seems like I should say more, but I don't want to spoil the movie in any way.
This is looking to be a good month; Wreck-it Ralph is brilliant, and Rise of the Guardians is coming out on the 21st. So while people are scurrying to buy all the black-Friday deals, I'll be watching Dreamwork's latest... And because it's black Friday I may even get to have an empty theatre! :D However, a review for it will not appear for a while... You'll see come December.
Though I am so happy to see Disney doing great again, I can't discount Dreamworks too much. One of the previews was a Dreamworks movie I hadn't heard of; The Croods. So far, it looks like Brave's female characterization done right, with Journey to the Center of the Earth done right as well. The best part: the designs. They didn't try to make them be attractive for the sake of being attractive, the characters look more like actual cavemen. Looking forward to seeing how it turns out!
Then there is Pixar... it seems to almost like dragging it's name in the mud now. They are re-releasing Monsters Inc in 3D. The cash cow goes Moo, and then prints money. The only film so far that looks like it has a shadow of a hope for Pixar, is "The Untitled Pixar movie that takes you inside the mind." Set for release in 2015.
Unless that movie is one of the trippiest things ever and just basically goes all out on creating something not seen in animation ever before, there isn't likely to be a winner from Pixar for a couple years... Get off your cash cattle Pixar, and start trying to find your name again.
But, to end on a happier note...
This has been Fixer Sue fanboying over the latest animated movie.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)