Editorials

Is Lionsgate the Worst Animation Distributor?

lion01
(If you like what you see, you can go to camseyeview.biz to see more of my work on video game reviews, editorials, lists, Kickstarters, developer interviews, and review/talk about animated films. If you would like, consider contributing to my Patreon at patreon.com. It would help support my work, and keeps the website up. Thanks for checking out my work, and I hope you like this editorial!)

Back in August 2015, Lionsgate, the distributors of the popular Hunger Games films and the production company behind Orange is the New Black on Netflix, released an animated film called Shawn the Sheep Movie. This was a stop-motion animated film by Aardman, the masters behind stop-motion animation. The film was a critical success, with anyone who saw the movie loving it from head to toe. Unfortunately, it didn’t do financially well, which is a huge shame since it’s a freaking good movie and deserves the pleasure of watching it. So, you would think the next step for Lionsgate would be to look for some of the best animated films to help get them into theaters. What were their next products, in terms of animation? They put out Norm of the North, the worst movie/animated movie of 2016, pushed out The adventures of Panda Warrior, a horrifyingly-terrible-looking CGI animated film from China that is a rip-off film of Kung Fu Panda, and released into theaters The Wild Life, yet another mediocre-looking CGI animated film that may look better than Norm of the North, but will be just as bad. They are also going to distribute a couple of more Alpha and Omega films straight to the DVD bargain bin pit of fire where they belong. Did I miss something here? Why is Lionsgate pushing out these, quite frankly, horrible wastes of money? Say what you want about the quality of the animated films from Sony Pictures Animation, at least they aren’t the worst things of all time. You don’t even need a focus group to know that these projects are dead-on-arrival. It’s gotten so bad that I decided to label them the Anti-GKIDS. Why? Let’s find out.

lion02

So, let’s start with the good company, GKIDS. This New York-based film distribution company has been getting their name out there for distributing the highest quality foreign-animated films that have all gotten Oscar nominations like The Secret of Kells, Ernest & Celestine, When Marnie Was There, Song of the Sea, A Cat in Paris, Chico and Rita, Boy & The World, and The Tale of Princess Kaguya. What do all of these films have in common? Well, GKIDS makes sure to pick out the best of the best, and won’t just choose to bring something over just because they can. They have a reputation to uphold, and they will only pick films that will reach their high quality standards. Sure, we still get some great films not from GKIDS, like the upcoming Long Way North from Shout! Factory, and The Boy and the Beast from Funimation, but my point is that GKIDS and some other companies do try to keep a level of quality in what they bring over.

lion03

Lionsgate, on the other hand, is one of the many problems as to why animation in film form is not taken seriously. Who in their right mind thought Norm of the North was a film that people wanted to see in theaters? Who at Lionsgate thought it would match up to the films by other studios? It’s a straight-to-DVD schlock title that somehow got to be in more theaters and got more attention than some of the best films of this year. Heck, Sausage Party had a smaller budget than Norm of the North, and was a solid movie. Lionsgate even thought this film would be popular enough to spawn two more 45-minute long sequels. Like, really? A film where no effort was put into making it coherent and good-looking to be popular enough to be a franchise? Yeah, people complain about the Ice Age movies coming out still, and while I will get to those around Christmas time, they at least have great animation and a few decent characters worth investing into. Lionsgate has this mindset that just because it’s animation, people will like it, without thinking why we loved these animated films in the first place. Did we love Zootopia because it was a bunch of animated animals in clothes? No! People fell in love with it because of its witty writing, engaging story, and likable characters. We didn’t fall in love with Kubo and the Two Strings because it was stop-motion. We fell head over heels for it because it was an animated film that treated the audience like they had brain cells, with an engaging story, incredibly entertaining characters, a mature tone, and very impressive stop-motion action sequences. No one fell in love with Norm of the North, because it was a condescending, horribly animated, cynical, ugly, insulting, pompous pile of garbage that was made by people who had no freaking idea what they were doing. It doesn’t help that a few months later, Lionsgate announced that they were releasing a straight-to-DVD film called Adventures of Panda Warrior, with Rob Schneider also attached as the lead character.  Boy, if they released this in theaters, they would have been torched alive, and anyone attached to it would have been blacklisted for bringing this film over in the first place. Why would they think we would want to see a Kung Fu Panda rip-off that has the graphics of an original PlayStation game, and acting that had no effort put into it? I mean, by sweet pink lemonade, Adventures of Panda Warrior looks like an unfinished college project that somehow got into stores. Just because the public sometimes makes questionable choices in what films to support, doesn’t mean that they are incredibly stupid, Lionsgate! People are smarter than what your focus groups make them out to be.

lion04

Sure, their newest animated film that they are distributing with Summit Entertainment, The Wild Life, doesn’t look as terrible, but it still looks horrid compared to Disney, Pixar, DreamWorks, Blue Sky Studios, and Illumination, and its dialogue and characters look and sound grating. You can even look up the voice cast, and it’s mostly voice actors, which is nice since it’s a film not relying on huge stars, but it doesn’t look good for them either to be attached to this trainwreck. As much as I know that it’s not going to be good, and early reviews are not kind to it, I’ll give it a fair shake (review coming soon).

lion05

So, what should Lionsgate do to improve upon their incredibly horrible animation track record? Well, they can actually put quality into what films they greenlight or bring over. Be like GKIDS or Shout! Factory where they pick and choose what they bring over. Do not greenlight focus-grouped or higher-up requested films, because I assure you that they will not be good and you will look like soulless blithering wastes of air. They can also cancel all Alpha & Omega straight-to-bargain bin sequels, because no one likes them, and while you can like them, you can’t tell me or anyone that they are good movies. I dare you to tell me how they are good movies.

lion06

As far as I know, Lionsgate is indeed the worst animation distributor in Hollywood. No effort, no quality control, they think the movie-going audience is stupid, and they keep making or distributing films, with the rare exception, that no one asked for. Blue Sky might be too scared to tell Fox that they don’t and shouldn’t make another Ice Age sequel, but at least they have made some interesting movies, and a truly good movie with The Peanuts Movie. Sony Pictures Animation might be shooting itself in the foot constantly, but at least there is a certain charm and creativity to the films they make and release.  I will be sure to say that Lionsgate did a good job if they do distribute something as good as the Shaun the Sheep Movie, but that will be quite the wait. Maybe they will learn their lesson, but I highly doubt it at the rate they are going.

Was It Really Our Fault For The Death of 2D Animation?

fault01
(If you like what you see, you can go to camseyeview.biz to see more of my work on video game reviews, editorials, lists, Kickstarters, developer interviews, and review/talk about animated films. If you would like, consider contributing to my Patreon at patreon.com. It would help support my work, and keeps the website up. Thanks for checking out my work, and I hope you like this editorial!)

Around the mid-2000s, 2D animated films were struggling, with a majority of the flops coming from Disney and DreamWorks. This was when their 2D animated films were not bringing in waves of delicious greenback bills, and were instead being critically panned, and flopping/underperforming. This list of films include Home on the Range, Brother Bear, Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas, Treasure Planet, Atlantis: The Lost Empire, and you get the idea. The only 2D animated films that were doing really well during this time period were the films made by Studio Ghibli, like Spirited Away and Howl’s Moving Castle. When Home on the Range and Sinbad came out, both Disney and DreamWorks told the world that 2D animation was not a profitable way of filmmaking anymore, no one was seeing 2D animated films, and the new profitable form of animation was CGI-animation. This was essentially throwing 2D animation under the bus. So, was it really the public’s fault that 2D animation was dead? Is there a reason Europe and the rest of the world is keeping it alive and not getting wide releases? Well, let’s talk about what was going on around this time period.

fault02

On one side of the spectrum during the early to mid-2000s, the only financially/critically successful animated films that were being made were of CGI, and Pixar and DreamWorks were leading the charge. This was when we were getting films like Shrek 2, Finding Nemo, and The Incredibles. All of these films were critical darlings, and are pretty fantastic films. On the other spectrum, you were unfortunately getting Disney and DreamWorks 2D animated films that were not doing well with audiences and the bank. Like I said above, the 2D animated films were not making enough of a profit, and were getting critically panned at the same time. Sure, you would get a film like Lilo & Stich, Emperor’s New Groove, and Spirits: Stallion of the Cimarron, but those films were few and far between in terms of being successful 2D animated films. The point is Disney and DreamWorks were losing money, and the only thing that was bringing in the cash besides their live-action films were their CGI animated films. Not to say that each CGI animated film during this period was a success, since this was when DreamWorks was trying to compete with Disney/Pixar, but the numbers and money talked.

fault03

So, does this mean that 2D animation was 100% dead? Of course not! Even if Disney, Pixar, and DreamWorks were moving toward full-on CGI animation, due to the masses leaning more to CGI animation by overall audience appeal, there were a few studios and directors that were passionate or really stubborn about Hollywood’s sudden lack of 2D animation. This was when we were getting a lot of the Studio Ghibli films brought over by Disney, like Spirited Away, Howl’s Moving Castle, and Porco Rosso to name a few. Other directors like Sylvain Chomet gave the public The Triplets of Belleville, one of the best pieces of 2D animation around, and was a critical and Oscar winner. Japan has a multitude of amazing animated films during this time period, and even today we have incredible 2D animated films, like the late Satoshi Kon’s Paprika, Mamoru Hosoda’s Wolf Children, The Boy and the Beast, and Summer Wars, Makoto Shinkai’s The Garden of Words, and of course, Katsuhiro Otomo’s slew of films like Steamboy, and anthology project, Short Peace.  Europe has been rocking the 2D animation, with films from France, Spain, Scotland, and other areas including Song of the Sea, The Secret of Kells, A Cat in Paris, Phantom Boy, Ernest & Celestine, The Illusionist, Nocturna, Wrinkles, and Chico and Rita. Even Disney came back with two 2D animated films, with The Princess and the Frog and Winnie the Pooh. Sure, they didn’t break a gigantic amount of bank, but I love that Disney at first was going to do one 2D film, then a CGI film, and go on like that until they went full-on CGI animated. Even Brazil gave us Boy and the World, one of the most visually amazing films, not just animated films, I have ever seen.

fault05

 

So, if 2D isn’t technically dead, since the rest of the world and the indie scene are treating it with the respect it deserves, then what really killed it? Well, it’s actually pretty obvious and simple. There is no reason to go into a college-based philosophical journey for the answer. Really, it’s the Hollywood machine, and the studios’ fault for killing off 2D animation.

fault04

Yeah, I know it sounds like a hipster thing to do, and blame the bigwigs for killing off a style of animation, but it’s quite frankly the truth. So, during the mid-2000s of 2000-2005 or so, what were the companies releasing during this time that was 2D? This was when Disney was releasing films like Atlantis: The Lost Empire, Brother Bear, Treasure Planet, Lilo & Stich, Emperor’s new Groove, and Home on the Range. On top of that, this was also the tail end of their Straight-to-DVD fling, where they released a bunch of mediocre sequels to their popular Disney films. I’m sure you can find merit and something positive to say about certain elements of these films, but they were really scraping the bottom of the barrel in terms of quality with these straight-to-DVD flicks. DreamWorks on the other hand only released about two 2D animated films, with one being a hit, and the other causing the infamous “2D animation is dead” quote with Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron and Sinbad. Now then, we’ve got our suspects from the 2D side of things from both companies, what went wrong with the studios making these films? After watching them recently, with the few exceptions that I have mentioned above, the rest feel like movies that were ruined by the higher-ups putting their focus-grouped hands into the mix. Films like Brother Bear, Sinbad, Treasure Planet, and Atlantis: The Los Empire could have been incredible movies, but what you get are films with bits and pieces of greatness and things to like, but then have to get past the elements that are distracting or not very interesting. Most of the time, the biggest blunder these films made was within its dialogue. When the characters talked like they were part of that time or setting, it was great and engaging. You felt like you were there with them. However, when the modern dialogue, Disney whimsy, and hip lingo pops into time periods where it isn’t remotely appropriate, and is only put there because some idiot higher-up thinks everyone would like it, it’s frustrating. It’s like they couldn’t fully stay invested in their own tones. If you want to be dark in Atlantis, then you need to keep the mature tone, and not throw in so many side characters, humor, and a weak bad guy. How much better could Brother Bear be if he didn’t turn into a bear and he was kept just as a human? I could say all of this with the other films like Treasure Planet and Sinbad. These studios, for the most part, would rather throw someone or something under the bus to avoid the honest truth that they made a bad movie that no one wanted to see, or have to admit that they were trying to cater to the lowest common denominator, and it wasn’t working. Oh, and was anyone really asking for Home on the Range? I mean, really?

fault06

Yeah, I don’t buy that 2D animation died because people stopped caring about it. I think it died because studios here in the states kept giving us films that either couldn’t stay in the tone they set out for, higher-ups got their meddling hands into the pie, or were just terrible movies. Luckily, with the huge success of films like Zootopia, The Secret Life of Pets, Finding Dory, and the animated films distributed by GKIDS, animation has become a huge success during 2016, where with a few exceptions; a mass majority of the 2016 big Hollywood flicks are not panning out. Sure, you could argue it’s just the summer movies, but I feel like the animated films and indie films have been getting more of the spotlight and praise. Hopefully, this means that the bigger companies can try and come back to 2D someday, but due to how current Hollywood is run, it will probably take some time. Just remember, it’s not always your fault Hollywood made a stupid mistake. Thanks for reading, I hope you liked the article, and see you all next time.

In Defense Of: Home


(If you like what you see, go to camseyeview.biz to see more of my work. If you want to, consider contributing to my Patreon at patreon.com/camseyeview.biz. Thanks for checking my site out, and I hope you enjoy the article!)

Recently, it’s been really hard to respect and feel good about Dreamworks. Sure, Kung Fu Panda 3 is a huge success, but you then remember how hit-or- miss this studio honestly is. From trying to compete with Disney/other studios, to doing their own thing, you would think DreamWorks would just do what they do best. Unfortunately that isn’t the case, due to their recent financial issues and having to lay off 500 employees because of bad investments and projects that didn’t rake in the cash. It really doesn’t help when they have films like Home. This 2015 film was DreamWorks’ only animated film of the year that just screamed “Dreamworks auto pilot.” It’s not a great movie, and has annoying characters, horrible pacing, some areas of the film feeling manipulative, pointless celebrity casting (there was no reason to hire JLO for the movie), and it feels like a moocher to the popular Despicable Me franchise. Even with the positive elements I am about to find for the film, I still don’t recommend this movie. So, let’s get started!

The animation is not horrible

Even with their worst movies, the animation from DreamWorks is still leagues better than what usually comes out during the year from the really bad third-party films. While it is not as good as DreamWorks’ Kung Fu Panda or How to Train your Dragon, it’s still solid enough to not be the worst problem about Home.

The ending can be a tad touching

So, basically, the entire plot of Home revolves around aliens known as the Boov, who are taking over Earth to escape from the “bad guy” aliens who are chasing them. One of the Boovs, played by Steve Martin, through a “misunderstanding” took something that was pretty important to the “bad guy” alien race. The twist is that the thing Steve Martin took was actually an egg case filled with the last of the “bad guy” aliens’ next generation. Seeing the interaction between the “evil” alien and Sheldon from Big Bang Theory (I know he has a name, but the actor is basically doing his character from the “hit” TV show) is touching. With a lot of the scenes being undone by the film’s horrible pacing, Home actually has one nice scene.

Rihanna’s character

Let’s face it, the characters in this movie are either annoying or really forgettable. I don’t remember their names or personalities. If they actually made a movie with likable characters instead of trying to be like Minions, then we would have a much better movie. And that’s a bad thing, since this film has Steve Martin in it! How do you mess up a movie with such a funny individual! Still, if there was one character that stood out because it was a solid child character, it would have to be the lead female, voiced by Rihanna. Even though I feel like the design and age of the character doesn’t fit her voice, Rihanna played the most competent and investment-worthy character in the film. She was smart, creative, funny, tough, didn’t hide from the danger, and has some softer moments concerning her being separated from her mother. She was the best thing about this movie and I wish she wasn’t stuck in this bad story.

Interesting color pallet

While this is kind of a backhanded compliment since the film still doesn’t look color-wise in a lot of ways, I do respect DreamWorks for using more pastel hues for the colors of the aliens. Again, while this doesn’t fix or redeem the film, at least they tried something that everyone else wasn’t doing.

With the recent buyout from Comcast, let’s hope they make sure DreamWorks doesn’t try to make another film like this again. Sure, the film has some tender moments and a few jokes that work, but overall, I found this film to be boring unless you have really young kids. While it might not be as super-cynical as Shark Tale, this is easily one of their three worst movies alongside the third Shrek movie. Please, DreamWorks, get back to being consistently good. Enough of the quantity-over-quality and trying to chase trends! If 2013 to now has shown you anything, it is that your current philosophy is not working. Please, just do amazing movies!

Hit-or-Miss Movie Predictions: Rock Dog


(If you like what you see, you can go to camseyeview.biz to see more of my work on video game reviews, editorials, lists, Kickstarters, developer interviews, and review/talk about animated films. If you would like, consider contributing to my Patreon at patreon.com. It would help support my work, and keeps the website up. Thanks for checking out my work, and I hope you like this review!)

Welcome back to Hit-or-Miss Movie Predictions! This is where I give my first impressions of upcoming animated films, and point out the good, the bad, and the interesting. In the end, I shall predict if it will be a hit, a miss, or something different altogether.

When I started these editorials talking about upcoming movies, these were never meant to be a set-in-stone prediction. How many times have we seen a movie or played a game that we all thought would be a failure, but then turned out to be amazing, or films that should have been amazing, but then became failures? Anyway, these are just my thoughts and opinions on the upcoming animated films and I am not making instant predictions. Even if the film is just asking for snap judgements like DreamWorks’ Trolls or Lionsgate’s upcoming The Wild Life, which we will talk about at a later date since they are both trainwrecks just asking for snap judgments. With that said, let’s get going with today’s impression of Rock Dog, a CGI animated film collaboration between China and Reel FX studios, the same studio behind The Book of Life. What do I think of this upcoming flick? Well, let’s find out! If you want to form your own opinion, here is a link to the trailer!

Animation/Art Direction

To be frank, this looks a lot better than what you would think of a Chinese-funded animated film, since so many that come out of the country look really bad in terms of theater-quality animation. Rock Dog actually looks pretty solid. The textures and some of the animation seen in the trailer could be better, but the overall presentation looks theater-quality enough to not get the “the animation looks like a made-for-TV/direct to DVD” criticism when it comes out. I think that’s because the two Chinese companies that are making this film, Huayi Brothers and Mandoo Pictures, outsourced the animation to be done by Reel FX, the same studio that made The Book of Life and Free Birds. It’s an interesting situation since most companies would rather outsource their projects to foreign companies to do all the heavy lifting. Anyway, in terms of the art style shown off in the trailer, it appears good. At least it looks different than the DreamWorks and Pixar rip-offs that are coming out.

Humor

Just going off of the first trailer since future trailers love to show off that there are in fact potty humor-style jokes (which are stupid), the humor seems more down to earth. Nothing too lowbrow, but I won’t be surprised if there was one crude joke slipped into the whole film that doesn’t work. It seems like this film is more about telling a story, and not trying to cram in jokes every five minutes. I’m down for a film that wants to be good harmless entertainment in the humor department.

Story

The plot revolves around a Tibetan mastiff named Bodi, voiced by Luke Wilson. After obtaining a radio that fell from the sky, he becomes obsessed with music. This doesn’t go over well with his father, Khampa, voiced by J.K. Simmons who wants Bodi to be the next village guard. Bodi decides to travel to the city to find a super popular artist named Angus Scattergood, voiced by Eddie Izzard. While this is all going on, a wolf named Linnux, voiced by Lewis Black, decides to take advantage of this situation by trying to kidnap Bodi so he can take over Bodi’s home village. Can Bodi realize his musical destiny, or will Linnux win out?

Casting

While not the biggest named cast, the overall list of actors they got for this film is still solid nonetheless. The cast include Luke Wilson, Eddie Izzard, J.K. Simmons, Lewis Black, Kenan Thompson, Jorge Garcia, Mae Whitman, Matt Dillon, and Sam Elliot.

Concerns

Well, for one, it seems like it’s going to come out when Illuminations’ SING comes out, which is another animal-oriented movie with a major theme of music. Granted, Rock Dog at least looks less cynical that SING. And yes, I will be talking about SING when another trailer is released, but so far, I’m not impressed. I just worry that Rock Dog is going to be overshadowed by another film that probably won’t be that good in the first place, which has happened to a lot of movies, like Kung Fu Panda 2 and any film from GKIDS. Also, I wonder how people feel about a Chinese-funded film starring a character from Tibet. I don’t know, maybe I’m looking too much into that element.

Prediction: Unknown

I really don’t know where this one will go. I can see it being an honest-to-goodness good movie, or a harmless underwhelming flick. That is more than I can say for what Lionsgate has coming out this year coughs The Wild Life coughs. Another high point for this film to succeed is that the director, Ash Brannon, has worked on hit movies in the past in different areas of development in films like Toy Story, A Bug’s Life, Over the Hedge, and was a co-director for Toy Story 2 and Surf’s Up. Who knows, all we can do is wait and see once Rock Dog is released later this year.

Hit-or-Miss Movie Predictions: Zootopia


(If you like what you see, go to camseyeview.biz to see more of my work. If you want to, consider contributing to my Patreon at patreon.com/camseyeview. Thanks for reading!)

Welcome back to Hit-or-Miss Movie Predictions. This is a series of first impression articles covering the newest trailers on animated films, and breaking down the good or bad that the trailer offers.

Disney has been on a streak of critically acclaimed movies over the past seven years now. Sure, some were more well received than others, but overall, they were good movies. It’s interesting to see that their next film, Zootopia, does take a few more risks than past films. First off, it’s one of the very, and I mean very few Disney animated films that use humanoid animals, the other two being Robin Hood and Chicken Little. Anyway, if you want to see the trailer for yourself, I will make sure to hyperlink it here. Now then, let’s break down the impressions.

 

Animation/Art Direction

I mean, this is Disney after all, you shouldn’t expect anything but great animation, with visually pleasing worlds and expressive characters. Like I said above, it’s interesting to see Disney do another film with human-like animals like in Robin Hood. It all looks fantastic. I also love the little visual jokes, like the hippos playing volleyball with giraffes, or the rhino cop fist-bumping the little bunny cop, and how the fist literally pushes her. It’s a film that was allowed to be creative and open-minded with its designs and world.

 

Humor

Unlike the humor you see in that piece of garbage Norm of the North, Zootopia seems to love its satirical take on society, and has a lot of visual gags with the animals they chose use. I already listed the volleyball match above, but it seems like a film that has jokes in the foreground, and in the background. Some jokes were predictable like “MR. Big” is actually a tiny animal, but most of the jokes and gags seen in the trailer and clips made me smile.

 

Story

Ginnifer Goodwin plays Officer Judy Hopps, a newly hired cop in the city of Zootopia, a city where prey and predators live together in peace. However, not everything is as peaceful as everyone thinks. An incident is causing certain predators to go crazy. While trying to solve this case, she teams up with a foxy con man named Nick Wilde, voiced by Jason Bateman. Can they solve the crime and save Zootopia?

 

Casting

Personally, I like the casting. Disney and Pixar always seem to get casts that fit the characters, and not just pick the biggest celebrities right now because they have the most buzz or are super popular. Zootopia’s cast includes Jason Bateman, Ginnifer Goodwin, Idris Elba, J.K. Simmons, John DiMaggio, Nate Torrence, Jenny Slate, Mark “Rhino” Smith, Tommy Chong, Octavia Spencer, Maurice LaMarche, and many more. I think the only one that stands out as “ we got her on name value alone”  is Shakira, who plays Gazelle, a pop star that is famous in the city of Zootopia. Kind of feels like they missed an opportunity in making her an animal based on her name, like a shark and calling her Sharkira. I guess I’ m slowly growing to say bad puns and dad jokes.

 

Any concerns?

For as much as I like the moral of the story that they are advertising, “don’t stop and keep on pushing no matter what”, I am concerned this film will be predictable. We have seen these kind of buddy cop comedy films before, and while I still want to see the movie, I don’t want to go through the film already knowing when something is about to happen. I wonder if Disney will put any creative spins on the overall film and tropes that are in this feature.

 

Prediction: Hit!

If this was Disney in the mid 2000s, I would have been more cautious, but since this is current Disney, and their past few movies have been great, I have no doubt that this will be a good, if not simply entertaining movie. It seems to take advantage of its set-up and how all the characters are animals. We will have to see next month if this film will be successful. I hope it is, since I want to see Disney do more than just princess films. Not that their other upcoming film, Moana doesn’t look amazing, but Zootopia seems like an interesting film, which I guess was probably greenlit due to how much money Disney made from Frozen. Still, I hope Zootopia is good!

Hit-or-Miss Movie Predictions: Kubo and the Two Strings


(If you like what you see, go to camseyeview.biz to see the rest of my work. If you want to, consider contributing to my Patreon at patreon.com/camseyeview. Thanks for reading my article! I hope you enjoy it!)

Welcome back to Hit-or-Miss Trailer Predictions, which will now be called Hit-or-Miss Movie Predictions! This is where I give my first impressions of upcoming animated films, and point out the good, the bad, and the interesting. In the end, I shall predict if it will be a hit, a miss, or something different altogether.

Out of all the studios I have yet to talk about, I have surprised myself that I haven’t talked about Laika. I mean, I should since they are the only ones making stop-motion animated films that really do push the envelope of what can go into a film aimed at all ages. Don’t fret though; I will review their work in the near future. For now, let’s talk about what is quite frankly, my most anticipated animated movie of 2016, Kubo and the Two Strings. Let’s get started with the impressions! Oh, and here is a link to the trailer if you want to watch it for yourself!

Animation/Art Direction

There is no doubt in my mind or anyone’s mind that this is one heck of a beautiful-looking movie. I mean, these individuals at Laika have made some visually impressive movies in the past, and they seem to get better and better after each film. The film’s look just hits all of those moods of delightful, ominous, and weird. You can tell how much love and effort Laika put into their movies, which is leagues more than most third-party studios, even studios like Dreamworks.

 

Humor

I will say, and probably say again in the future, that the comedic aspects of Laika films have always been hit-or-miss with me. For every joke that works, there is one that doesn’t. It definitely depends on the film itself, since I found the jokes in Paranorman to work better than the ones in The Boxtrolls, but my point still stands that the humor is not consistent. Of course, I realize that humor is subjective. It seems like the humor is taking more of a backseat in this film, and I am all for it. Granted, you can probably see one of the jokes coming when they introduce George Takei’s character in the trailer, but overall, it seems like the humor will be more subtle or not as heavy in this movie. I do hope I’m right though, I would hate for something this atmospheric and beautiful to be riddled with bad comedy.

 

The story

Kubo is a young boy who lives with his mother in a village. One day, a spirit from the past releases an age-old vendetta, and causes mass chaos with gods and monsters invading the land to get Kubo and his powers. Kubo then sets off on a journey to obtain a magical armor his father wore to save the land.

 

Any concerns?/Casting

Let’s talk about the elephant in the room, the voice cast. Listen, I can probably guess why they made these casting decisions, but it’s 2016, so this is kind of awkward. With the recent Oscar controversy and the Gods of Egypt casting problems, you would think Hollywood would have been more…cautious with the casting. Not that the actors this film hired are bad, because they aren’t. George Takei, Ralph Fiennes, Charlize Theron, and Matthew McConaughey are not bad actors at all. The problem is that in a film that is heavily inspired by Japanese folklore and mythology, they only hire two Asian actors. I’m sorry, but you can’t tell me this isn’t a bit tone deaf in terms of casting.

Now, with that being said, I can probably understand why they got so many recognizable actors. My guess is that due to stop-motion being a hard sell for some reason, they promised to get some big actors who are popular right now. It’s a shame that Hollywood thinks you can’t make an animated family film in any other form than CGI. I think the acclaim films like Song of the Sea, Ernest & Celestine, and Laika’s other films proven that other animated art forms are still amazing and can lead to great products, but I digress. It just seems like it’s a bummer that they couldn’t find some other great Asian actors that could have fit some of these roles perfectly. Now, of course, if the actors do a good job immersing themselves in their characters, then that is a good thing, but like I said, it is 2016, and to have only two Asian actors in a film that is heavily leaning on themes of Japanese mythology, it’s hard not to notice this.

Another interesting fact is that Laika has made two films in a row with a male lead. Why not make the lead a female? I can understand if by the end, if the main lead isn’t an interesting character, then the gender wouldn’t change anything, but I wonder if they will make another movie with a female lead again, as in Coraline.

 

Prediction: Hit!

Now, whether I think the casting is a big deal or not, I do feel like the film will be a critical hit! To me, Laika hasn’t made a bad movie. Some of their films might have better elements than others, but so far, not one is what I would consider to be an official dud. I think if you have enjoyed their other films, then you should definitely go out and see this movie when it’s released in theaters later this year!

The Negatives: Frozen


(If you like what you see, go to camseyeview.biz to see more of my work. If you want to, consider contributing to my Patreon at patreon.com/camseyeview. Thanks for reading, and I hope you enjoy the article!)

Welcome to The Negatives. This is where we look at the critically acclaimed films from Disney, Dreamworks, and Pixar, and, well, point out their problems.

For In Defense Of, we looked at one of Disney’s biggest failures with The Black Cauldron, and I found some positive elements of the film. This time, let’s take a look at one of Disney’s biggest moneymakers of all time, Frozen. Now, even though we are about to look at the negative aspects of the film, I do want to say that I really do like this movie. Not as much as everyone else, but I still loved watching it. It brought a certain spark of Disney love back into me after my being so cynical about the company for years. However, over time, I have thought more critically about the film, and while I love Frozen, it really does have some flaws. Let’s get started!

 

The villain was weak!

Now, to be fair, I started off with this negative opinion, since in some ways, the villain, Hans, voiced by Santino Fontana, does work. Hans could represent the consequence of Anna being too outwardly social and trusting due to being inside a castle for so many years. It’s the reason why you shouldn’t be super-social and trusting of everyone, since some people out there are willing to hurt you and do things you don’t want to do. However, I think everyone could have seen this plot twist coming from the very beginning of the film. About 20 minutes into the movie, you hear Han’s father mentioning his plans for taking over the kingdom that Anna and Elsa rule. It’s not very original, and I feel like they didn’t really need a villain, since the main focus of the film is on the relationship between Anna and Elsa.

 

The Rock Troll song in the final third

You know how the song from the gargoyles was really distracting in Hunchback of Notre Dame? It was during a point in the story where the stakes were high and at that point, you were enthralled with the drama. Too bad that gargoyle song just ruins the entire mood and didn’t need to be in the film. That is how I felt about the song from the Rock Trolls in the final third of the film. This is after Anna was slowly freezing over. The male lead took her to see the Rock Trolls to try and cure her. Sadly, this leads into a song that really didn’t need to be in the film. It’s like “Hey! Anna is dying! Can you stop singing for a freaking minute, and try and save her?!” Granted, in the end, they couldn’t do anything to cure her, but they could have said that before breaking out into a song that ruins the mood and heartbreak of seeing one of the film’s main characters dying! At least Olaf’s song was amazing since he was so blissfully unaware of his fate if the sun hit him. Not to mention it was probably made to take a jab at annoying side characters.

 

Not really based on the source material

So, this film is very loosely based off the classic story, The Snow Queen. Why base Frozen off The Snow Queen story, when you barely do anything with the original story? Why not actually make a dark fantasy film? Dark fantasy films can work like The Dark Crystal. It is rather tiring that Disney, while they have been making good movies these past few years, will not do straight-up adaptations. It would be so nice for them to not think of how marketable this can be, or how many toys they can sell. Heck, that piece of CGI garbage The Snow Queen film at least hit elements of the original story more than Frozen, and I think Frozen is the better movie! They can at least say not “based on” and instead say “very loosely based on”.

 

Being overly marketed and commercialized ruined its charm!

When Frozen came out, it was a huge hit, and it was like, “Finally! Disney is back on track with good movies!” Not that they didn’t hit gold with the films leading up to Frozen, but still. Sadly, after Disney saw how hugely successful the film was, they tainted it with commercial tie-ins, putting the film back in theaters multiple times, and it resulted in all that charm and good graces that Disney got back, being now gone. It was overplayed, hyped-up to be the Citizen Kane of Disney films, and it was way too much. I really enjoyed it the first time I saw it, but that love shrunk slightly because of business. I know Disney is a company, and at the end of the day, it is all about making that bottom dollar, but at the same time, they should know when too much is, well, too much.

Like I have said many times, I do like this movie. Would I put it in my top 5? No. What about top 10? Well, maybe. I am glad it did well, and I am curious to see how they would do a sequel. I don’t think they should, but that’s just me. Well, next time we will be going back to In Defense Of, and I think it’s time to poke at Dreamworks. However, we might have to go a long way from Home to find something positive. Thanks for reading!

Hit or Miss Trailer Predictions: The Angry Birds Movie


(If you like what you see, you can go to camseyeview.biz for more of my work. If you want to, consider contributing to my Patreon on patreon.com/camseyeview. Hope you enjoy the article!)

Welcome back to Hit or Miss Trailer Predictions. This is a series of first impression articles covering the newest trailers on animated films, and breaking down the good or bad that the trailer offers.

For the past couple of years, you couldn’t go anywhere without seeing something Angry Birds related. I, for one, am with the crowd that is getting sick and tired of it. If you think that isn’t true, then maybe the hundreds of layoffs of employees from the developer behind the popular franchise should be another reason to show people’s constantly losing interest in flinging birds at pigs. Now, of course, the franchise got to be so popular that they had to make a movie. Cut forward to 2015, and we have our first official trailer for the film that is coming out next year. So, what are my thoughts/predictions? Well, let’s break down everything. If you would like to make your own assumptions on the upcoming film, check out the trailer and tell me what you think!

 

Animation/Art Direction

Besides seeing iconic characters have arms and legs, the film actually looks good. Like I said, it’s strange to see the birds and pigs have limbs, but you quickly get used to it. I also like the fluid animation and the fast-paced humor. I know neither of those things are new or original anymore, but I think for a film like this to work, it needs to channel what made The LEGO Movie and Hotel Transylvania work. Have fast animation and jokes, but balance it out with heart, and a story with likable characters. I also love how colorful everything looks. It’s as if you stabbed a rainbow and let it all bleed out onto the CGI models.

 

Humor

While some of the jokes in the trailer fell flat for me, like the yoga skit with Josh Gad’s character, I found myself smirking at the rest of them. Sure, the jokes might not be original, and you can have predictable stories, characters, and maybe some jokes, but it’s all in the execution. Like I said, I found myself liking some of the jokes, for example when you first meet the bad guy, and the main lead having to deal with the little bird kicking the ball against his house.

 

Story

So, basically, there is this island where all these birds live, and a few individual ones have, well, anger issues or some kind of tick to them. One day, out of the blue, a ship arrives and out come these individuals called pigs. No one knows why they are there, and three birds, Red, voiced by Jason Sudeikis, Chuck, voiced by Josh Gad, and Bomb, voiced by Danny McBride decide to investigate why the pigs, led by one who is voiced by Bill Hader, are on the island. I think this movie will need to be clever since the game the film is based on didn’t really have a story. Hope it is clever, anyway.

 

Voice Cast

Honestly, I like this voice cast. You could tell that the company making this film, Rovio and Sony Entertainment, had the coin to bring in some actors that include Jason Sudeikis, Josh Gad, Danny McBride, Peter Dinklage, Keegan-Michael Key, and a few other actors. It’s interesting to note how many of these actors are from sketch comedy backgrounds. I think that will work in the film’s favor, due to how they can work off one another.

 

Any last minute good/bad comments?

I am not the only one thinking this, but I do think the film is a year or two too late. Instead of coming out when the franchise was huge, they instead come out when the popularity of the franchise is dying. I wonder if Rovio, the company behind the franchise, is basing all of their bets on this one film. Granted, a few bad business decisions have made Rovio go on a downward slide, but still.

 

Prediction: Unexpected Hit?

 

I am going to go out on a limb for this film and say it’s going to be an unexpected hit. I mean, look at what happened with The LEGO Movie or the recent Peanuts film. So many people thought they would crash and burn, but came out to be good movies. Granted, I won’t be surprised if Angry Birds ends up not being a good movie, and fails in the box office, but who knows. I just have a little more faith in this film than say, Norm of the North since there is actual effort put into Angry Birds. Now, how much effort that is, will show in the film’s story, characters, and acting. However, like I said above, this film does seem like it’s coming out too late. Don’t let me down, Angry Birds. I’m putting some of my faith into your film! Let’s me say this. This will be much more faithful in terms of an adaptation than freaking Jem and the Holograms.

In Defense Of: The Black Cauldron


(If you like what you see, go to camseyeview.biz for more of my work. If you want to, consider contributing to my Patreon at patreon.com/camseyeview. Thanks for reading, and I hope you enjoy the article!)

Welcome to the first edition of “In Defense Of…” This is where I write an editorial covering a couple of positive elements of Disney, Dreamworks, or Pixar films that were negatively reviewed or downright panned by the critics and audiences.

Pop quiz time! What do you get when you have a big budget, take seven years to make a movie, and then release it in 1985? Well, you get what is widely known to be Disney’s biggest flop in terms of an animated film, The Black Cauldron. Most people these days are more familiar with the huge financial and critical Disney flops like John Carter and The Lone Ranger, two infamously horrible movies that did incredibly poorly at the box office. Not United Passions flop, but it did so badly that it was beaten out by The Care Bears Movie. Think about that for a moment, a film so bad, that another mediocre movie did better. The Black Cauldron put the studio into major jeopardy, which was luckily saved by the likes of The Great Mouse Detectives, Oliver and Company, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, and of course, The Little Mermaid, which started the famous Disney Renaissance of the 90s.  So, with all of this failure behind the movie and its development history of last-minute changes, is there anything good/redeemable for this movie? Well, yes. I think there are a couple of good elements, and apparently, I am not the only one who thinks so, since the film is now getting a cult following. Let’s begin! Oh, and spoilers!

 

  • The beautiful animation

During this time at Disney, they were pretty much reusing a lot of their animation from past films like The Jungle Book, 101 Dalmatians, Snow White, and so on. It made the films feel cheap, and while I like movies like Disney’s Robin Hood, it felt like they were doing this because the films took a long time to make, and they wanted to save a lot of money. However, from what I have seen, The Black Cauldron is 100% original animation. No rehashes. It also looks good with the smooth movements and, during the death scene of the villain, very detailed. It’s a good-looking movie. It’s just a shame so much money went into the animation, but it had a mediocre story.

 

  • The Villain/Villain Death

While you can argue that there isn’t much to this villain, The Horned King is one of the most intimidating villains in Disney’s cannon. It doesn’t hurt either that he is voiced by famous actor John Hurt. There is something really unsettling about him from his design to the raspy voice. I bet for the kids that saw this movie, The Horned King gave them nightmares. On top of that, his villain death is probably the most graphic out of any Disney film. At the end of the movie he is forcefully pulled in to the titular Black Cauldron. His skin peels and tears away from him, and his bones turn to dust as he is pulled into the cauldron kicking and screaming. It’s gruesome, if you couldn’t tell.

 

  • The Atmosphere

The movie lacks in a lot of elements, but The Black Cauldron has some great atmosphere at some points. The film makes you feel like you are in this grungy fantasy world, where there is no hope among the human and creatures that live there. Sure, the immersion sometimes comes to a halt when you have to deal with some of the pointless side characters, but when the film is quiet, you feel fully inside the film’s world.

Unfortunately, even looking at all of these positives, this is easily one of the weakest Disney films I have ever seen. Its story is thin, the characters are either forgettable or annoying, the ending is underwhelming, and for all the money and time put into the film’s animation and marketing, you would think this would have been great. I guess it also doesn’t help that The Black Cauldron is based off a series of books. I don’t know, I feel like if they made the characters more interesting and not have the many Disney tropes, the film would have at least been solid. They probably should have gone full-on dark fantasy. I’m fine with you if you like it, since as I listed, there are good elements. It’s just not personally my favorite Disney film. Well, I hope you all enjoyed this because we are going to next time do a companion piece to In Defense Of with The Negatives, where we take a look at the negatives of the most popular/widely acclaimed Disney, Pixar, and Dreamworks movies. So, since we looked at one of the worst Disney disasters of all time, how about we look at Disney’s recent Golden Goose with Frozen? Thanks for reading!

Hit or Miss Trailer Predictions: Capture the Flag


(If you like what you see, you can go to camseyeview.biz for more of my work. If you want to, consider supporting my Patreon on patreon.com/camseyeview. Hope you enjoy the article!)

Welcome back to Hit or Miss Trailer Predictions. This is a series of first impression articles covering the newest trailers on animated films, and breaking down the good or bad that the trailer offers.

When you watch a trailer for a movie, you want to make sure what you see is easily translatable to the normal moviegoer. You want them to know the set-up, the characters, and maybe throw in a few jokes/action sequences to fill up the trailer. Basically, you don’t want to confuse the moviegoer with what kind of story your movie is telling. Apparently, no one told that to the individual who edited the English trailer for Capture the Flag, a Spanish-animated film being directed by Enruique Gato, who you might know as the director of Tad the Lost Explorer. Definitely off to a good start, aren’t we? (Once again, notice my sarcasm). Let’s get to it. Here is a trailer for the film, and you can make your own conclusions.

 

The Animation

Honestly, the animation doesn’t look terrible. This film seems to have a bigger budget for the animation department than many other foreign CGI animated films, and it doesn’t look as clunky as say, Tad the Lost Explorer or The Snow Queen. It still doesn’t look as good as anything Disney or Pixar releases, but you can tell they put a little more effort into the overall presentation.

 

The Story

Unfortunately, this is where I have the biggest problem with the trailer; the story looks to be all over the place. Capture the Flag seems to have four different movies in one. You have a surfing movie, a ‘kid trying to bring his family back together’ movie, a space flight movie, and then a family-oriented sci-fi movie at the end. It should never be this complicated. For example, you watch the trailer for Ernest & Celestine, one of my all-time favorite films, and the trailer shows off an offbeat/quirky friendship that the two characters make, and one that their respective societies don’t think should happen. It’s easy to get into, and you aren’t confused by the end of it. Capture the Flag just looks confused in what it wants to be.

 

Art Direction

I honestly don’t have much to say about this part of the film. It has a generic Pixar-style look. It at least looks better than Snow Queens or Legend of Oz: Dorothy’s Return.

 

Humor

This is sadly another part about which I don’t have a lot to say. The humor sounds generic, and I’m not saying this film needs to be laugh-out-loud hilarious, but it would help if the writing was better, and I couldn’t see the jokes coming a mile away. Or, just make the writing more charming.

 

Any last minute good/bad comments?

Capture the Flag sounds like it’s trying to be hip and ‘with it’. With all the surfing and terms like “dude” being used, this would have been more fitting, even if still dated, if it relwased in the 90s. It reminds me again why films like How to Train your Dragon, Toy Story, Beauty and the Beast, and Song of the Sea work. Just be your own thing, and not stress out about being modern with the young kids. Remember, the kids who are seeing this are probably being taken by their parents. Entertain both!

 

Prediction: Critical Miss Maybe?

I feel like this film will probably be a critical bomb on release here in the states, but who knows. It could be like Dreamwork’s Sinbad film where it tries too hard to be for the younger crowd, but still has all of those elements that make any Sinbad film fun to watch. I’m glad to see the animation is better than most, but if they would just dial back on the pandering, take out a few of the plot elements, and be a more relatable or stable film, it would be much better. I don’t think Paramount, Capture The Flag’s distributor, has a huge hit on their hands, but we will have to see.

Hit or Miss Trailer Predictions: Norm of the North


(If you like what you see, you can go to camseyeview.biz for more of my work. If you want to, consider supporting my Patreon on patreon.com/camseyeview. Hope you enjoy the article!)

Welcome to Hit or Miss Trailer Predictions. This is a series of first impression articles covering the newest trailers on animated films, and breaking down the good or bad that the trailer offers.

For whatever reason, animation studios want to take that next big leap into making  fully featured films, even if they really, and I mean really, don’t have the man power, talent, technology, writers, or budget to do so. I know you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover, but when you see something like the trailer for Splash Entertainment’s Norm of the North, directed by Trevor Wall, and set to release on January 15th, 2016, what else are you going to think but “boy, this looks terrible” and other probably harsher variations of that same comment? This is probably going to be one of the biggest flops of 2016. Sure, it’s not fair to judge a film entirely on its trailer, but, well, just watch the trailer. Let’s begin!

The Animation

Good gravy, the animation in this film is horrible. It’s cheap, stilted, and the movements of all the characters don’t look natural. I know this is being made by a smaller studio, but that doesn’t excuse it for having bad animation. I don’t think this would be such a big deal if this was straight to DVD, but it’s going to be released in theaters. Yeah, the same format that you see Inside Out, Kung Fu Panda, Frozen, The LEGO Movie, and Shrek 2, apparently needed something that looks like CGI from 1996 in 2016. Even then, if this film did come out during 1996, it still would have looked terrible compared to the original Toy Story. Another big problem with the animation is how none of the voices sync up with the lip movements. It looks like something from an early Godzilla dub.

The Story

Basically, Rob Schneider plays the main character named Norm. Norm is a polar bear that doesn’t want to kill and eat meat, which would pretty much have him die of starvation if this was real life. In this story, humans end up coming to Antarctica. Apparently they want to move there because a corporate sleazebag wants to make one of the coldest parts on earth a living society. It is up to Norm and his three lemmings (lemmings don’t live in Antarctica, by the way) to go to New York and convince the humans not to move there. First off, no one, and I mean, no one wants to move to a frozen wasteland.  You can put as many mini-malls there as you want, no one is realistically going to move there. I shouldn’t have to nitpick the plot elements from a trailer, but I can’t help it!  The set-up for the film bothers me so much because of how boring, soulless, and terrible it all is.  Even more confusing, where the heck did the seagull in the trailer get glasses, and the caribou get a full-on poker table and deck of cards? Why does the bear and his lemming friends who are basically the Penguins from Madagascar need to be dancers in New York? Who is thinking that Antarctica is a great living area? Are people in New York not afraid that a large polar bear is walking around? Why the heck is there an obviously forced environmental message? Again, if I’m picking apart the trailer, that does not bode well for your movie!

Art Direction

The art direction is ugly. It’s so poorly designed that it looks like an unfinished version of the Despicable Me human designs. Nothing looks good, and seems incredibly cheap. Heck, a majority of the terrible-looking GOYA award-winning films that aren’t really that good to begin with, are much better-looking than Norm of the North. Either the studio didn’t have the budget, the technology, or they lacked the talent to make this film attractive.

Humor

Remember how bad the puns/jokes were in The Nut Job? They are comedy gold compared to the jokes that you could catch before they were thrown at you in the trailer. It feels like, once again, the writers thought of the bare minimum of what kids would find funny, instead of having clever writing that you would find in films like Up and Inside Out. I have talked about this before in my Tad the Lost Explorer review, write your films to include everyone! Don’t alienate the adults/teens that are probably taking the children to see this!

Acting Talent

Rob Schneider is the main character. I could just stop there, and I pretty much should, but I can’t. Schneider has never been box office gold. Why did they think that he could be leading role material? Personally, he has never been funny or that great of an actor. I am sure he is a nice guy, and I’m sure he is doing this because of his controversial tweet he made last year that lost him his State Farm gig, but man, he does not have the comedic talent to make this film good. Speaking of other actors, why did famous comedians Gabriel Iglesias and Ken Jeong think this was a good project? Heck, both Iglesias and Jeong are funny and popular individuals. Why not have those two as the main characters?  Though, if we are going to be honest, no actor can save this movie.

Any Cynical Comments?

A trend that we have seen in a lot of bad animated films is where they use a popular but over-played  year-old pop song for marketing. It’s an even bigger sign when you see that the song doesn’t even fit the film’s tone. For this example, the trailer for Norm of the North use Talyor Swift’s Shake it Off. Not only does it not fit, but it makes the film look…confused. Is it an environmental film? Or is it about Norm showing that standing out is okay, and just ignoring what the haters have to say?

Got anything good to say?

Nope. I’ve got nothing good to say about this movie.

Prediction: Miss/Critical/Financial Bomb

Yeah, I have no faith in this film doing anything, but bombing. I wouldn’t have been so harsh if this was a direct-to-DVD film. It still would be terrible as a movie, but at least the poor quality made sense. Sadly, this film is coming to the big screen. This means it needs to be up-to-par with movies I have mentioned throughout this article. Just because you want to be on the big screen doesn’t mean you should be! This film has no right to be in theaters. I can’t believe Liongate, the distributer, thinks this is a film that warrants your time.  I mean, they would think it’s worth your time because they put its release in January, which we all know is the best time to put any movie in theaters (note my sarcasm). Basically, Norm of the North will be the reason why no one goes to theaters in January.

Introduction Post!

Hello everyone! Welcome to The Other Side of Animation. Now, what is this you might ask? Well, let me ask you a question. You have all probably watched or read about award shows for films and TV shows. These are your Golden Globes, your Oscars, the Razzies, and you get the idea. Now then, you ever see the awards that go to the best animated features/shorts? You see the nominations and they are usually filled with films from Pixar, Disney, and Dreamworks. You then see one or two nominations for films that you have never heard of. My reaction when I see that is, “Wait! What’s that movie?” These are the films that you always see get limited theatrical releases before awards season, and always get overlooked and ignored by the mass public since Dreamworks, Pixar, and Disney are much bigger names. Unfortunately for those people that have never heard of these smaller films, they are usually of higher quality, depending on the year they were released. For example, during the 2014 Oscars, I thought Song of the Sea was a superior film compared to Disney’s Big Hero 6, but since no one saw Song of the Sea, Big Hero 6 was obviously the winner due to Disney and Marvel being behind it and the common moviegoer being more familiar with those titles than the team behind Song of the Sea. Not that there is anything wrong with something like that since I still liked Big Hero 6, but you always would like something to spice up the mix a bit and see the bigwigs of the industry share the space with some newcomers.
My goal for this site is to review/talk about animated films that are not by the likes of Dreamworks, Disney, and Pixar. These are your films like A Monster in Paris, Ernest and Celestine, The Nut Job, Memories, Song of the Sea, The Rabbi’s Cat, and The Triplets of Belleville. This means that films by famed studio, Studio Ghibli will be on the review list because they were not directly made by Disney. Disney only helped distribute them.

Here are the guidelines for my reviews and any editorials I will be doing.

Main reviews will not be about any films made by Pixar, Disney, and Dreamworks.

I may talk about animated TV shows at some point in the future, but I do not want a constant flood of suggestions for anime and OVAs. They are not my specialty, and I would rather 99% of my reviews be about animated films, anthology films, and animated shorts.

Any films/TV shows that are by Pixar, Disney, and Dreamworks will be limited to editorials/lists.

You can send me recommendations for animated movies/animated TV shows for reviews/editorials I haven’t done yet. I’d be happy to consider any suggestions!

 

Well then, you must be wondering if I will have a rating system. I will indeed have one, but it won’t be a typical number/star/letter rating. I have set up my own rating system below!

Criterion/Essentials: Perfect movies that are instant purchases and should be in your movie library.

Go See it! : A fantastic movie that is bogged down by a few noticeable problems

Rent it: Not a terrible movie, but it had too many issues that result in a movie worth a lone rental/see on Netflix/On Demand if there is literally nothing else on.

Lackluster!: A terrible movie that, out of morbid curiosity, might be checked out, but should be avoided in order to see better movies.

The Worst: Nothing redeemable, and not worth giving attention to. It might have one element to enjoy, but it’s not even close to redeeming the gigantic amount of problems the movie has.

I hope you enjoy these posts and have a nice day!