|
Some Guy TT posted:I don't think there's a desire for anthro animals so much as it is fear of the Bambi question- "why did Bambi's mother have to die?" Any cartoon that shows animals realistically is inevitably going to have to deal with a question like this. For some reason American culture treats the notion of parents having serious conversations with their kids in terrifying terms. Sex education is another good example, I guess because it's too icky or awkward so let's let Hollywood teach our kids about it instead. what are you talking about 
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2013 19:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:31 |
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:I don't think there's a desire for anthro animals so much as it is fear of the Bambi question- "why did Bambi's mother have to die?" Any cartoon that shows animals realistically is inevitably going to have to deal with a question like this. For some reason American culture treats the notion of parents having serious conversations with their kids in terrifying terms. Sex education is another good example, I guess because it's too icky or awkward so let's let Hollywood teach our kids about it instead. But is seeing a human-like creature die better than seeing an animal die? Yes of course, but that says some interesting things about us I think. quote:The irony, of course, is that this exact same situation comes up in Finding Nemo ("why did Nemo's mother have to die?"), and I bet many of you never even considered that this could be traumatic to children until I brought up the comparison just now. Kids are a lot a hardier and smarter than the industry gives them credit for. But the presumption that they're easily traumatized and stupid is so pervasive that we get movies like...this, where whoever the target audience is supposed to be, it's definitely not kids. There was an episode of The Simpsons where Millhouse watches the movie from the beginning after having been shielded from the first part and has an emotional breakdown. I watched The Neverending Story and The Land Before Time when I was five and it didn't break my brain. It made me feel bad to see Littlefoot's mom die but it gave me an appreciation for tragedy in drama and how it shapes characters. I feel bad for kids whose parents don't have enough faith in them to show them scary and sad movies that are awesome. E: ^ yeah, not sure how it applies to Bee Movie but good points Croisquessein fucked around with this message at 03:28 on Apr 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 03:24
|
|
|
I think I understand what Some Guy TT is trying to get at, and I wonder if he recalls the same absurd review of "Bambi" by Roger Ebert I read (and is, sadly, only available as an academic paper.) There's probably a fear that if animal behavior is portrayed more or less realistically, you'll lose the audience or get a weird, "what the hell movie did he watch" reaction from critics like that. And so we wind up with moments in later Disney movies like the scene in "Lady and the Tramp" where Lady's two friends each offer to marry her so she can keep her honor after a night out with Tramp?! The scene just confused the crap out of me as a child and when I went back to watch it as an adult, all I wanted to do was scream at the screen, "You are DOGS! You are not humans, so why do you even give a poo poo about that?!?" On the other hand, there's "Felidae", where very Disney-esque animated animals act very very close to their real-life equivalents. And it is... jarring... 
Rahonavis fucked around with this message at 17:09 on Apr 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 03:45
|
|
|
In lady and the tramp the dogs are just a more visually interesting stand-in for for people, and some people do act like that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 03:50
|
|
|
You have to humanize animals somewhat to tell a cohesive story in a film, I don't have a problem with that. I was referring to aesthetics myself. I don't want to see a weird amalgam of human and animal unless it's meant to be disturbing in some way. Remember in the recent Charlotte's Web adaptation how they made Charlotte look all cutesy with two eyes and some weird smile thing on her face? Eeeggh. I don't have to see a humanized face to think of them as sentient, that's all I'm saying.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 04:01
|
|
|
I see Bee Movie as a film that could not have been made unless it was assumed to be sold to children. It's a deliberately inferior version of an adult plot. Think for a moment why "replace bees with Jews" works so well. They're not bees, they're the abstract concept of bees being used to develop adult conflicts except without meaningful consequences. Bee Movie makes no sense unless we think of it in these terms. And even then it's still pretty incomprehensible. By contrast, take the suggestion earlier in this thread for Accurate Bees. A bee has to choose between killing itself to save the hive or saving itself. that's an interesting conflict. It's an easily understood conflict. I only needed one sentence. Try to describe what's going on in Bee Movie in a single sentence. I'm not even sure how it was pitched. Comparing these two ideas, and looking back on past animated films, I can't help but see a correlation between the seriousness of the story and how realistic the animals are portrayed. I think it's just easier to keep a tight plot moving when the story is clearly defined, and this is a lot easier to do when screenwriting energy doesn't have to be wasted drawing pointless parallels between the human world and the animal one. Bee Movie consists almost entirely of these parallels- remove them, and I'm not even sure we have a story left to criticize.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 05:30
|
|
|
Croisquessein posted:You have to humanize animals somewhat to tell a cohesive story in a film, I don't have a problem with that. I was referring to aesthetics myself. I don't want to see a weird amalgam of human and animal unless it's meant to be disturbing in some way. Remember in the recent Charlotte's Web adaptation how they made Charlotte look all cutesy with two eyes and some weird smile thing on her face? I haven't seen that movie, but that's a pretty accurate looking spider face. Some do only have 2 eyes(or two large eyes with smaller ones facing forward, which is what those spots on the top of the head seem to be). The smile thing is the jaws, they're normally less heart shaped than those ones are, but I imagine making them too large or too angular would give the wrong impression of the character from a design perspective.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 07:36
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:By contrast, take the suggestion earlier in this thread for Accurate Bees. A bee has to choose between killing itself to save the hive or saving itself. that's an interesting conflict. It's an easily understood conflict. I only needed one sentence. Try to describe what's going on in Bee Movie in a single sentence. I'm not even sure how it was pitched. My guess is something along the lines of "a movie about nothing... with bees!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 10:37
|
|
|
NGL posted:My guess is something along the lines of "a movie about nothing... with bees!" I agree with this. I don't think it was necessary to dumb it down for kids. It was dumb from the beginning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 14:09
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:Try to describe what's going on in Bee Movie in a single sentence. There are talking bees and they do things bees don't normally do and they all make this face.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 14:19
|
|
|
This might have been the best review of an animated movie I've ever read. Also I'm pretty sure I watched that movie, but I can't really remember anything about it apart from some disjointed scenes (probably for the best.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 18:41
|
|
|
A human heart posted:I haven't seen that movie, but that's a pretty accurate looking spider face. Some do only have 2 eyes(or two large eyes with smaller ones facing forward, which is what those spots on the top of the head seem to be). The smile thing is the jaws, they're normally less heart shaped than those ones are, but I imagine making them too large or too angular would give the wrong impression of the character from a design perspective. Maybe not the best example of what I'm talking about, but that thing still creeps me out with its little smirk and weirdly shaped eyes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 18:47
|
|
|
Rahonavis posted:
Thanks, now I'm remembering all the hosed up scenes. Still,I remember it to be a great movie.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 19:53
|
|
|
Is he talking about the same movie? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boG8QL8kORU#t=1m32s
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 23:17
|
|
|
NGL posted:My guess is something along the lines of "a movie about nothing... with bees!" Now now, let's be fair. I think it was probably more along the lines of "Jerry Seinfeld... as a bee!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 00:28
|
|
|
Fight Club Sandwich posted:There are talking bees and they do things bees don't normally do and they all make this face.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
Woah, someone returned my kitten? Thank you so much!! I was planning to do it soon but I was being kind of lazy about it since I didn't have a saved copy of the cropped cougar cub picture. Kitty  .
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 04:35
|
|
|
See, like there is something deeply wrong about this face, but I can't quite put my finger on it. The concept art pictures actually look less creepy when they have proboscis noses and six legs and actual stuff like that, all the bees here just either look really punchable or they're going to kill you in your sleep. ^^^Oh poo poo without your avatar I didn't really recognize you, now I do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 13:33
|
|
|
Pick posted:Woah, someone returned my kitten? Thank you so much!! I was planning to do it soon but I was being kind of lazy about it since I didn't have a saved copy of the cropped cougar cub picture. You can find all your old avatar images, SA saves them. Right click on someone's avatar and go to "open image in new tab", and you'll see a number before the final .jpg/gif/png in the URL. You can see older ones by manually changing that URL to lower numbers and/or the extension to different formats (so if someone has had three jpg avatars, they will be 0001.jpg. 0002.jpg and 0003.jpg, and is they have had two avatars, one a gif and the other a png, they will be 0001.gif and 0001.png respectively) Fatkraken fucked around with this message at 13:43 on Apr 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 13:40
|
|
|
Oh, that's who you are. I didn't start reading this thread until you'd been raged so it felt strange reading such good posts from someone I didn't recognize. But now I have no idea where to find your erotic comics!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
Mad enough about bees to remove a kitten
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 17:15
|
|
|
A human heart posted:I haven't seen that movie, but that's a pretty accurate looking spider face. Some do only have 2 eyes(or two large eyes with smaller ones facing forward, which is what those spots on the top of the head seem to be). The smile thing is the jaws, they're normally less heart shaped than those ones are, but I imagine making them too large or too angular would give the wrong impression of the character from a design perspective. Really, a spiderface with eyebrows, irises, and the conjoined outline of a human nasal structure and mouth is "pretty accurate?" This is actually more hideous and alienating than any real spider could hope to be.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
Looking at this picture again, I'm noticing you can't distinguish between what on that plate is 'real' and 'toy.' Is that lime supposed to be part of his dinner? Or made of plastic? What about those assorted brown bits?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:Really, a spiderface with eyebrows, irises, and the conjoined outline of a human nasal structure and mouth is "pretty accurate?" This is actually more hideous and alienating than any real spider could hope to be. Don't see the eyebrows, and "the conjoined outline of a human nasal structure and mouth" really is just the edges of the mouth parts, which while slightly altered are not that different than the mouthparts of some real arthropod species. Also in the movie, when she talks it's the lower parts of the mandibles that move in a scissor like motion, not the illusory "mouth" line you're picking up on, and since in most of the extreme close ups of her face she WILL be talking, the real nature of the mouth will be far more obvious in the movie. She does have more eyes dotting the top of her head too. The only gross inaccuracy other than general simplification is the eyes being more like mammal eyes than spider eyes. Still, it's a drat site closer to "accurate spiders" than Bee movie is to Accurate Bees or ANTZ and A Bugs Life are to Accurate Ants.  shows the extra eyes betterFriedpundit posted:Looking at this picture again, I'm noticing you can't distinguish between what on that plate is 'real' and 'toy.' Is that lime supposed to be part of his dinner? Or made of plastic? What about those assorted brown bits? It's half a pea I think
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 18:33
|
|
Fatkraken posted:It's half a pea I think pea movie
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 18:37
|
|
|
Deadly Chlorine posted:See, like there is something deeply wrong about this face, but I can't quite put my finger on it. The concept art pictures actually look less creepy when they have proboscis noses and six legs and actual stuff like that, all the bees here just either look really punchable or they're going to kill you in your sleep. It's the pupils, they're contracted, which we psychologically associate with anger or intense focus. Which is actually appropriate for the scene because he's engaged in dick-jousting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 04:08
|
|
|
On the level of social perception management, looking at 'Seinfeld' - Jerry is ideal/peak NeoLiberal Man. He lives in Manhattan, travels in a passenger jet around the country, and consumes in a conscious, yuppie way. So I guess after this 90's hit they thought they could transfer the magic from Nine Seasons of TV to this artless cartoon. But some people, like George, cry at the end of movies like 'Home Alone'; someone out there was touched by the brief zeitgeist of 'Bee Movie'
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 23:11
|
|
|
Friedpundit posted:Looking at this picture again, I'm noticing you can't distinguish between what on that plate is 'real' and 'toy.' Is that lime supposed to be part of his dinner? Or made of plastic? What about those assorted brown bits? Everything in the entire film is that same uniform and completely visually uninteresting plastic texture. Except for the handle of the bee smoker, which was actually distinct in having a convincing material appearance. By the way, if a mod is willing to change the title to "Bee Movie (2007) and Shark Tale (2004): The World Needs to Know" then I will share Shark Tale thoughts/info, though not to Bee Movie extents. Pick fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Apr 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2013 02:08
|
|
|
Pick posted:Everything in the entire film is that same uniform and completely visually uninteresting plastic texture. Except for the handle of the bee smoker, which was actually distinct in having a convincing material appearance. It's weirdly similar to a video game set to 'medium', everything is detailed enough, but flat as anything. Actually, the game doesn't look that far off the movie.  I wonder if they share assets. Pick posted:By the way, if a mod is willing to change the title to "Bee Movie (2007) and Shark Tale (2004): The World Needs to Know" then I will share Shark Tale thoughts/info, though not to Bee Movie extents. I'm excited to read more about lovely movies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2013 08:35
|
|
|
WickedIcon posted:pea movie Pee Movie Because it is a bad movie.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2013 16:16
|
|
|
Fatkraken posted:Lots of words about Charlotte in "Charlotte's Web", including  Those humanlike eyes staring out at me from an otherwise believably spider-like face IS the Uncanny Valley effect for me. I've never seen "Charlotte's Web" (I adore the book and reading over the cast list for this movie I just... no thank you. The Hannah Barbera cartoon hurt enough) but the very thought of what that face would look like in motion gives me the acid reflux.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2013 19:42
|
|
|
This review made me laugh so much I almost died, repeatedly . It was also very insightful. Thanks Pick!
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2013 22:50
|
|
|
Deadly Chlorine posted:See, like there is something deeply wrong about this face, but I can't quite put my finger on it. The concept art pictures actually look less creepy when they have proboscis noses and six legs and actual stuff like that, all the bees here just either look really punchable or they're going to kill you in your sleep. The mouth is quirked up on one side, but the lower lid and cheek under it on that side aren't scrunched upwards. He's looking upwards while squinting/glaring, but his upper eyelids are too closed, and his lower lids haven't lifted enough: your eyelid movements in expressions self-center towards your pupils. For that expression his lids are in a position as though he were looking straight ahead. The eyebrows are completely neutral, and they shouldn't be. Put it together, and he looks like he's been Botoxxed. Oh, and his elbows are pointing inwards, but his wrists are twisted outwards sharply to make his fork and knife sit at the desired position. No part of the model is dependent on the other parts of the model, and your brain is freaking out when you see it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 00:44
|
|
|
 What people tend to forget about Shrek is that it's a very good movie. Unfortunately, its legacy has been irreparably corrupted by its franchise. This may seem like a really weird way to start a review of Shark Tale, but bear with me here, because here's another thing people tend to forget: Shark Tale came out in 2004, preceded only by Antz, Shrek, and Shrek 2 in the Dreamworks 3D lineup. In fact, even I had forgotten this. I've raved a few times about how Shark Tale looks like total rear end, but upon reflection, it's pretty good for its era and passable even now. My standards were unfair, or at least feel unfair now that I've seen Bee Movie. I can't express to you how much watching the back-alley abortion that is Bee Movie reformed my opinion of Shark Tale, which--and let me be completely clear here--is still not a good film. And perhaps it truly should be judged with my original harshness, because Shark Tale was A-team stuff. Bee Movie, well, do I have to state the obvious? It may seem weird to talk about A-teams and B-teams. Maybe I have to go back a little further. Animated films take a really, really, really motherfucking long time to create--often five or so years. So long that it's unfeasible for most studios to focus only on one film at a time. (LAIKA is a notable exception.) This means that you have two choices: keep your very, very best people on choice projects and then have all your other projects be cobbled-together messes of brazen incompetence by DORKS, or try to strike a difficult balance and divide your workforce out to create two decent products, with one edging out as superior. Disney traditional animation used to use the latter technique. For example, The Lion King was (amazingly) a B-team kind of project, where Pocahontas was their contemporary A-team effort. Yeah, okay obviously it doesn't always work out. Now, despite that, Andreas Deja was on Lion King (animating Scar) and not on Pocahontas animating, uh, like that little dog or something. Why? Because they needed an excellent animator for Scar. It was a fair spread, and it shows, since for all of Pocahontas' flaws, the animation is top-tier. Dreamworks kind of seems to have taken the other approach. Movies like Kung Fu Panda get their very, very best, and the results are stunning. Kung Fu Panda is one of my favorite films of all time--artful to its core and as impressive now as it was upon its initial release. It's almost perfect. But Kung Fu Panda also came out... what?! Less than a year after Bee Movie!? How the gently caress could that be? Bee Movie looks like some hosed-up lost episode of Reboot. I've seen more artistically valid endeavors created in 3D Movie Maker! (I truly believe the decision to make Bee Movie came from someone at the top of Dreamworks and the actual animation studio was like "gently caress well let's give some interns some practice and in the meantime everyone with talent please go to kung fu panda ok thanks".) But Shark Tale was who they had. By the way, it was co-directed by Victoria Jenson, who was a storyboard artist on Pinocchio and the Emperor of Night, one of the only theatrically-released films for which I have an original animation cel. I made a big deal at one point about Jennifer Yuh Nelson, sole director of Kung Fu Panda 2, being a huge inspiration for women working on animated films. (Kung Fu Panda 2 is the highest grossing film ever directed solely by a woman, as well as a loving great film.) This is still true, but it's worth acknowledging that Dreamworks had female directors on their 3D animated films going back all the way to Shrek in 2001. It took Pixar over a decade to achieve this with Brenda Chapman, who was essentially fired from Brave. I was going somewhere with this. Oh, yeah. Shark Tale... hrmm. Shark Tale is a movie trying too hard to be an incestuous mix of underwater Shrek and Dragonheart. Its main flaw is that it's really loving annoying. But again, Bee Movie gave me some sort of brain problem, so my biggest complaint with Shark Tale is just that... poo poo, I already used the word "annoying". It's annoying! The characters are annoying, and the pop culture references are annoying. The plot is annoying. But characterization and plot is there, as well as jokes, or at least times when you can see why laughter might happen following exposure. It's a lot better than Bee Movie. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT SHARK TALE! [continuing--]
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 06:17
|
|
|
The Voice Cast! People tend to whine and whine and whine about how all of film is circling down the loving toilet and that star power is a hollow substitute for a truly skilled voice actor like Frank Welker and blah blah blah blah blah These people completely fail to realize that this technique was, if anything, perfected in Disney's The Jungle Book, which as you might recall came out a while ago*. Now, maybe you don't recognize the voices of most of the characters. Because you weren't born in the loving 40s, okay? But Phil Harris and Louis Prima were kind of a thing back then. The vultures were intended to be voiced by the Beatles. So this ain't new. *Siiigh, 1967. You guys. But yeah just for fun, let's look at who they paid to say stuff: Will Smith Robert De Niro Renée Zellweger Angelina Jolie Jack Black Martin Scorsese Woah, Jack Black came back to Dreamworks animation after this? Man. He is a forgiving dude. I find it hilarious Scorsese is on that list, but gently caress it, why not. And you know what? They all do a really stand-up job. I'm sure a no-name could have done an equally good job, but these people did what they could with the material at their disposal. And really, you have to give props to de Niro for being willing to play Gay Shark Dad. (By the way, I did find it odd upon reflection that this film was so Gay Shark since it was still the dark ages of 2004. Curious upon reflection--did conservatives complain about this movie? Anyone remember? Did they just forget to because this movie is stupid? This movie is stupid.) But yeah, anyway--which came first, the creepy character designs or the casting? A little of this, a little of that. Obviously the final designs were tailored to fit those who would come to voice them. But I doubt they had their list right off the bat. I'd be interested in this process, except preferably for a better movie. Okay! ... I just realized Angelina Jolie also came back, since she voices Tigress. Tigress is a much better character than Lola. Oh well. Did Kung Fu Panda have a gay shark? I don't think so! I'm not going to go through this film scene-by-scene like I did for Bee Movie. Among other things, it wouldn't be as funny, because at the end of the day Shark Tale basically makes sense. That might not sound like THRILLING ENDORSEMENT but in the context of this thread it sure is. Generally though, there are some things you should know: THE PLOT: Shark Tale is about an everyman carwash guy (or whalewash, in this case) who dreams of something better. Unfortunately for him, his dreams are mostly pie-in-the-sky foolishness. This frustrates the girl who likes him, the girl-...fish (?) who takes calls at said carwash (Zellweger). They live in the inner city of New York City, or whatever they call it in this case, probably a fish pun. The movie begins, well, annoyingly, as you might expect. It's just "Look, a thing you recognize, but with some sort of reference to fish awkwardly folded in!" Coral-cola, Seal (the musician, ... who is a seal), Katie Current, SEA-9, a fish that looks like a chopper, whatever. There's no reason to expand on this because everyone knows about it, because everyone hates it. It's known and hated. Jokes at their absolutely most flaccid and pointless. Referential humor, but without anything to make the reference feel valid or meaningful. It never, ever stops. So if this film ever feels okay as it's being described, imagine someone shouting "BURGER KING EXISTS!!" into your ear every twelve seconds while you're trying to watch it. Meanwhile, this city is terrorized (apparently) by the shark mafia, led by Don Lino, voiced by de Niro. The film makes a, uh, bold move by having our villain introduced in a scene where he explains how he has lived his life for his sons and loves them more than anything. Which I have to admit is a novel approach for a villain's introduction in this kind of film. Don Lino comes across as patient and caring, complimenting both of his sons and expressing his love equally. I'm sure that at some point in this scene he'll like... flip out or something oorrrr?  No, not really, he just vaguely threatens the pufferfish (Scorscese) after he insults his gay shark son. This means that pufferfish now needs protection money for the whalewash (he's the owner), which he didn't before, and that means pufferfish comes to Smithfish to collect on what Smithfish owes him ("five thousand clams"... a joke that actually makes sense, even if it's still not funny). This event ties the two plots together unnecessarily. I say unnecessary because the main characters, Smithfish and Gay Shark Lenny, meet in a completely unrelated way. But this doesn't actually hurt the film so whatever. When Angie (Zellweger) finds out that Smithfish needs the money, she gives him an heirloom pink pearl to sell to repay the pufferfish boss. She also points out the moral of the film, because unlike Bee Movie, this one has one of those too. In this case, it's that "You don't have to be at the top to be a somebody." This is a nice sentiment and it does kind of fit the events that happen in the movie. Yes, the moral is in fact... topical! Man, I'm just full of the warm fuzzy compliments today! Bee Movie! We then have another shark scene. Don Lino is having a heart-to-heart with his son Lenny over a meal. His other son, Frankie, is also present. Again, nothing really seems threatening or antagonistic here.  quote:Lenny. Lenny. Look at me. Look at me. This handin' over the business, it's for you, for both of yous, and you're acting like you don't even want it. I need to know that you can handle that. It's hard to read intonation in text, I know, but again, they're just giving the impression of a guy who really cares about his kids. Part of why I'm mentioning this is because it feeds into the one thing--one. thing.--I really, really.... like about Shark Tale. But we'll get into that later. For the time being, it's kind of bizarre, since we're 20 minutes in and the biggest douche is our main character, who pawns a coworker's priceless heirloom. The opening of the film basically STATES that the sharks run the reef and are bad guys who scare everyone, but it's just not an impression you get from them at all. You basically forget that they're even supposed to be fulfilling that role in the film. Don Lino tells his son to prove that he's a killer by eating a shrimp. This shrimp is intentionally super-cloying but GOD drat is it (buzzword!) annoying as poo poo and boy oh boy do you as a member of the audience want it loving dead. Lenny (gay shark Jack Black) of course lets it and its fellow shrimp go free. Even then, his dad just tells Frankie (the other brother) to take Lenny out and show him how to act like a proper shark. You're now expecting Frankie to be a huge dick about this, but he's not either?? Once dad is out of sight, he assures Lenny that they can do this together, make their dad happy, and move on with taking over the family business. This contrasted against the next scene, where Smithfish takes the money from pawning his coworker's pink pearl (to save him from getting murderized) and bets it all on a seahorse at the races, thus attracting the attention of Lola (Angelina Jolie), who he then proceeds to hit on. Alllll class. "Golddigger" plays in the background when Lola is introduced because this film is nothing if not painfully literal in its song selection. Pick fucked around with this message at 07:25 on Apr 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 06:33
|
|
|
All the stuff with the shark mafia boss makes Shark Tale sound like a horrible adaptation of Graeme Base's wonderful book, The Sign of the Seahorse, which has a grouper mob boss extorting money from the diner the hero works at. I participated in a public reading of it yesterday and its still charming. Pick, have you seem Maya the Bee? I saw an ad for it and thought of this thread.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 08:27
|
|
|
Pick posted:Animated films take a really, really, really motherfucking long time to create--often five or so years. Which makes the fact that they just happened to be working on a talking fish movie at the same time as Pixar pretty suspicious, in my eyes.  According to Disney War the decision to make Antz was a direct result of Katzenberg's knowledge of Disney's upcoming projects (including Bug's Life) before he left to form Dreamworks and they intentionally released it before Bug's Life to try and steal some of Disney's thunder. I can't help but wonder if there was some similar subterfuge going on with Finding Nemo and Shark Tale.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 09:40
|
|
|
Count Chocula posted:Pick, have you seem Maya the Bee? I saw an ad for it and thought of this thread. Ha! I didn't know they made a 3D animated cartoon of Beine Maja. It's a really old anime based on German comics. ***** Great writeup again, Pick. I really like the research you put into this one. I wouldn't mind at all if there were more "Let's watch" threads like this for various films if they put in this kind of effort. Steve Yun fucked around with this message at 10:59 on Apr 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 10:56
|
|
|
I know you're trying to be complimentary, but that description still makes my head hurt because of how unnecessarily nautical everything is. Nothing seem to have happened that even remotely has anything to do with fish. At least Bee Movie had an explanation for why its characters were bees, albeit one that made no sense. So far all the animals have contributed to Shark Tale is that we have sharks, who literally devour fellow sentient creatures, being treated with sympathetic character traits. It's like reading Kevin and Kell.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 15:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 00:31 |
|
|
X-Ray Pecs posted:Pee Movie I'd prefer Bea Movie, where it's the exact same movie just with CG Bea Arthur in place of that bee.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 15:16
|
|
