Posted by RoyalcowDreamworks knocked Kung Fu Panda out of the park there is no question about that. Personally I found it more watchable than Wall-E. No disrespect to Wall-E here (Wheezy I'm talking to you), but I have seen Kung Fu Panda more. In any case Monsters vs. Aliens is the next film for Dreamworks so I was expecting a lot. Here's the preview.
You catch that part at the end where it said 3D? So that turns out to be the main selling point for this movie. I was really surprised how much more engaging that it makes things (especially if you aren't worried about things jumping out at you all the time). You could make out all of the little details better somehow (ten points to whoever can tell me in the comments where Shrek's head appears). It was a great experience.
The cast was pretty good, but I didn't care as much about the characters like I did in Kung Fu Panda. Reese Witherspoon does what she does best, which is to sound cute. Seth Rogen (who is in everything apparently) was really the highlight of the movie for me. Sure he doesn't stretch much past any other role he does, but why bother when you can play a gelatinous blob so well. Again no disrespect meant. Colbert's president is moderately funny, but the character really has one standout part (hint: it involves a synthesizer). Other IR favorites Rainn Wilson and Will Arnett also make appearances. All and all, I enjoyed the movie. It's no Kung Fu Panda, but it's still a good time. Oh and be sure to stay after the first part of the credits. Let's hear what you thought in the comments!
Ross
Double M
Wheezy
MajorLB
Posts
6 comments:
WALL-E is endlessly watchable and enjoyable because it's...well, a better movie. I prefer greatness over fluff, even if the greatness means I don't get to laugh out loud every 2 seconds from fart jokes.
@Midgard Dragon I completely agree with you that WALL-E is a better movie. No question there. But as I mentioned previously I have found myself watching Kung Fu Panda more.
I didn't see Kung Fu Panda, but I found that actually knowing the actors behind the voices to be distracting. I kept seeing Reese Witherspoon's or Hugh Laurie's face when they talked. I heard Kung Fu Panda had a similar issue.
Then again at least there was dialogue. I really enjoyed WALL-E and appreciate how well done it was, including the way the robots communicated through sound effects. However, if I was a kid I think I would've been a bit bored during the first half of WALL-E.
Now I want Wheezy to jump in and explain how 3D is a plot to make more money in the theaters.
@MajorLB I thought that the characters looked a bit like them anyway. Or maybe that was just me projecting what they actually look like onto the characters.
I guess I have to comment on this one since it's kinda my thing. Plus I've been called out no less than twice here, so...
Kung Fu Panda was great. Great visuals, great story - followed Joseph Campbell's "Heroes Journey" pretty much to a T, and there's nothing wrong with that. Makes for good movies.
Wall-E was also great. It told a love story in a really unique way, and of course the animation was absolutely incredible.
Monsters vs. Aliens was entertaining. Not a great movie, but entertaining. There's a fundamental difference between how Pixar and Dreamworks go about making movies, it seems to me. Generally speaking, I feel like Dreamworks tries to make movies that are going to appeal to the largest demographic possible. They want adults to take their kids to their flicks and enjoy the movie enough to buy it later on DVD. That's why you get so many pop culture references and adult-ish humor. Kids will love it because of colorful characters, adults will enjoy the jokes. Kung Fu Panda was the exception because it also had a great story with great characters. Insectasaurus isn't a great character, but he/she gets you a couple of punchlines.
Pixar makes movies without thinking about the audience demographic (I think this is a good thing). When they make a movie, they make what THEY would want to see, and hope that the rest of the world agrees with them. The good thing is they have great taste. Honestly, I feel like their movies are more dramas than comedies. They're funny - but the stories are so much deeper than most animated films that they become much much more than a kids' movie. Kids still like them because they're cartoons, but I think they're meant for adults.
Lots of generalities there, but you get the idea.
As for 3D, I'm worried it's a gimmick that's going away. The movie industry is pushing it because it's an experience you can't pirate, you have to go to the theater to get it. I think it was used well in MvA because the scenes were huge sweeping vistas with towering monsters, and the 3D immersed you in the story more. I hate the "flying at your face" stuff (which MvA did only twice I can recall) - because that takes you out of the movie instead of bringing you further in. That stuff is meant for theme parks and "My Bloody Valentine."
I'll be interested in seeing what Pixar does with it, as well as "Avatar" - as James Cameron is the guy who is pushing this in Hollywood the most.
Ok I'm done.
Ok I'm not done.
Pixar vs Dreamworks: A Visual Representation
Now I'm done.
Post a Comment