Alan Horn, the New Disney Chairman

For a while, we've been wondering who Disney would hire as Chairman after the previous Chairman, Rich Ross, got the boot. Today, we have our answer!

Alan Horn was named the Chairman of the Walt Disney Studios today. He will become Chairman on June 11th. Horn was the former President and COO of Warner Bros., and oversaw huge successes like the Harry Potter films, Happy Feet, 300, the Lord of the Rings trilogy, Christopher Nolan's first two Batman films and Sherlock Holmes. Prior to Warner Bros., he worked for 20th Century Fox and co-founded Castle Rock Entertainment. Robert Iger had this to say about Horn: “Alan not only has an incredible wealth of knowledge and experience in the business, he has a true appreciation of movie making as both an art and a business.”

With that, I hope that Alan Horn will undo what Rich Ross did wrong. Someone who knows filmmaking, hopefully he will recognize that good animation deserves good marketing. We don't know how he will do, but hope for the best. Rich Ross on the other hand was an inexperienced man whose background was in television, mainly the Disney Channel. Making him Chairman was one of Iger's biggest mistakes, and the box office failures of Mars Needs Moms, Prom, Winnie the Pooh and John Carter were proof that he was not fit for the job. Hiring MT Carney as the head of the marketing department was another huge blunder, as the marketing department killed films like Winnie the Pooh and John Carter, which could have been successful.

Horn has a lot of projects to oversee on the horizon: Disney's upcoming animated films, Pixar's ambitious upcoming slate, the upcoming Marvel films and various projects like Oz: The Great and Powerful and Lone Ranger. Maybe we won't see any more idiotic title changes, better marketing and best of all, effort. A little extra push will be put into upcoming live-action films that haven't begun production yet, so they don't go over like The Sorcerer's Apprentice, Prince of Persia and the fourth Pirates film. Also, will Horn help John Lasseter and the folks at Walt Disney Animation Studios successfully bring back hand-drawn animation with a lot of fanfare? I hope so. The marketing department tripped up on The Princess and the Frog, and releasing Winnie the Pooh on the same day as the final Harry Potter film with hardly any marketing was almost criminal of the studio to do. Hopefully none of these idiotic blunders will happen again.

The only thing I'm slightly worried about is how he'll handle Disney's in-house animated films. Warner Bros.' track record with animated films over the years hasn't been so good. Their only success stories were Robert Zemeckis' mo-capped The Polar Express and Animal Logic's Happy Feet. Everything else, like Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole, Happy Feet Two and a few others didn't do so well. Hopefully that has to do with the quality of those films and that Warner Bros. didn't know how to handle or market them. Since Disney has a legacy in animation and their animated films are what define them, Horn will be in charge of better output. Plus, it's a much different environment. Warner Bros. always struggled with keeping an animation studio unlike the other big distributors.

Anyways, how do you feel about Alan Horn being the Chairman of the Walt Disney Studios? Do you think he'll be good? Do you think he'll run Disney the right way and not the way Ross did? Or did you have someone else in mind? Sound off!

Best Animated Short - 1991

So one thing about writing these reviews is that they take a lot of time to write. Before starting this project I wrote a couple of reviews for the nominees for the current year, but it never really registered how long they take, as I wrote them only once a year. When I started this project it became clear that I underestimated how long it would take to write these reviews. In the beginning a review of five nominees was taking me a good three hours. This includes the time it takes to watch a short to jog my memory of it and writing the review. Now it's taking me five to six hours. I'm spending a lot more time per short, and I don't even think the quality is getting any better. (Of course if I had any regular readers, which I don't, I might be able to get some feedback, *hint hint*)

However, hopefully things will be getting better. After all, we have left the era of five nominees and entering into the Golden Age of Three Nominees. In the 20 years between 1992-2011, five nominees were the norm. There were only two years where there were fewer than five nominees: 1996 and 2000. Conversely, in the 27 years between 1965-1991, three nominees were the norm. There were only four years with more than three nominees: 1968, 1974, 1975, and 1977. I went over the rules for this category as it currently stands in an earlier post. It states that any three to five films that fulfill a certain score criteria gets a nomination. I have no idea why there is this disparity in the number of nominees. Was there a rule change sometime between the 1991 Oscars and the 1992 Oscars, one that changed the number of nominees (with exceptions) or one that changed the score limit? Did people just grade harder? Unfortunately I hadn't been able to find the answer, as I can't find the Academy Award rules from back then.

Read more »

James Bond 'Skyfall' storyboards leaked.

With all the turmoil of MGM filing for chapter 11 bankruptcy at the end of 2010, it took some time getting the new Bond movie going, but Skyfall, the 23rd movie in the series starring Daniel Craig for the third time as Britain's top spy will finally be out on November 9th (UK premier is October 26th), while celebrating it's 50 years existence. The script was co-written by triple time academy award nominee John Logan, ('Gladiator', 'The Aviator' and 'Hugo') who also wrote the screenplay for this year's Oscar winning animated feature 'Rango'. But apparently the story isn't as secret as Bond would' ve liked, as someone has been selling off the authentic call sheets and storyboard artwork on Ebay.

The scenes starring the top spy driving a motorcycle under heavy circumstances have been filmed in Turkey, at the Grand Bazaar in Istanbul, at Fethiye and Adana. The snapshots below clearly show Craig on the motorbike, which in reality appears to be more of a scooter/buggy type of rig, fully equipped with digital cameras. 'From Russia with Love' and 'The World is not Enough' also had exotic scenes shot on location in Turkey.

Fortunately, MGM's lion is still roaring. The restructured studio is now lead by Ann Mather, former Executive Vice President and CFO at Pixar, who also worked for Disney earlier. They sold the distribution rights for Bond 23 and 24 to Sony last year, so the screen credits will definitely be listing 'James Bond will return' once more. Great!

James Bond was created by Ian Fleming, who was a Naval Intelligence Officer himself, trying to break the Nazi's 'Enigma Code' while also being in charge of Operation 'Golden Eye', a plan to sabotage the Nazi's during WWII. In 1952 he wrote his first book 'Casino Royale' at his home in Jamaica (where he did all of his writing) which sold out completely within weeks after it got published. He wrote 14 books in total, while his final one, 'Octopussy and the living Daylights' a collection of shorter stories, was published after his death in 1964. Several authors have picked up the book series since then, resulting in the latest (37th) Bond novel from Ian Fleming productions, 'Carte Blanche' by Jefferey Deaver in May 2011. A new yet untitled novel is currently written by Willliam Boyd, which will be out in autumn 2013. Unlike the latest novels, it will be set in the 1960's to portray a more 'classic' Bond story. Boyd, familiar with screenplay writing (he co-authored David Attenborough's 'Chaplin') worked with actor Daniel Craig on 'The Trench', a movie he directed himself in 1999.

Above left: Fleming working away on his next story behind the typewriter at his 'Goldeneye' estate in Jamaica. Right: After the success of his first novel, Fleming bought a custom made goldplated Royal Quiet de Luxe typewriter, which was bought by Bond actor Pierce Brosnan at an auction in 1995.

Bond in Comics.

Bond has been the focus of many comic books adaptions, most notably through a long lasting comic strip series, published between 1958 and 1983 in the Daily Express and other (British) newspaper. With art by John McLusky and most stories by Henry Gammidge thirteen story arcs were published based on Fleming's books between July 7, 1958 and January 8, 1966. When the team of Russian artist Yaroslav Horak and writer Jim Lawrence took over, they adapted the remaining Fleming material and Kingsley Amis' Bond novel 'Colonel Sun' from 1968. Between January 10, 1966 and January 22, 1977, they also introduced 20 original stories, with extreme titles such as 'The League of Vampires'.

An original strip by McLusky from 'Live and let Die' published between December 1958 and March 1959 (Click to enlarge).

After publication in the Daily Express was seized, Horak and Lawrence continued to do five more stories until 1979. Lawrence wrote several more stories after that, with McLusky returning to artwork. In 1984 the comic strip definitely came to an end with the 'Snake Goddess' and 'Double Eagle' storyline, with Horak again doing the artwork.

As of 2009, Titan Books has done an excellent job of bringing these great strips back in print in several volumes through their 'Omnibus' collection. Volume three just appeared in March (featuring the 'Colonel Sun' adaption). The next volume will be released in November containing nine stories, from the 'Isle of Condors' (June 12, 1972 - October 21, 1972) to 'The Black Ruby Caper' (February 19, 1975 - July 15, 1975).

Check out the first trailer for 'Skyfall' below, which was released on May 21st (toggle 1080p switch for superior quality).

"Finding Nemo" Swims to Blu-ray December 4th

A release date has finally been chosen for Finding Nemo on Blu-ray! December 4th!

Now with this date, it's also possible that Brave will hit Blu-ray on the same day. Why's that you might ask? When Up hit Blu-ray in November 2009, Monsters, Inc. was released the same day. When Ratatouille debuted on home media for the first time, so did the first collection of Pixar shorts. On that same day, Cars was released on Blu-ray, having been on DVD for a year up until then. When Toy Story 3 came to home media, the Cars Toon collection hit stores. When Cars 2 came out on home media, the 3D versions of the Toy Story films were released. Maybe this trend will continue with Brave and Finding Nemo. It's possible. What do you think?

I'd say it might happen, but I believe that Pixar will probably give Brave the usual first week of November release so they can get it out there before the holidays. Now back to Finding Nemo. What can we expect from this release? For now, I think we'll be getting all of the wonderful bonus features from the original DVD. This does raise an interesting question though, will they include the Audio-Visual Commentary? I'd say yes, since it's a great bonus and it has several behind the scenes clips. It'll probably be renamed the Cine-Explore commentary, and they'll probably structure it the same way they did with the Cars and Ratatouille Cine-Explore commentaries, and not like the ones on the later films. They would have to, because of all the behind the scenes clips. They should also keep the other bonus features, which I'm sure they probably will.

New bonus features? Who knows what else they could possibly add, since the original DVD was loaded. Also, we're getting a 3D Blu-ray edition of the film. It was inevitable, since the film is being re-released in 3D on September 14th. I just hope that Disney doesn't include all of the extras on the 3D edition only, like they did with the Blu-ray releases of Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides and Cars 2, but something tells me that Disney is now dropping this policy since it probably angered a lot of consumers. John Carter's upcoming non-3D Blu-ray release has all of its bonus features, the 3D Blu-ray doesn't have an extra assortment. The Lion King's 3D Blu-ray release wasn't like that, either, oddly enough.

Also, the cover artwork isn't too bad. I'm usually not too crazy about the cover artwork for anything on home media, especially something from Disney, but the cover doesn't look too bad. I do think it's not blue enough, and the work is a bit sloppy. The original DVD and VHS (yes, Finding Nemo was available on VHS when it first debuted on home media) is a bit better, and for some reason, Bruce looks a bit out of place here. Maybe it's just me, but he does seem a bit out of place. The 3D cover is far superior, being a modified version of the big character poster.

Also, we're getting a second collection of Pixar short films sometime this year. For now, I think it'll probably appear alongside Finding Nemo (and Brave, if that is also released on December 4th) but the German advertisement that confirmed it says sometime in November. So who knows. Also, the ad reveals the cover artwork. So it looks like this will have everything from Your Friend the Rat up until La Luna, with the possible exception of the Cars Toon shorts, since they have their own release. Also, the Toy Story Toon short Small Fry (which was attached to The Muppets) will debut on this set, making it the first time the short will be available on home media. Good thing too, Small Fry was a lot of fun much like Hawaiian Vacation.

With these three titles coming, it'll be a holiday of Pixar. A new film, an older one that everyone has been waiting for on Blu-ray, and a collection of their recent short films. I'm definitely looking forward to getting them all when they come out. How about you? What version of Finding Nemo will you get? The 3D version or the standard Blu-ray? What do you think of the cover artwork? When do you think Brave will hit Blu? Sound off!

The Animation Revolution, Part 2

In my article, "The Animation Revolution", I took a look at the current state of the animation industry in North America and offered what I felt were reasonable suggestions to the studios, suggestions on how to help the art form by opting for better films rather than derivative moneymakers. I am well aware that these studios want to make money, because, let’s face it, who doesn’t? At the same time, however, creativity is being shunted aside. I went over the other films that are dominating the animation scene, the ones that aren’t from whom I consider the “big three”: Disney, Pixar and DreamWorks. I will be honest, I do enjoy some animated romps that don't aim to be serious. I'm not saying "fun" animated films are bad. There's a a place in this world for those kinds of films. The problem is, there are too many in this day and age.

I firmly believe that we are going through The Third Golden Age of Animation. I believe it started five years ago in early 2007, after there wasn't such a glut of animated films but still enough to make it the start of the Golden Age. Fortunately, out of all the animated films released in 2007, we saw some quality endeavors instead of mediocre films that came and went. This would continue in the next few years, and we've seen studios like Disney and DreamWorks stepping up their game while Pixar delivered critical and commercial smashes. So here we are now, in the middle of 2012. Looking at the output, it seems like a very strong year. 2013 looks good too, as does the future projects coming from Disney, Pixar and DreamWorks. The Third Golden Age will continue, as long as these films wow critics and bring in the bucks, but...

In order to really kick things into high gear, mainstream animation in the United States and around the world needs an upgrade. I am perfectly fine with Pixar, Disney and DreamWorks making great, thoughtful family films. Family films are necessary, but the other studios making kid-friendly films that are less mature than what the big three offer need to step up their game. Now I suggested that they try ambitious projects every once in a while, while also making their bread and butter through tame projects. The problem is, if all of the big animated films are family films, some people are still going to perceive animated films as baby-sitters, children's films or films that aren't to be taken seriously.

More and more people are beginning to realize that animation is an art form, and animated family films are also for adults. Some people, however, say things like "These movies are for the kid in you" and "I love Disney and Pixar films because I feel like a kid again". Nostalgia isn't the reason why I admire great animated family films, and it should not be the reason why people enjoy animated family films. I admire them because they are great films. No "little kid in me" gets excited, I admire these films as a mature nineteen-year-old. I admire the storytelling, the heart, the writing, the craftsmanship, everything. What's also annoying is when someone says "These animated films are getting more and more adult these days..." No, they aren't getting "more adult". Are you trying to say they were only for children in the past and not for adults? The Disney animated classics were never only for kids, Walt Disney himself said so. I don't care how Disney themselves markets their films, the filmmakers and artists didn't make these things for kids first and foremost. Pixar's films from the beginning were not just for kids, and so on. These films have no target audience, they are made for anyone.

Also what makes them "adult"? One shouldn't use that term, because a G or PG rated film that's suitable for children (well, not all children of course) can be mature, meaningful and complex. Just look at Pixar's recent films like WALL-E and Up. What kid is going to watch WALL-E and say "Wow, what a great film about the evils of mass consumerism and reliance on technology"? Probably none, unless you spell the message out for them. They'll probably just like the colors, the characters and the funny parts. Also, will children immediately understand some of the deeper themes in the early Disney films? Probably not. Noticing these things as an adult, it's quite mind-blowing. Yes, Bambi's mother's death made children cry, but did kids understand the other themes of the film? Probably not. It makes it all the more frustrating when people write off family films as films that are not "adult". Well you might as well say the same about G and PG-rated live action films that are family film staples like The Wizard of Oz, The Sounds of Music, Star Wars, E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial and several others.

Unfortunately, people tend to equate specific film content with the terms "adult" and "mature". Anyone with common sense knows that gratuitous violence, sex and language doesn't make a film "adult" or "mature". Pixar's films have none of these, though they do tend to have violence, frightening scenes and humor that might not be suitable for everyone. Same with Disney and DreamWorks' recent films. However, they are still perceived by some as "kiddie" because they aren't rated PG-13 or R. Does a Pixar film need to be gory or loaded with sex and swearing in order to qualify as an "adult" or "mature" animated film? No. You might as well say something like Star Wars isn't adult because of this, but that film seems to get a pass along with every other G and PG-rated live action film because... They are "real" movies. That's another thing, why is live action the only supreme form of moviemaking? Animation is not an inferior way of moviemaking.

I guess if you are making an animated film, it has to be PG-13 or R-rated in order to be called an "adult" animated film. Funny, isn't it? In fact, family friendly live-action films are called "kids movies" as well. So if it's family friendly, that means it's kids' stuff? Lovely logic... As for family friendly animated features being perceived as kids' stuff, what can one do to shake that belief? Here's one way the studios could do it, by marketing a G or PG-rated animated film as something adults would have the desire to see.

One gigantic problem has persisted for a while, what is it? It's the way Disney markets their animated output. Whenever the classics come to home video, they are advertised as fluffy, kiddie stuff. There are exceptions, like The Lion King, where most of the advertising focuses on the more "epic" side of the film. Something like Bambi, a very mature and artistic film, comes off like a cutesy funny bunny romp in the advertising. It doesn't help when the covers from the home video releases always show Bambi as a fawn, smiling and happy with Thumper and Flower. Previews for Disney classics when they hit home video throughout the years usually showed kids enjoying them, implying that these films are nothing but mere baby-sitters. Even worse, some of their animated classics are shown on Disney's preschooler channel, Disney Junior. An animated classic that took years to make, intended for general audiences, being degraded by being shown on a channel for preschoolers... Sickening, isn't it? Disney, being one of the first things you might think about whenever "animation" or "cartoon" is brought up, wrote itself into a corner because of this, especially during the Eisner regime. Disney soiled their image and made themselves look like a shameless money machine that was making "kiddie stuff", rather than a studio that specialized in good quality family entertainment and the occasional adult-oriented films (notice I didn't say "adult" films).

Under Eisner, Disney "had" to be "for kids" some way or another. The films made during the Renaissance were usually watered down to satisfy children. Read up on all the horror stories. Certain films were altered because children got antsy during test screenings. Remember how Jeffrey Katzenberg almost cut "Part of Your World" out of The Little Mermaid? "If I Never Knew You" from Pocahontas got cut (though it was finished and put back into the film for its 2005 DVD release), ambitious ideas were ruined (see Atlantis: The Lost Empire) and unnecessary cuts were made to make certain films more kid-friendly (The Black Cauldron, Lilo & Stitch). Everything had to be for kids. Just look what happened to Dinosaur. Kid-friendly "sidekicks" were inserted into the films, not for comic relief, but to lighten the load for children. Pixar doesn't do that. Walt didn't do that. Even worse, merchandise was everywhere. Must I bring up the "Disney Princesses" brand?

Big difference!

Disney's blatant push to make themselves appear as an overtly kid-friendly brand ruined their image and hurt animation in many ways. Blame the corporate side, because the artists and storytellers at Disney want to make good films, not cheap cash grabs. Not toy commercials. The direct-to-video sequels and the Disney Channel's transition from a good channel into a teenybopper channel made matters worse. This "it has to be for kids" problem also affects other studios, who market their films as "kiddie stuff". Trailers usually focus on comic relief and the more cutesy elements of the films. Look at how Paramount has marketed some of DreamWorks' more recent films. Kung Fu Panda 2 and Puss in Boots are fine examples, with trailers and commercials that focused more on the comic relief than the story. This is probably why DreamWorks' hasn't really scored an opening weekend of over $50 million recently. Even some of the trailers for Pixar's films were pretty bad, such as WALL-E, Toy Story 3 and the Brave trailer from last autumn. Other animated films? Marketed as kiddie fluff. Laika's upcoming ParaNorman focuses more on the comedy, and less on the creepy ghouls. As for films that are fun comedies, there's no need to make something like Despicable Me look like something epic, since it's a comedy, but why is that formula (trailers with comic relief, less story) used to market animated films that aren't necessarily funny comedies? What if these films were marketed correctly? Sometimes Disney's marketing department gets it right. Brave's recent trailer is more in line with the Japanese trailers for Pixar films, which effectively start by introducing the characters and then showing the more dramatic side of the film, while using comic relief wisely. The trailer for DreamWorks' Rise of the Guardians is beautiful, not throwing unnecessary humor at you. The trailer for Frankenweenie is a nice trailer where the humor works. That's about it, though...

Now that I got that out of the way, here's another suggestion I have. Independent animated films... Think about it. They don't cost way too much to make. If a studio like Columbia or Universal were to acquire an animated film like that and give it some pretty good marketing, they could score a profitable success. Wes Anderson's Fantastic Mr. Fox comes to mind, a $40 million film that was marketed poorly and released at the wrong time. Now what if 20th Century Fox gave it a better release date and marketed it with confidence? I'm not saying they have to go all out and shell out $100 million, but still, make the film look good from the trailers and TV spots. Make sure people know it's coming out. What if that little film took in around $70 million domestically and over $150 million worldwide? It would be a success for them. Instead, they got rewarded with a flop. Did they learn a lesson? Apparently not...

I understand that some independent animated films might not be embraced by mainstream audiences with enthusiasm, but you never know what audiences will accept. Rango scored a decent multiplier, and that wasn't like your usual animated film. Coraline, despite being deemed too scary for kids, had longevity at the box office. Something like Fantastic Mr. Fox or The Illusionist could've been profitable. They didn't have to be big blockbusters, but them being successful would give studios confidence if they don't want to do a big budget risk, like Rango or something like a Pixar film. Why can't that they try that? If that was being done right now, there would be a sort of demand for independent animated films and more foreign animated films. With all of those performing well alongside the big three and the kid-friendly romps, we'll get ahead. These animated films won't be hard to find. They'll get the attention they really deserve. With that, animation will get more and more accolades, and more people will realize that the art form has endless possibilities. Right now, animated films do very well and will continue to do well, and it's the perfect time to be ambitious, to start taking some risks. The medium is not a novelty, and people need to understand this sooner or later.

It can happen. If it does, new heights will be reached. Audiences will appreciate animation in ways they never did before. Animated classics will be sought after by those who once deemed animation as inane "kiddie stuff". Foreign animated films and more experimental endeavors will be the norm. Animation will dominate... It can happen...

Ranking the Oscar nominated shorts: 1992-2001

Back in March, after I completed the reviews of the Oscar nominated shorts from 2002-2011, I wrote a special post ranking the nominated films in those years by personal preference. That turned out to be one of my favorite posts, since it was fun going over all of the nominated films in making the ranks, and I just like making ranked lists. It was so much fun that I've decided to make one of these ranked lists once every ten reviews. Since I just completed my 20th review, I will now present my rankings of the films nominated between 1992-2001, which were the 61st - 70th time that the Best Animated Short award was presented.

For the most part there were five nominees per year in these ten years. The only exceptions came in 1996, when there were only four nominees, and 2000 when there were only three. That makes for 47 total nominees, three short of the 50 that were nominated between 2002-2011. And there was one film that Disney had locked up in their underground vaults guarded by Cerberus for 15 years, but one courageous man had risked life and limb to bring Redux Riding Hood to animation audiences everywhere. While director Steve Moore will probably end up chained to a rock having his liver eaten by an eagle every day, his contributions will never be forgotten by me, as it allows me to rank all 47 nominees!

Read more »

Thoughts on "Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted"

Since it's coming out in a couple of weeks, I figured I'd offer my thoughts on DreamWorks Animation's Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted, which had its world premiere at the Cannes Film Festival last Friday to very good reception. The film currently sits at 80% on critics aggregator site Rotten Tomatoes, though that score may go up or down. All I can say is, I'm very surprised, because out of all the animated films coming out this year, I wasn't really looking forward to this one.

From the two trailers I saw in theaters, this looked like a loud, frenetic mess. I enjoyed the first film a lot, though its second half was lacking. Its 2008 sequel, Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa, was dialogue-heavy. The story at least tried to develop the main characters. The results? Both films are average, but enjoyable with very colorful animation and fun character designs. The jokes were funny for the most part, nothing really cringeworthy.

Now DreamWorks has been getting better. Since Kung Fu Panda, their films were a little less derivative and less dependent on pop culture jokes. How to Train Your Dragon was the real shocker, though it wasn't perfect, it is currently the closest thing to Pixar that the studio has put out. DreamWorks even put effort into the three sequels Shrek Forever After, Kung Fu Panda 2 and Puss in Boots, which were more story-driven while also having lots of comedy. The upcoming Rise of the Guardians looks beautiful, something I wouldn't say about say... Shark Tale or Bee Movie.

I was afraid that DreamWorks would deliver another derivative film with this sequel and go back to their pre-2008 roots. The trailers, I felt, were bad. They make the film look like something that's on speed. Early reviews did indeed say it was frenetic, but they also praised the film. Apparently DreamWorks delivered a fun, funny and witty adventure with this finale to their zoo gang series. While I was dissatisfied with the trailers, I was surprised to see that Noah Baumbach co-wrote the screenplay, who wrote for several Wes Anderson films including his spectacular stop-motion film Fantastic Mr. Fox. The reviews are also praising the film's circus scenes, since the plot involves Alex, Marty, Melman and Gloria joining a traveling circus, which are very colorful and nice to look at. Those shots were my favorite parts of the recent trailer, so that's a scene I'm looking forward to. I will also admit that Marty's "afro circus" line is pretty funny.

With all that said, I am now looking forward to seeing this film. Even though the trailers didn't really do much for me, I ultimately decided a few weeks ago that I'd give it a chance since the first two were satisfying. As for the box office, this'll probably be washed away by Brave and Ice Age: Continental Drift domestically, but worldwide, it should do very well. The European setting was obviously picked because this series is huge in Europe, so it's perfect for DreamWorks and the revenue will support their more ambitious upcoming films. It'll be a nice animated treat before Brave hits theaters.

Are you looking forward to this film? Or do you plan on skipping it? What did you think of Madagascar and Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa? Sound off!

"Wreck-It Ralph" Trailer Coming June 6th

That's right folks, a trailer for Walt Disney Animation Studios' upcoming film Wreck-It Ralph is on the way! We'll be getting it in less than two weeks, on June 6th. All I can say is, I am very very excited. I was worried that Disney wouldn't have one ready in time. I do wish that they had one to attach to The Avengers, which would've been an extremely smart marketing move. However, at least we'll be seeing this trailer before Pixar's Brave, which is inevitably going to do very well at the box office. In addition to that, we'll probably see it before DreamWorks' Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted, which opens June 8th.

It's like Tangled all over again. We had to wait until Toy Story 3 came out in June 2010 to see the first trailer for the film, and from there, Disney marketed the film aggressively until it hit theaters in November. Now if Disney does the same for Wreck-It Ralph, they'll have another Tangled-sized success on their hands. With Rich Ross and MT Carney gone, I hope the marketing department does this and learns from the past mistakes. One can only hope, right?

What would you like to see in the first trailer for this film? Do you think Disney blew it by not having one ready for The Avengers? Or do you think the film still has a chance to score at the box office? Sound off!

Max Payne 3: Three Million units and counting.

Last week, Rockstar's Max Payne 3 was released for the Xbox 360 and the PS3. The shooter is the latest gem from the brothers Sam and Dan Houser, founders of Rockstar Games. Now, Take-Two Interactive, owners of Rockstar and 2K Games ('Bioshock'), has stated that Max sold three Million units in the first week.

Reported figures also showed a loss of 27 percent over the last year, accumulating a net revenue of 'merely' $825.8 million up to the end of March 2012. Take-Two shareholders however are still smiling, as the corporation expects to make up for it's loss this year around, and forecasts a total revenue of 1.75 to 1.85 Billion before March 31, 2013 (so, in fact even better then the reported 1.13 Billion over 2010/2011), leading me to conclude that GTA V will definitely be released before that.

GTA IV sold 3.6 million units within the first 24 hours and six Million the first week, which made it into the Guiness book of records aka Guiness World Records. (the record for fastest selling game currently stands with Activision's Modern Warfare 3, which sold 6.5 million units on the very first day of sales). All GTA games by Rockstar, going back to the very first one, have been released in October, except for GTA IV, which was slated for October 16, 2007 but was delayed until April 8, 2008 (after the fiscal year ended) due to 'technical challenges', as the official accounts state.

Max Payne Comic.

Completely in style with the first two games (which used comic book panels instead of cut scenes), Marvel Comics just released the first of three comic books about Max Payne, written by Dan Houser himself with Sami Järvi aka Sam Lake of Finnish game developer Remedy Entertainment, the original creators of Max Payne. The limited comic book series titled 'After the Fall' chronicles Max's past, as shown in the original game from 2001 and the sequel 'The Fall of Max Payne' released in 2003. It has great art by Fernando Blanco with stunning covers by Greg Horn. But don't run off to your local comic store just yet, as Rockstar has officially made the series available for free as downloads on their site (a PDF file becomes available if you hover over the cover artwork). Currently only the first issue is available, issue 2 will be available as of June 12, with 3 following after that.

Best Animated Short - 1992

We have finally gotten to the 20th set of nominated shorts! That means there's another 60 more to go! That's not too exciting, actually. What is more exciting is that it's the 20th anniversary of all things 1992. Fasten your seat belts. We're going to take a trip down memory lane.

1992 was a whirlwind year in my life. It was the year that I turned seven. I was at the stage where I was able to have some pretty vivid memories, but very few that withstands the effects of 20 years of neuronal reconstruction. More importantly, it was the year that I moved from California to Kansas. I've lived in five states in my life. Michigan was where I was born, and where I lived until 1989. We still go there frequently because of family. Virginia is where I lived the longest - I've lived there since 1999 - and it's where my family still lives. I've been in Texas since 2009 for school. Kansas was where I spent the majority of my childhood (1992-1999), and it is where I have the fondest memories. That leaves California as kind my forgotten home. I lived in Pleasanton from 1989-1992: I was too young and it was too distant to have any lasting memories. Or so I thought.

Read more »

Pixar and Sequels

Andrew Stanton, the director of Pixar's Finding Nemo and WALL-E, showed up at the Hero Complex Film Festival last weekend and talked about his experiences working with Steve Jobs while also offering a screening of WALL-E. He then brought up the idea of Pixar making more sequels. That's right, you heard it, more sequels.

“I’m sure you’ll see some other sequels of things as they grow because now we are not so blinded. It’s the originals that keep us really going and it’s the sequels that are like comfort food, and I think it’s the same way for the audience," he stated. He also spoke enthusiastically about Monsters University, stating it was the only sequel/prequel in the works and that the crew doesn't want to "taint" the original. He once again stated the Pixar tradition: They won't make the sequel unless they have a good idea, be it a fourth Toy Story or a second Finding Nemo.

Personally, I don't want to see any more sequels from Pixar. Sometimes it's best to leave the original films on their own, Toy Story 2 and Toy Story 3 happened to be rare exceptions that formed an excellent trilogy. I just can't see them making another one, because the trilogy ended so perfectly with Toy Story 3. Also, if Pixar doesn't do sequels if the story isn't strong, then how come we got Cars 2? Your opinions may be vary, but I felt that Cars 2 was something that needed more work. It was a messy story that focused too much on one character while downplaying everyone else. It got negative reviews, and many Pixar fans were unsatisfied with it.

Which also brings up an interesting question, is Cars 3 going to happen? Now I did not entirely dislike Cars 2, but I've said numerous times that I don't ever want Pixar to go down those roads again. Cars 2 lacked a strong story and it had an incredibly disastrous final act. Now I wouldn't be surprised if Lasseter and the crew genuinely learned from that mistake (though Lasseter seemed to use the commercial success as an excuse to prove that people liked the film, regardless of the critical reception) and improve the story for a third film. Cars 2 would've been fine as a non-serious romp from another studio, it just felt out of place coming from Pixar. Hopefully it's just rumors, but it might happen given the dough this franchise brings in.

As for a sequel to The Incredibles, I'll support it if director Brad Bird has a great idea for the sequel, but I am in the minority. I never wanted a sequel back when it came out, and nor do I really want one now. It's great as a stand-alone film, it does not need a sequel. Then again, Toy Story didn't either, so you never know. If Bird comes up with an idea, then I will be excited. If Lee Unkrich, John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton and several others have an excellent idea for another Toy Story, I won't be upset, but for now, I don't want another Toy Story. They should stick with the Toy Story Toons or have Disney make something without Pixar's involvement that will still bring in the bucks for Pixar, much like the direct-to-video Cars spin-off Planes.

I'm not going to jump the gun and yell "Pixar is selling out!" We still have Brave, The Good Dinosaur, the untitled Inside the Mind project and Dia De Los Muertos, which director Lee Unkrich talked about today. I'm just not happy with the idea of a potential fourth Toy Story, which doesn't need another installment. I could probably tolerate a third Cars, given how disappointing the sequel was. I just hope that Pixar isn't doing this to support bigger projects because their original non-sequel films do so well and Cars 2 didn't outgross riskier projects like Ratatouille and Up.

I would actually be fine with just Cars being that franchise that supports bigger projects, because I can't see Dia De Los Muertos selling a line of toys, since Ratatouille and Up weren't quite market-friendly. I wouldn't mind if Cars was like an Ice Age-type franchise for Pixar, one that reels in the bucks from time to time. If Cars 2's $559 million worldwide total supported the upcoming original projects, then I don't see much harm in a third one. The damage is already done. Also, what if that third one is an improvement?

What do you think of Pixar doing more sequels? Do you think they have sold out? Or do you think there's potential in certain sequels? What would you like a sequel to Cars or The Incredibles to be about? Sound off!

Maya 2013 bonus tools.

Today Autodesk provided a free collection of plug-ins and scripts for Maya 2013. When installed it will create an additional menu that features various tools and utilities, allowing for an easier workflow. The Bonus tools are available for free for Windows, Mac and Linux 32 and 64 bit systems.

There are a couple of new modifier commands, such as the drag/move tool, mirror translate/rotate and copy pivot from selected. Some extra modeling feats have also been added, such as the delete edge tool and the N-sided to quad tool.

Go to Autodesk Area for all the details on the new and tweaked bonus tool features and download links. Instructions for setting up additional Python scripts and plug-ins have been included in the 58 page PDF file that comes with the set, so make sure to check them out if needed.

"Brave" TV Spots and "Finding Nemo" 3D Trailer

Yesterday, we got two new things from Pixar: First, a new TV spot for Brave and second, the new trailer for the 3D re-release of Finding Nemo. First up, the Brave spot...

The TV spot isn't bad, though it does try to sell it more as a comedy than anything else. This is the norm for most Disney and Pixar animated films when it comes to the commercials, which are normally hyperactive to begin with. Most of the comic relief here works, but I'm hoping that future TV spots will focus on the story itself and not the antics of the main characters.

They also released an extended version today that's less messy, though it does insert comic relief at moments where it doesn't belong. All in all, this is an improvement and it shows some bits and pieces of new footage. I also found it kind of weird that the spot said "from Disney and Pixar", as opposed to "Disney-Pixar". Then again, I miss the days when the trailers and spots would say "Walt Disney Pictures present a Pixar Animation Studios film," because technically, that's what they should say.

Then we have this featurette, which is more akin to humorous "Kilt" featurette. This one advertises a fictional LP called "Freedom Broch" featuring parodies of well-known songs. The marketing department really seemed to go all out with this film. Now let's see them devote this effort and time to Wreck-It Ralph!

Next up, the Finding Nemo 3D trailer...

I am very excited to re-experience Finding Nemo in theaters (though I would prefer that it wasn't in 3D). This trailer was somewhat of a mess, but it doesn't really matter because we all know how great the film is. It focuses a lot more on the comedy than the story. I would've preferred a trailer that focused more on the story, but I'm guessing Disney marketing wants to make this come off as a funny film to kids who haven't seen the original (are there any?). I also think this re-release is a bit too soon, but then again, this is a crown jewel of animation so I'd love to see it on the big screen. When I first saw it in 2003, I was around ten years old, so seeing it in theaters now would probably be an even better experience. I have no idea what it will look like in 3D, but I just wish that we could re-experience these films without having to wear sunglasses. This is why I'm happy and unhappy about Disney's re-release plans, which I ranted about before.

Also, I've realized something, the trailer line-up for Brave is probably going to be massive. Just think about it for a second. This, Monsters University (inevitable since it shown at CinemaCon), Rise of the Guardians, Frankenweenie, ParaNorman and possibly Wreck-It Ralph. Other theaters might add Ice Age: Continental Drift or Hotel Transylvania. That's going to be quite a line-up of trailers. What do you think? What trailers do you think will be attached to the film? Both 2D and 3D versions.

Anyways, what are your thoughts on the Brave TV spot and the Finding Nemo 3D trailer? Sound off!

Also, one more month until Brave opens nationwide!

Best Animated Short Make-up Review - Redux Riding Hood (1997)

So if you're one of the two people that have been following my blog since I started it, you should know that in the 19 years that I've reviewed, there are two films that I haven't seen. And they both happen to be from Disney. One was Lorenzo, the 2004 film about a pompous cat whose tail comes to life thanks to some witchery. And the other is Redux Riding Hood, the 1997 film that serves as like an afterstory to the Little Red Riding Hood fairy tale. Both films were nominated for the Oscar, but neither film won. After the losses, Disney had shelved the films and they have not been found online or on DVD releases for years, with only a guest appearance at a festival with Oscar-nominated animated shorts. Lorenzo is still MIA, but after 15 years under lock and key, Redux Riding Hood is finally available online. I wrote about the film back when I did the 1997 reviews, but now that I have finally seen it, I might as well do a full review.

Read more »

"The Avengers" Soars Again, Second Viewing Thoughts and More

It was bound to happen. The Avengers would inevitably take the #1 spot at the weekend box office again. Universal Pictures' Battleship was no match for Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Hulk, Hawkeye and Black Widow. While it didn't crush the third weekend record (Avatar holds that record), it still had a good hold for a blockbuster, dropping 46% from last weekend. The film has now grossed $457 million domestically and $1.180 billion worldwide, making it the fourth highest grossing film worldwide. The bigger question is, will it top Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2? (which made $1.328 billion) I think it has the potential to do so, because it hasn't opened in a few other markets yet, most notably Japan. Its current $724 million overseas total is nothing short of impressive. As for the final domestic total, I still think it has a shot at topping $600 million, as it would be lovely to see a non-James Cameron film passing that mark.

I saw it again on Saturday, and it was just as good if not better. I still have a few criticisms. I think the first thirty minutes or so are somewhat flimsy, though things fire on all cylinders when Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Bruce Banner and Thor are together. I also felt that Thor could've seen a little more development, though they did explain how got back to Earth briefly. I just hope they cover what was left out in Thor 2. The finale was even more enjoyable, even though I knew what was going to happen. Alan Silvestri's score stood out more this time around as well, especially the main theme. It's ridiculously catchy, and it's one that won't go away, and that's a good thing. Also, I saw this in IMAX 3D. I must say, it's worth it. Though it was post-conversion 3D, I think that it actually worked, and this is coming from someone who thinks post-conversion 3D is the devil. During the final battle, when the Chitauri Leviathans come flying at the screen, it feels like they are going to come out of the screen. Wait, this was post-conversion 3D?

The audience loved it, though the reaction wasn't as overly enthusiastic as the reaction it got when I saw it at another theater on opening day. Before the film began, someone yelled out "Avengers assemble!" Throughout the film, everyone laughed and even clapped during a few parts. The best scenes (and you know which ones I'm talking about) got the best reactions. The audience applauded at the end, and a lot of them stayed for both post-credits scenes. I missed the second post-credits scene because the folks I was with wanted to leave, but my father and I stayed. The second post-credits scene got a lot of laughs.

All in all, it was definitely fun on second viewing. Contrary to what some might say, this one won't wear thin for a while. Like I said in my first review, it's what other summer blockbusters should be. It's loads of fun and it's one of those films you have to see in theaters, for those who haven't seen it in theaters yet.

Trailers? Only four. We got The Dark Knight Rises, which looks amazing. What more can I say about it? We also got the very intense trailer for Prometheus, which also looks brilliant. They also had this trailer for The Amazing Spider-Man, which debuted way back in February. I found it kind of weird that they showed this, not the one that came after it. At first, I wasn't really looking forward to this, but with each new preview, I get a little bit more excited. I have a feeling this will do fine at the box office, but it won't outgross any of the Raimi films stateside. Last but not least, we got the Frankenweenie trailer. While I think this film looks brilliant, I just think it doesn't look like something you'd see in IMAX 3D. It somewhat confuses me that this is in IMAX 3D, but Pixar's Brave isn't. To me, that would be perfect on the huge screen.

Oh well, aside from The Avengers doing incredibly well, we have Battleship. I predicted that $50 million would be the maximum amount this film would gross on opening weekend, but it made only half of that. With just $25 million, this is pretty bad for a big budget summer blockbuster. It's already covered its $209 million budget internationally, but you'd think that something like this would score an opening of over $35 million or so just because it was another mindless summer blockbuster. Apparently audiences weren't fooled this time, and I don't want to sound like a broken record, but this looked like Transformers 3.5, but on water. I mean, G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra opened with $56 million back in 2009, because it still looked like something worth seeing. This didn't, and reviews certainly seem to imply that. I haven't seen it, I don't plan on seeing it, and quite frankly, I'm probably not missing anything.

It was also obvious that it wouldn't come anywhere near The Avengers this weekend. I think that Men in Black 3 (changed from III to 3 so they could conveniently throw 3D into the title, I guess) will dethrone this film next weekend, since it looks like fun, it's a Men in Black film (regardless of how Men in Black II did) and reviews are decent so far. Also, it's Will Smith in an action film (he hasn't acted in a film since 2008's Seven Pounds). Audiences will show up. I think it'll score at least $70 million on its opening weekend because the previous film's opening weekend is $71 million adjusted, the first film's opening adjusts to $88 million. It'll also take away The Avengers' 3D and IMAX 3D screens.

On another sad animation-related note, Aardman's The Pirates! Band of Misfits sunk again. This time it dropped 49%, with a weak $1.5 million weekend total. While it has grossed $99 million worldwide so far, the fact remains: Another artistically interesting animated film has died at the domestic box office. Poor marketing killed what was already a hard sell. You'd think that someone at Columbia Pictures or Sony Pictures Animation would market it aggressively so it would make a tidy profit, since the film cost roughly $60 million to make. That's much less than what Sony Animation's own The Smurfs cost to make. If they hadn't watered it down for American children and audiences, sold it as a quirky comedy for family audiences (and not as a kiddie spoof of Pirates of the Caribbean) and released it in early April, they probably would've had a profitable film on their hands. Aardman split with DreamWorks for a reason, now those horror stories seem to be happening again. Executive meddling is ruining these films.

Well, those were my thoughts on this weekend's box office results. This one turned into a bit of a ramble, but a lot went on over the weekend. What are your thoughts on The Avengers' success? Do you think Men in Black 3 will be a success in the long run? Do you think The Avengers will be 2012's top grossing film? Sound off!

Non-nominated Highlight: Oink (1993)

Well, as I like to point out (and have been kind of proving with the ability to embed or link to 74 of the 92 nominees between 1993-2011), many of the nominated short films are readily available online. However, there are those handful of films that are impossible to find online. I've still managed to find many of them on videotapes or DVDs with many other short films. I usually like to watch the other shorts, because they may be more interesting than the ones that were actually nominated. Nowhere is this more evident than in this film, the next entry into our series of great short films that were not nominated. (Although to be honest I did link to three other great films that were not nominated since the last entry. See if you can find them.)
Read more »

Introducing "KJO and Kris"

Hello folks, the other day, a fellow animation fan and I decided to come up with a web show for YouTube, called "KJO and Kris"! Of course, I'm KJO and my co-host Kris is a fellow blogger (you can also follow her on twitter) and animation lover. The idea was to deliver our take on certain animated features, and to see how our opinions are similar and how they can also differ. We'll be covering older animated films and recent animated films from several different studios.

For now, we have an introduction video and the first in series of "rambles".

The introduction...

... And our ramble, about things like the differences between cartoons and animated features, the MPAA and Disney's upcoming film Wreck-It Ralph.

As you can see, we have yet to get an official logo of sorts, so this will have to do for the moment. Our first review should be here by next week or so. Definitely check it out and tell us what you think. Also, give us suggestions on what animated films we should review. We already got a good amount right now.

Disney's Next Short Film, "Paperman"

Walt Disney Animation Studios' has kicked off a series of videos chronicling the making of their upcoming animated short film, Paperman. This short film will be attached to their upcoming animated feature Wreck-It Ralph this autumn. From what I've seen of this project so far, it looks very interesting. Disney certainly knows how to deliver the goods when it comes to animated short films, and like Pixar, they are trying to keep the idea of short films before main attractions going in this day and age. In this first clip, director John Kahrs talks about what inspired him.

I'm really looking forward to this. As one who is very happy with the fact that Disney is putting short films before their big event films, Paperman seems even riskier than their previous few short films, given the storyline and the interesting, minimalistic art style. This and Wreck-It Ralph should make for a great night at the theaters. Looking at the still images and the synopsis alone is proof that Walt Disney Animation Studios is slowly getting back to their roots and following in Walt Disney's footsteps.

Are you looking to this short film? Sound off!

Best Animated Short - 1993

Our journey in reviewing the Oscar nominated animated shorts has taken me to 1993 Oscars. This was the first time I remember watching any parts of the Oscar ceremony. Before I get into that story, let me first clarify something. The Oscars are an annual thing, so there will have to be a way to designate which ceremony you are talking about. There are generally three ways to do so. The first way is to do the official title, which counts the ceremonies using the 1927-28 one as the first one. So for example one we are reviewing is the 66th annual Academy Awards while the one that just passed is the 85th annual Academy Awards. I don't like this method because it is annoying and requires a lot of math. An alternative method is to do it by year, but even then there are two ways to do so. One is to do it by the year of the ceremony, so in this case would be the ceremony from 1994. The other is to do it by the year the movies they were celebrating came out. So this would be the 1993 Oscars, since the films that were nominated had their release in 1993. This is the way I do it.

Read more »

Review: "Tron: Uprising" Prologue/Preview

Warning: Spoilers ahead! Also, if you haven't seen Tron: Legacy or its predecessor, you may be a bit confused.

Being a fan of the original Tron and one who enjoyed its sequel Tron: Legacy, I definitely had to check out this series. Tron: Uprising takes place between the original 1982 classic and the 2010 sequel. The series will be airing on Disney XD on June 7th. At first I wasn't sure if I would bother with this series, prematurely writing it off as a spin-off just to bring in the bucks, but then I decided to see this prologue (or preview of sorts, titled "Beck's Beginning") in order to judge it. I'm glad I didn't ignore it, this series has potential and it actually attempts to tell a pretty good story for an animated television series.

Tron: Uprising tells the story of Beck, a program who is strongly against Clu's oppression of The Grid (of course, if you've seen Tron: Legacy, you'll know all of this from the start). He aspires to be the next Tron, who is thought to be dead after Clu took over. After one of Clu's henchmen kills one of Beck's close friends, Beck seeks vengeance. This 31-minute preview essentially shows what happened to Beck's home (one of many cities on The Grid) and what drove Beck to stand up against Clu. Most of it is a flashback, as Beck tells it to what appears to be another one of Clu's henchmen. It turns out, it's Tron himself, who is still alive. The preview ends where Tron plans on training the young program.

Aside from the nice set-up, this was a pretty good preview and it shows that the series is something worth looking forward to. It was nice to hear Bruce Boxleitner provide the voice of Tron. Elijah Wood provided the voice of Beck. The rest of the voice cast was top notch, with big names such as Mandy Moore and Paul Ruebens (of all people!) alongside Lance Henriksen (who voiced Kerchak in Tarzan) and well-known video game and anime voice actor Fred Tatasciore as Clu, though I wished Jeff Bridges would provide the voice of Clu.

The style is really cool. It faithfully captures the look of Tron: Legacy, even if it isn't as elaborate, it's still really nice to look at. What I didn't really care for was the actual animation, it just seemed really stiff to me and I felt that character designs were a tad bit awkward. Joseph Trapanese, who has worked with Daft Punk before, has recaptured the brilliance of their Tron: Legacy score for the series. Talented people were certainly behind this show, including Steven Lisberger himself. Sean Bailey is also one of the show's directors alongside Charlie Bean. Add to that some of talented actors and a decent script, and you've got a promising series.

In all, it was impressive. It was not perfect by any means, but good for an animated television show. I usually don't watch much TV these days, especially animated shows, but I thought the writing was not too bad. There were very flimsy moments, but overall, it did its job. The characters were interesting and I was liking the story. Hopefully we'll get a lot out of this. I hope they delve into how Tron was reprogrammed and became Rinzler, and even more. That was a big problem I had with Tron: Legacy, the story was very thin and it didn't explain much. I still really enjoyed the film (seeing in IMAX 3D on opening weekend was an experience I won't forget) and maybe this series will tie some loose ends. Like I said, this series has potential, and it looks it wasn't wasted.

You can view the whole prologue/preview here.

I'm certainly looking forward to this series. If you've seen this preview, what did you think of it? Are you anticipating this series? Or not? Sound off!

Box Office: "The Avengers" Rules Again, New "Brave" Clip

The Avengers was #1 yet again, which was expected. This time, it broke more records. It became the first film to gross over $100 million (the total was $103 million) on its second weekend while also breaking second weekend record. It also became the fastest film to hit $300 million and $350 million at the domestic box office. It now sits at $373 million. Worldwide, it has hit $1 billion. All this in just three weeks (most overseas got the film the weekend before we Americans got it), that's just amazing. What should it take in next weekend? I'm saying around $60-62 million.

In other box office news, Tim Burton's Dark Shadows only opened with $29 million, which is a rather disappointing start for this Burton-Depp film. Mixed reviews might've killed it, not like it stood a chance against The Avengers anyway, but it still could've done better. The Hunger Games held well, as it might clear $400 million at the domestic box office. What's also been doing well was the comedy Think Like a Man, which might tip $100 million by the end of its run.

Aardman's The Pirates! Band of Misfits held well this weekend after sinking last weekend. The film has now grossed $23 million to date, hardly spectacular by any stretch, but it's an indicator that this film might have decent legs in the long run. I highly doubt anything else will hurt it until Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted comes out on June 8th. All I can say is, Columbia dropped the ball with this film. Toning it down for American audiences, mainly children, and marketing it like a kiddie romp pretty much spelled box office disappointment for this wonderfully entertaining stop motion film.

Oh, and feast 'yer eyes on another new Brave clip, focusing on King Fergus and Queen Elinor.

Your thoughts on the success of The Avengers? Were you expecting it to hit $100 million this weekend? Or lower? How much do you think it'll make in the long run? Also, what do you think of the new Brave clip? Sound off!

The Animation Revolution

The following is all strictly opinion-based and is essentially what I believe is the right direction to go to expand the art of animation into new territories. Any of my criticisms against certain films and animation studios isn't meant to be taken personally, these are only my personal thoughts.

Animation is an art form... Always has been, and always will be...

It’s been nearly seventy-five years since Walt Disney and his crew of highly talented people tried the impossible and produced the ambitious project that was Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs and premiered it to the public. This film changed the world’s view of the animation medium, which they thought was an outlet for funny six-minute cartoons. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs not only made audiences laugh, it made them cry, a first for anything animated. It also frightened younger audiences, proving that Walt didn’t want these films to be seen as children’s fare.

Critics and audiences loved it. It became the highest grossing film at the time of its release, but the Academy Awards snubbed it despite the fact that it was a great film that signaled a new frontier for cinema. It wasn’t nominated for Best Picture, but Walt Disney ultimately got a “Special Achievement” award as an apology. No Disney animated feature made during Walt’s lifetime would ever be nominated for Best Picture, but Walt did take home the most Oscars than anyone else for not only his animated films, but his live action films and short films. However, the critical reception for most of the Disney animated features was sky high and to this day, they constantly do extremely well on home video formats.

With that, how come animation still isn’t recognized as an art form by the public? Today, animated films usually dent the Top 10 at the domestic and worldwide box office, and sometimes top it completely. The Academy Awards nominated Pixar’s Up and Toy Story 3 for Best Picture for both 2009 and 2010 respectively (the second and third they did this, which they did first was Beauty and the Beast), but yet the category for Best Animated Feature still exists and those two films ended up taking home that award. Aside from Pixar, Disney and DreamWorks, most of the mainstream animated films out there are very kid-oriented and while some of them are entertaining, they don’t try anything new with the medium. Disney also doesn’t help by marketing their films as kid’s stuff, and the classics are surrounded by a merchandising empire that further rams that point home.

Over the last few years, we got such unnecessary films that did nothing for the medium. The heavy-hitters (Disney, Pixar, DreamWorks) delivered the goods, and so did the independent filmmakers, but then we also got a fair share of kid-friendly films that over-saturated the market: Alpha and Omega, Mars Needs Moms, Hop, Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil, The Smurfs, Happy Feet Two alongside average, sometimes near-mediocre films like Dr. Seuss’ The Lorax and Gnomeo and Juliet.

We’re at a point now where animated films are doing better than ever before at the box office. Toy Story 3 is a fine example, but most of the other big animation outlets are resorting to releasing kiddie films like The Smurfs and Hop, rather than trying to compete with the big guns artistically and expand the art form. Instead, they just want to make films that kids will drag their parents to see, rather than trying something new.

There are exceptions. Films like Rango, The Adventures of Tintin, A Cat in Paris, Chico & Rita, Fantastic Mr. Fox, Coraline, Mary & Max, The Secret of Kells and other artistically interesting animated films have surfaced in the last few years. The problem is, only a couple of them saw some kind of success at the box office. Most of these films are only released in select theaters and only get some form of recognition when they appear during the Academy Awards. As good as Pixar is, no independent films have ever taken home the Oscar for Best Animated Feature. They just come and go, people miss out on them. Rango won for 2011, and that might open people up to alternatives in the animation world, but not likely.

Meanwhile, subpar films do well. The heavy-hitters usually top the box office because their films are the best of the bunch. We’re lucky to have a studio like Pixar consistently making critically acclaimed films, and DreamWorks and Disney have gotten better as well and have churned out solid gold winners. Blue Sky, Sony Pictures Animation and Illumination however, have their ups and downs and they aren’t trying anything new with the medium. Newcomer Laika, after the moderate success of Coraline, seems like a candidate for one of the big animation houses, but we don’t know how their new film ParaNorman will do.

Pixar has revolutionized computer animation and made excellent films with such unusual plots and casts of characters such as Monsters, Inc., Ratatouille and Up. They also gave audiences a film that was virtually dialogue-less for the first thirty minutes. They have moved audiences to tears with Up and Toy Story 3, while also making them laugh. The best thing is, they aren’t even making these films for children. They, like Walt Disney, are aiming for the entire family so they can entertain and inspire adults, children and everyone else. They’re also not afraid of trying something new, and their upcoming films Dia De Los Muertos and Pete Docter’s currently untitled “Inside the Mind” project prove this.

Since Michael Eisner stepped down as CEO of The Walt Disney Company, Walt Disney Animation Studios has been making films that are true to the great Disney tradition while also trying some new things. The Princess and the Frog and Winnie the Pooh are the studio’s first traditional animated films since 2004 and they’re both wonderful films. While poor management lead to them disappointing at the box office, it’s great that they were produced in the first place. The CGI films Bolt and Tangled also showed that Disney could tell good stories again no matter what medium. We should see the same for their two upcoming films, Wreck-It Ralph and Frozen.

DreamWorks’ has worked with better stories for films such as How to Train Your Dragon, and experimenting with different visual styles for films like Kung Fu Panda and its critically acclaimed sequel. While they’ve had a few near-duds like Shrek Forever After and Megamind (spillover from the pre-2008 era), their upcoming slate consists of projects that have a lot of potential such as Rise of the Guardians, Me and My Shadow, Rumblewick and Alma. That’s not even half of what they have in the works.

As for Sony, Illumination and Blue Sky? Sony delivered a critically acclaimed success with Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, but also delivered the travesty that was The Smurfs. Illumination had the cute and entertaining Despicable Me, but they also had Hop and Dr. Seuss’ The Lorax. Blue Sky delivered the goods with the first Ice Age, Dr. Seuss’ Horton Hears a Who! and Rio, but also did pointless sequels to Ice Age that did nothing but bring in the bucks, and “Rio 2” is on the way.

What we need is for the big studios to challenge Pixar, Disney and DreamWorks with equally artistic efforts since independent films aren’t going to be given successful wide releases anytime soon. Rango was from a number of production houses, which was lucky enough to get a wide release from a big studio. It was a success, too, but it wasn’t big enough. Why can’t Blue Sky try this? With three non-sequel films in production, now is the time to try something new and risky, especially with the extra billion dollars they’ll most likely make off of Ice Age: Continental Drift this summer. Sony does have some interesting projects in the works, but their slate seems to lack ambition. Illumination’s upcoming slate consists of kid stuff, with a few eye-catchers in-between.

It makes me wonder though, with films like the Ice Age sequels, Despicable Me and it’s upcoming sequel and The Smurfs franchise, how come the studios can’t use this money for a risk every now and then? Think about it this way, Sony (for example) reels in $1 billion worldwide from both Smurfs films combined, and then comes up with something ambitious while making their bread and butter through safer stuff. Wouldn’t that be lovely? Same with Blue Sky and Illumination. Ice Age: Continental Drift reels in another insane amount of money, and some of that goes into something risky. You get where I am going with this?

So if these other studios do what Pixar, Disney and DreamWorks are doing, then we can make a giant leap forward. The medium needs it, because one half is about art and storytelling. The other half is just about entertaining kids and making a profit without caring for quality. If those all do well, people will see animation as an art form and the Academy Awards might also eliminate the Best Animated Feature category and put the best animated films of the year alongside the year’s best live action films. While I personally don't support award ceremonies, it would be lovely to see animation get that respect.

Pipe dream... But it CAN happen. Before the Second Golden Age of Animation fired up in the mid 1980s after the success of Don Bluth’s An American Tail and the Disney classics on home video, the idea of animation doing remotely well alongside blockbusters was unheard of. While films like Disney’s The Fox and the Hound were successful, they didn’t dent the Top 5 or sat alongside blockbusters like Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Grease, Superman, Kramer vs. Kramer and several others. Several other films flat out failed, but toy commercials were beginning to dominate animation in the form of Saturday morning cartoons and cheaply made films based on them.

Flash forward to the early 1990s, the Disney films are now rounding out the Top 5. Aladdin is the #1 film of 1992 both domestically and worldwide, defeating films like Batman Returns and Home Alone 2: Lost in New York. The Lion King was #1 at the worldwide box office in 1994 and became the best-selling home video release of all time. In 1995, Pixar’s Toy Story and Disney’s Pocahontas were both in the Top 5, Toy Story being at #1. That was a pipe dream back in 1985, but ten years later, it happened! It’s still happening. Animated films being in the Top 10 is nothing new now. With that, the market can be filled with artistic efforts instead of mediocre cash grabs. With all of the big budgets the other studios have, they need to take more risks.

Suppose in 2020, the other big studios begin offering works that are on par with Pixar, DreamWorks and Disney’s films. Then we’ll see independent animated films getting picked up for distribution, because that will be a hot property by that time. Instead of seizing money-making opportunities through making kiddie flicks, studios will now give audiences works of art. That way, it won’t be like the early 1990s, when all the studios thought that they could compete with Disney by making derivative films. These studios wonder why they are usually defeated critically and commercially by the likes of the big three, well, they need to make better films. Then we can start seeing more adult-oriented animation catch on, to go alongside marvelous family films. More foreign endeavors could make it big over here. This can all happen... Right now is the perfect time to do it.

All it’s going to take is vision, guts and no cynicism...