Showing posts with label Aardman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Aardman. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

September Animation Tidbits


More tidbits for ya... Some rather interesting ones, too...

Aardman's next feature-length stop motion animated film finally has a release date...

As confirmed by writer/director Richard Starzak on his Twitter, Shaun the Sheep (based on Aardman's long-running television series of the same name) will hit theaters on March 20, 2015...


Now first thing's first, is that the UK/Europe-only date? Or is this when it's supposed to open in the US as well?

Here in the states, DreamWorks' The Penguins of Madagascar opens the weekend after March 20th. Columbia essentially dumped Aardman's last film, The Pirates! Band of Misfits, in a spot where it would be eaten up by both 3D and family-friendly competition (shame on them) so if that's the US release date, I won't be surprised. I had last predicted that the film would hit theaters in April, but it looks like they're going for the mid-March spot.

I have a feeling that it will be an April release here in the states, what do you think? Either way, it's great to know that they finally have an idea of when it will be completed. Hopefully we get dates on other planned 2015 animated films, such as Ratchet & Clank, soon.

~


It was announced today that Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg are currently working on an R-rated animated comedy called Sausage Party.

Get this, it's about a sausage who goes on a journey to discover the "truth about his existence"... Where does this journey take place? In a supermarket... And the main sausage must get back to his aisle before the Fourth of July sale...

DreamWorks stalwart Conrad Vernon will direct with Greg Tiernan (bizarre choice, considering that his background is only direct-to-video Thomas the Tank Engine movies), and the film will be released by Columbia Pictures presumably sometime in 2015.

I'm not too sure about this one just yet. While it's nice to have a mainstream R-rated animated film come around, I have a feeling that this one will be no different from all of the "adult" animation that catches on in America. You know, the Family Guy and South Park variety. When are we going to start getting real "adult" animated films? Films that are mature to begin with, not ones that are raunchy and juvenile.

Then again, I loved This Is The End so this could be very, very funny. The concept though... Talking food? That's... New...

Well, for an animated feature-length film that is...

Update (9/25/13): Cartoon Brew confirmed that the film is being produced by Canadian animation house Nitrogen Studios, and the film will be computer animated.

~

Europe got four Frozen posters today... And boy do they beat the domestic one. Well not by much, but still...


The UK one on the left? Sven seems too front and center here. The one on the right is a bit better, even though it still makes the film look like a goofy comedy.


The one on the left? Great! Finally, some focus on Elsa for a change! The one without Elsa? Ehhhhh...

Oh, and I already saw the trailer that we're getting on Thursday. It's no great shakes, though the footage looked beautiful. I do anticipate seeing it in good quality this come Thursday but it doesn't come anywhere close to the short Japanese teaser. Typical of Disney's North American marketing...

~

And that's it... Some animation tidbits. What do you think of the international Frozen posters? What's your take on Sausage Party? Are you excited about Aardman's next film - a stop motion one no less? Sound off below!

Saturday, December 29, 2012

2012 Animation Box Office Stats


With the year coming to a close, let's take a look at how the animated batch did this year...
~


Dr. Seuss' The Lorax - Easily the most surprising and befuddling animated box office success of the year. Yes, the highest grossing Dr. Seuss film did gross over $200 million (How The Grinch Stole Christmas), but it didn't seem like The Lorax would get anywhere near that amount since it looked derivative from the trailers and turned out to be a very derivative film. Also add in the fact that several animated films in 2011 had unspectacular opening weekends and that the last animated Dr. Seuss adaptation (Horton Hears a Who!) didn't hit $200 million. It was suggested by some that animation was in a bit of a rut in 2011. I just think last year didn't really offer any "must-see" events, or the good stuff was a little too out of reach for audiences (i.e. Rango)

However, I've been thinking now that these kinds of family films are "the thing" now. Meaning, family films that are really more for kids than anything, but ones they drag their unfortunate parents to. I mean, explain why Yogi Bear pulled the ridiculously good multiplier that it did, and why The Smurfs did so well. These kinds of movies are hot at the moment, which is too bad, the good stuff should be making money. Worldwide, it didn't really sail. Horton Hears a Who! was no smash worldwide either, so this gross was expected, even with the film being in 3D and IMAX 3D. It made a nice $348 million worldwide. It cost almost nothing for Illumination, so it's a big success for them and everyone else involved.


The Pirates! Band of Misfits - Time and time again, I find myself wondering why stop-motion animation films have such a difficult time at the American box office. Sometimes I blame inept marketing, other times I believe it's because the subject matter in some of the films isn't really mainstream or conventional. The Pirates! Band of Misfits, I believe, suffered from both. Though I analyzed the overall box office performance earlier this year, I thought I'd address this point as well.

To a casual American moviegoer, The Pirates! would look undesirable, even if Columbia didn't market it the way they did. Not just because it's stop-motion, but because it comes off as a weird pirate film and American audiences are not truly accustomed to the animation medium to begin with. After the big budget spectacle of the Pirates of the Caribbean films, who would want to see this kind of film? Outside of us animation fans and those who are knowledgable about Aardman and the book series, no one would really. Of course, in a world where tons of adults shun animation, you really need to have something in your animated film that will interest adults from the get-go. The Pirates! really had no chance, being from a studio that makes quirky animated films that just don't seem to catch on here in America.

Of course, the folks at Aardman's home country were charitable. The Pirates! was a hit in the UK, and it did well enough all around the world. It did double its minimal budget of $55 million, so it's a moderate success for the studio. It certainly did better (profit-wise) than their last feature, Arthur Christmas. The optimist in me, however, hoped that the film would've made more dough in the states. Releasing this (a 3D film no less) right before The Avengers was an incredibly stupid move from Columbia. If released earlier in the month, it could've had time to get good legs and make more than the paltry $31 million it ended up making. Stop-motion really needs to take off in the domestic market.


Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted - Given the dwindling opening weekend totals of the DreamWorks films and the lackluster reception Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa got from audiences, I was expecting this to open with a very low total (in the $30 million range), but I guess all that colorful pizazz and singing zebra action really got people hyped for the film. Opening with $60 million, it had very good word of mouth and became the series' highest-grossing installment. Good thing too, for I believe it is the best of the series and a good film overall.

The film also broke $200 million, ensuring us animation fans that the $200 million benchmark would be reached more than once after a year where no feature did so. Over $700 million worldwide? DreamWorks certainly played their cards right with this film, and it was a much-needed super-hit for them.


Brave - I was certain that this would cross $200 million, and it did. Cars 2 only missed it by a hair, so I felt Brave would have no problem clearing that. Plus with the reception it got, it was bound to happen. It opened well (Over $60 million is the usual for a Pixar film) and had very good word of mouth, though it was more on the level of WALL-E than something like Ratatouille or Up. That being said, it is currently this year's highest grossing animated film domestically and will most likely keep that title.

Worldwide... What happened? I was thinking that this kind of fantasy film (not to mention 3D) would do Up numbers (i.e. over $400 million) overseas. Guess I was dead wrong. After all, How to Train Your Dragon grossed around the same amount. Over $500 million is good for any animated film, but it's not a monstrous total. But again, it's a big success for Pixar, once again.


Ice Age: Continental Drift - Looking at Shrek Forever After and Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, I knew this fourth installment in the series would dip and make the lowest total in the franchise domestically. It sure did, but $161 million is still good enough for Blue Sky. Worldwide, it exploded. We all saw that one coming. $875 million. Biggest animated film at the box office this year, and one of the biggest of all time. Are you not surprised?


ParaNorman - Like Coraline and other stop-motion films, ParaNorman only opened with a small amount. Word of mouth seemed to be great, the film pulled a 3.9x multiplier, the biggest this year so far for animated film. Again, another masterful stop-motion film has underperformed overall. Worldwide? It didn't make much of a mark, sadly. With $99 million overall, it looks like ParaNorman isn't much of a success. It didn't double its $60 million budget. Shame, but Laika will prevail.


Hotel Transylvania - Unlike the two other spooky-themed animated films released this year, Hotel Transylvania was certainly very mainstream and accessible. ParaNorman and Frankenweenie were not mainstream and are overall films that aren't entirely suitable for an audience that wants a specific kind of animated film presented to them (unless it's Pixar making the film). This on the other hand was perfect for casual moviegoers with its star-studded cast, appealing animation and funny jokes. Yes, it's been made clear many times: American audiences would rather see an animated film like this, and not something truly creative or daring like ParaNorman.

It is currently Sony Pictures Animation's biggest film domestically with $143 million and a healthy $308 million take worldwide. The budget? Only $85 million. Again, Sony Animation knows how to make a profit much like Blue Sky and Illumination.


Frankenweenie - Despite some pushy marketing from Disney, this Tim Burton stop-motion critical darling just couldn't do it. It opened low like every other stop-motion film and crept its way up to the mid-$30 million range. Its current worldwide total is $66 million, but that isn't enough to double the $39 million budget. It opens in a few more territories in the next few weeks, so who knows at this rate. Again, another stop-motion film has underperformed.


Wreck-It Ralph - Opening with a strong $49 million (though I had hoped it would've opened with more, but Hurricane Sandy affected the box office somewhat), Wreck-It Ralph was on its way to really wreck the box office. It has done very well so far, it's looking like it'll end up somewhere around $180-$190 million. How come it will fall short of $200 million? With the buzz it has been getting, why won't in reach it? How come it couldn't outgross Tangled?

The final worldwide total is too early to tell, since other countries haven't gotten the film yet (the latest arrival will be in Japan, in March). It's not really making a stir in most countries, but it's got the chance to add a good $200 million overseas and help the great Walt Disney Animation Studios film crack $400 million worldwide. With a $165 million budget, Disney will have a success on their hands if it makes that much. It should, a lot of effort went into it and it better get what it deserves.


Rise of the Guardians - What happened? Well, I looked into it and it seemed like another case where it was a combination of bad things. However, Rise of the Guardians has scored some impressive legs and word of mouth. It should at least hit $100 million by the time it is out of theaters here in the states. Worldwide, it's doing steadily but not spectacularly. Around $300 million seems to be the final amount for this film, which is good but not as much as DreamWorks' films usually do worldwide. It's no flop, but it's no big success.

~

Overall, this was certainly a better year than last year. It wasn't, however, an excellent year like 2009 or 2010. Three films hit $200 million stateside, proving that feature animation can still thrive with mass audiences despite a rather dry year behind it. But it wasn't without disappointments: Rise of the Guardians underperforming was certainly a shock to the animation community, and while it was expected, it was still a bit discouraging to see ParaNorman, Frankenweenie and The Pirates! not doing too well. I was hoping for some sort of stop-motion revolution this year since Coraline was able to do well enough three years back, but alas it did not happen.

Another thing that irks me is that something so obviously commercial like The Lorax could open so high ($70 million) and easily coast to $200 million stateside. Brave did the usual for a Pixar film, though I was hoping it would perform like Up, but this didn't earn the very strong word of mouth that film got. Worldwide, it did well but it was no titan. I guess that was going to happen, like I said earlier. Madagascar 3's success, I felt was deserved, since it was a quality film. I'd take a "good" loud/busy/obnoxious movie over a bad one. Nothing wrong with a busy, chaotic animated film done right. Ice Age's performance, I'm happy with, it shows that people are slowly getting tired of the franchise here in the states. While I'm happy to see Wreck-It Ralph doing well, I was hoping it would crush Brave at the box office being the year's best. Oh well...

What box office performance surprised you this year? What did you predict for these films? Did they match your predictions? Sound off!

Saturday, November 3, 2012

The Animated Race


Yesterday, 21 titles have been confirmed for this year's animation Oscar race. Though I'll always be against the idea of "Best Animated Feature" (an animated feature is a motion picture, don't separate it from live action), this is actually the fun part: Predicting!

With twenty-one films, that means there will be five slots for Best Animated Feature. There is also a possibility that one of these films may get nominated for Best Picture (that should have happened last year with Rango), so it will be interesting given this year's batch.

The Players:
Adventures in Zambezia
A South African computer animated film, also simply known as Zambezia. The film debuted earlier this year in South Africa, but no stateside release is planned yet. I have a feeling this one will have a limited run just in time for the Oscars. I believe, though, it'll have a very small chance at getting nominated.

Brave
This one has a big chance at getting nominated, being a Pixar film and the fact that it got good critical reception. Cars 2 was left out, but we all know why. This'll be nominated.

Delhi Safari
An Indian computer animated feature that apparently got some good reception at film festivals. The film opens here in the states on December 7th. Like Zambezia, I don't think this one has much of a chance though it is said to be a good film.

Dr. Seuss' The Lorax
Environmental themes aside, this probably won't get nominated.

Frankenweenie
Being a well-received Tim Burton film, this has a great chance at getting nominated.

From Up on Poppy Hill
Directed by Hayao Miyazaki's son Goro Miyazaki (Tales from Earthsea), this 2011 Studio Ghibli production has a good chance though Ponyo was not nominated in 2009. It could surprise, you never know. The film will be given a limited run in the US on March 15th.

Hey Krishna
Another Indian animated feature. Has a slight chance.

Hotel Transylvania
This one probably won't get nominated, since this film is more of silly fun comedy than anything.

Ice Age: Continental Drift
Definitely not getting nominated.

A Liar's Autobiography - The Untrue Story of Monty Python's Graham Chapman
Not sure about this one, though it is very interesting visually.

Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted
This one has a decent chance, being a well-received film and one that did make quite a splash at the Cannes Film Festival though it may not be one of the finalists.

The Mystical Law
A Japanese animated film. Not sure if this one has much of a chance.

The Painting
A 2011 French animated film. Like A Cat in Paris, this may have a very good chance.

ParaNorman
This will definitely be nominated. If it isn't, there will be an uproar amongst most animation fans.

The Pirates! Band of Misfits
Aardman's Arthur Christmas didn't get nominated last year (though it should have been nominated), I can't see this one making the cut either. It does have a chance, though.

The Rabbi's Cat
A French/Austrian animated film released a year ago. This one has a chance at getting nominated, just as much as The Painting.

Rise of the Guardians
Has a great chance, unless it gets mixed-to-negative reviews. Still, I can see it getting nominated.

Secret of the Wings
Why is this even qualifying? It's another Tinker Bell direct-to-video movie. I mean, doesn't Disney realize that something like this will never get nominated?

Walter & Tandoori's Christmas
Apparently this is based on animated television series, and this one also came out last year. I can't see this one getting nominated.

Wreck-It Ralph
Personally, I'd like this one to take home the Oscar. It's definitely getting nominated.

Zarafa
A French/Belgian animated film. This one has a slight chance.

Anyways, here's my early prediction:
Brave
The Painting
ParaNorman
Rise of the Guardians
Wreck-It Ralph

What's your prediction? Sound off!

Sunday, August 12, 2012

Let's Go Blundering!


Remember Aardman Animations' recent film, The Pirates! Band of Misfits? Chances are, you may not unless you are in the know of what's going on in the animation industry. Yes indeed, this little film happens to be another one of those animated films that came and went at the domestic box office. Why is that? Instead of being a poor animated film (in fact, it was a really good film), The Pirates! was actually another victim of executive meddling and misguided decisions. Columbia Pictures' attempts to help get the picture to sell ultimately sunk this high seas romp.

First off, Columbia Pictures probably had no idea what they were going to do after Aardman Animations joined forces with Sony Pictures Animation. First, the studio gives them the conventional Arthur Christmas and then this: A film based on a series of books that isn't well known in the United States, that has humor that may go over American audiences' heads, which is about science in Victorian England and features Charles Darwin as a main character. Science? Charles Darwin? Hot buttons here in the states, in addition to the concept potentially not being too appealing to American audiences. Columbia was probably worried that there would be controversy, given the amount of flack recent animated films tend to get. Remember how Cars 2, The Secret World of Arrietty and Dr. Seuss' The Lorax were supposed to be "liberal propaganda" for children?

With all due to respect to people's political and religious views, this most likely got Columbia Pictures worried. Since animation is viewed as "kiddie stuff" here in the states, people will suggest that anything with a slight agenda is propaganda for children, sometimes without having seen it. The original title of this film was The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists!, since that's the name of one of the books it's based on. Of course, that's the name of the original UK version of the film. So what did they do? They changed the title to The Pirates! Band of Misfits, which is such a bland and boring title that says nothing of film's story. Hey, it's more marketable to Americans, right? It's also marketable to kids, too! What could go wrong? Because, you know, animation is for kids!

Okay, there's nothing wrong with a title change. As long as we get Aardman brilliance on the big screen, that's all that matters. They did not stop there. The film was altered for American audiences and young children. Now I'm not going to talk about the whole leprosy joke controversy, since Aardman themselves re-wrote the joke and it plays that way in both the UK and US versions. Since it's a big issue, I won't comment on my thoughts on the change.

The Pirates! Band of Misfits is not the same film as The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! The voice cast was slightly changed. The Albino Pirate is voiced by Anton Yelchin in the US version. In the original UK version, he's voiced by Russell Tovey. In the US trailer for the film, they use Tovey's voice, so these changes must've been done at the eleventh hour. Al Roker provides the voice of "the pirate who likes kittens and sunsets", who had a different name in the original and might have been silent. The changes make no sense, why re-dub one pirate's voice to sound American? The rest of the cast is British, so why change one? It makes no sense, and the voice sticks out.

It's a minor problem, but it's the first of a few. Some of the more adult-oriented humor was removed, such as lines that were a bit suggestive. The film was given a PG, and one the reasons was "some language", another indicator that these changes were done at last minute. Since I have no access to the British original, from what I've heard, the lines aren't too bad. They're a little more noticeable, such as the scene where the Pirate Captain says airships are for looking down women's tops. Still, I think a joke like that would go over kids' heads. In the US version, the Pirate Captain says airships are good for attracting women. Not as funny. This is one of a few changes, but they're still unnecessary. (If I get my hands on a region free UK Blu-ray of this film, I'll make a rundown of what's been changed)

So they changed the title. Check. They edited out certain things to make it suitable for children, because they believe animation is for children first and foremost. Check. What did they do they next? They began marketing the film. The first US trailer showed up in August, pretty early, so apparently Sony was ready to launch this film. Apparently they were confident in this...



This was not a great trailer, typical for an animated family film, but it passed the film off as a sort of kids' spoof of the Pirates of the Caribbean films. This trailer was obviously trying to appeal to American audiences, and it conveniently shuffles Charles Darwin's role in the film out of sight, only using him for a few parts. The trailer was alright, but it was certainly not as good as the brilliant UK trailer.



This trailer is a much more confident one, since Aardman films normally do very well in the UK and the books are of course more popular there. Plus that song is so catchy, the fact that us Americans didn't get that song in any trailer or ad is just... Wrong...

Columbia planned on releasing this film on March 30th (the same day as the UK), but there was a lot of competition and several releases were shuffled such as the family friendly Mirror Mirror and a few other films. The film was later delayed to April 27th, another big mistake and the final nail in the coffin for this film. Columbia also screwed Arthur Christmas by releasing it amidst several family films last November: Happy Feet Two, The Muppets and Hugo. Opening with just $12 million domestically, it had to climb its way to $46 million. How did it do in the UK? $33 million tops, and it was the 10th highest grossing film of the year, beating out films like Tangled, Fast Five, Kung Fu Panda 2, Puss in Boots, Cars 2 and even The Smurfs, Columbia and Sony Pictures Animation's big success story that year. Once again, an Aardman film did poorly here and did well in the UK.

I was hoping, when Aardman would finally get back to animated features, they would find some form of success here in the states. Chicken Run was a big hit back in 2000. In fact it was the highest grossing non-Disney animated film until Shrek came along. Wallace and Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit and Flushed Away had great word of mouth despite poor opening weekends. Arthur Christmas seemed like the perfect film to re-launch themselves as a viable name in the states alongside the likes of Pixar, Disney and DreamWorks, since it wasn't too quirky or different. Arthur Christmas came and went, and it's a real shame. So would The Pirates! do better? Most likely not...

The next trailer and the ads showed up, which were worse than the first trailer. April 27th was not the right time to release it, being the weekend before the little movie about the superheroes teaming up opened. Yes, releasing The Pirates! the weekend before The Avengers was an incredibly idiotic move. Why not early April? Mirror Mirror was pushed forward to March 16th, and The Lorax was beginning to lose momentum. What about mid-April? They could've started small and word of mouth could've helped it. The film scored a solid "B" on CinemaScore, so it could've reached a certain total off of a lousy opening weekend. It's like Columbia had no faith in this film, at all.

The Avengers essentially pulled everything out of it: The family audiences and the 3D screens. It washed the swashbuckling comedy away like a hurricane. But how did it do in the UK? #12 right now with $25 million, not too bad. Here, it seems to be stopping at $31 million, making it Aardman's lowest grossing film in the states. Luckily, the $55 million film took in a final total of $118 million worldwide. Arthur Christmas took in $147 million worldwide against its $100 million budget, making it more of a dud for the studio.

It's all a shame, because Aardman seemed to be going the right path with a new partner after their troubles with the pre-2008 DreamWorks atmosphere. Arthur Christmas certainly feels more American audience-friendly than their other films without feeling forced. Again, lazy marketing and a terrible release date killed it. It had no room to breathe no matter where it was placed, but perhaps good marketing could've helped, right? Nope, it had to stand on its own. And I thought Disney marketing under Rich Ross was bad. The Pirates! shared a similar fate, and it was obviously not going to be a massive hit to begin with, but it didn't have any chances at all plus it wasn't as accessible as the previous Aardman films. If Arthur Christmas was their most accessible, The Pirates! was their least.

Quite unfortunate, but The Pirates! sunk and was tampered with before release in the US in a dunderheaded move to make the film appeal to children. Aardman clearly made a much more adult-oriented film that could still delight children with its silly action scenes and appealing characters. But the more American audiences assume animation is for children first, the more this kind of thing will happen to these animated films.

Whether it's studio powers needlessly trying to improve a film's chances at gaining at the box office or just getting something they don't want off their back, a lot of these animated films just can't stand a chance in today's overly competitive market. Animation has been lucrative since the Second Golden Age, so why can't the executives give non-conventional films a chance in addition to the ones that are obviously going to be huge? Look at Rango, something that was clearly more adult-oriented than most fare and incredibly risky. Paramount backed that with decent marketing, and the box office performance indicates that the controversy over the film's content didn't harm it as much as one would assume. It broke $100 million stateside and finished up with $242 million worldwide against a $135 million budget. Not bad, Paramount has started its own animation studio because of how well it did (plus the fact that their last DreamWorks films hits theaters this autumn).

So with that, you'd think Columbia would go for a tidy profit since The Pirates! wasn't so expensive. Nope, they just threw it out there and that was it. It's just what Fox did with Wes Anderson's Fantastic Mr. Fox, a $40 million stop motion animated film that could've been a small hit had they not released it against heavy competition with little to no fanfare. The Pirates! is sure to get new fans when it hits Blu-ray and DVD, but it could've been a good-sized success and help Aardman's works get an audience in the states.

Sunday, July 15, 2012

2012 Animation Report Card: First Half


With Blue Sky's Ice Age: Continental Drift kicking off the second half of the year (grossing an estimated $46 million on its opening weekend), now is the time to grade what we got in the first half. We only got four animated features of course (not counting The Secret World of Arrietty, being a 2010 film), while the second half will give us six.

These are just short reviews, as you can read the individual quickie reviews I did when I saw these films. The only one I did not do a quickie review for was Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted, which I just saw. The full review of that film will be saved for Part 8 of "Moving Forward". Some of the grades may also be different from the original Quick Flick Reviews.

Dr. Seuss' The Lorax
Directed by Chris Renaud and Kyle Balda
Written by Ken Daurio and Cinco Paul
Produced by Chris Meledandri and Janet Healey
Distributor: Universal Pictures
Studio: Illumination Entertainment

Dr. Seuss’ classic has been updated into something that panders more to children than anything. The Lorax boasts some great colorful visuals and cute designs that are true to Dr. Seuss’ original illustrations, but the film is cut from the same cloth as Illumination’s debut feature, Despicable Me. It’s a sweet, saccharine romp with a message that’s not too heavy, it’s just rote and ironically almost out of place. It also has musical numbers which feel forced, and humor that is hit-or-miss. The Lorax himself and the Once-ler make the film worth it, while everyone else is just there to pad out the story and provide comic relief. For a film about the dangers of corporate greed and artificial things, it kind of felt artificial.
C-

Original review

The Pirates! Band of Misfits
Directed by Peter Lord and Jeff Newitt
Written by Gideon Defoe
Produced by Julie Lockhart, Peter Lord and David Sproxton
Distributor: Columbia Pictures
Studio: Aardman Animations / Sony Pictures Animation

The Pirates! Band of Misfits is a clever, sometimes wacky ride with a lot of work and effort put into it. Sometimes the blending of computer animation and stop-motion didn’t work, but overall, it’s loaded with eye candy and even some traditional animation for the great map montage scenes. The characters are fun, although they aren’t as memorable as the characters from the past Aardman films, but there’s enough charm to elevate it. The American version of this film tones down some of the more adult-oriented humor in the British original (The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists!) and re-dubs a few voices for some characters, but that’s never too distracting. Minimal the plot may be, it’s really just a base for the crazy antics that follow when the pirate characters get entangled with Charles Darwin in London. Mayhem and wit ensues, making for an unexpected and fast-paced romp.
B+

Original review

Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted
Directed by Eric Darnell and Tom McGrath
Written by Eric Darnell and Noah Baumbach
Produced by Mireille Soria
Distributor: Paramount Pictures
Studio: DreamWorks Animation SKG / Pacific Data Images

Coming off of two entertaining but otherwise problematic films, Madagascar 3: Europe’s Most Wanted actually ends the trilogy (well I sure hope it’s the end) on a high note. While the first two films had a hard time figuring out what they wanted to be, Madagascar 3 knows exactly what it wants to be: An over-the-top cartoon that’s loaded with ridiculous action, slapstick and zany characters. While some pop culture jokes and the use of pop songs from the past and present rear their ugly head a few times, most of the comedy is hilarious. The new characters are great, and the zoo gang is actually a much more interesting band of characters than they were in the first two films. Noah Baumbach spices up what could’ve been a by-the-numbers screenplay with a lot of wit, clever writing and even some heart. The animation is exciting, colorful and eye-popping, with a great circus finale that’s like a psychedelic explosion. It’s pure fun at its best.
B

Brave
Directed by Mark Andrews, Brenda Chapman and Steve Purcell
Written by Mark Andrews, Brenda Chapman, Irene Mecchi and Steve Purcell
Produced by Katherine Sarafian
Distributor: Walt Disney Pictures
Studio: Pixar Animation Studios

Pixar goes for a more traditional route with Brave, a fairy tale-like story rooted in Grimm Brothers traditions while also drawing from the classic Disney book and putting some new spins on them. Like Pixar’s other films, it has a story that resonates with a beautifully written mother-daughter relationship that echoes the great father-son relationship in Finding Nemo. Also, the animation, character designs, art direction and lighting are peerless, as per usual with Pixar. The Scottish highlands look beautiful and epic. Patrick Doyle’s score is breathtaking and captivating, and the cast gives it their all. The film does have some issues, such as the pacing (it could’ve been longer) and a strange imbalance, where the comic relief sometimes overshadows the more serious side of the narrative. Fortunately, it never pulls punches and again, it plays to adults like every other Pixar film. It’s beautiful, moving and engaging.
A

Original review

~

There you have it. How would you grade these four animated features? Would you say 2012 is a great year for animation so far?

Monday, April 30, 2012

"The Pirates!" Doesn't Go Over Like Gangbusters


Columbia/Sony Pictures Animation and Aardman Animations' The Pirates! Band of Misfits opened at #2 this weekend, which is good for an Aardman or stop motion animated film, but... It opened with just $11 million, making it the smallest opening for an Aardman film (even below Arthur Christmas) and it's now among the smallest opening weekend totals for a wide release animated film. It's just another indicator that Aardman's films don't really explode on opening weekend, along with stop motion films in general.

What held this back from doing well on opening weekend? Arthur Christmas was a much more accessible film, but that too did not score a good-sized opening weekend probably due to when it was released and whatnot. The Pirates! didn't have much competition from other family films, and it basically has opened in the quiet month before the summer blockbuster typhoon. Could it be that audiences just don't care for stop-motion? Well that doesn't seem right, given how well Chicken Run did not to mention the huge following that The Nightmare Before Christmas has. Coraline had a very small opening weekend but strong legs helped it pass $75 million stateside. It can't be that it's stop-motion.

I blame the marketing, again. Now to be fair with Columbia Pictures, this was probably a pretty hard sell here in the United States. Are the books well known here? Or is it just something that's more popular in the UK and elsewhere? Again, regardless of whether it was based on books or not, this probably came off as a Pirates of the Caribbean spoof for kids to American audiences. The trailers and commercials didn't mention the books, and just made it look like another silly kiddie romp. Now look at the UK trailers, much funnier. The first trailer alone makes you want to see it. The title change probably didn't help either. In the UK, the film is called The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! since that's the name of one of the books it's based on. The Pirates! Band of Misfits is such a misleading title, and the trailers conveniently downplayed Charles Darwin who is a major character in the film. What, were they afraid of offending those who are against Darwin's theories? The film doesn't even make much mention of evolution or whatever, but since it's such a huge issue here, the marketing pretty much obscured Darwin and the whole idea that it's about science in nineteenth century England. Band of Misfits makes it sound like some kind of kids' film... Because you know, animation is totally for kids, right? What a shame.

In fact, Sony did try to make it more accessible to American audiences and kids. The Pirates! Band of Misfits is not the same film as The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! Some of the more crude humor was toned down (not counting the leprosy joke, that was cut by Aardman themselves), and a few characters were recast, even though a majority of the characters have British accents. What... The... Hell? It's not as bad as what happened to something like The Magic Roundabout (a very British animated film based on a British children's show, that was completely re-dubbed and re-written for American audiences and released as Doogal), but come on! These studios need to stop pandering to kids. Aardman's original film was clearly a much more adult-oriented film that could still appeal to kids with its wacky hi-jinks and fun character designs, but they had to alter it for American audiences. I'm an American and I am offended, because this is a condescending practice that is ruining the animation industry while stifling creativity and also treating American audiences like they are dumb. Why couldn't Sony just give us what Aardman originally set out to do and market it as the wildly fun and quirky animated film that it is? Why does it have to be for kids? Why? Why? Why?!? The original version probably would've been more successful! Had they marketed it as a more adult-oriented film, maybe not too many people (and no offense to anyone's religious beliefs) would freak out and say "It's science-loving Darwinists trying to corrupt our children! Oh noes!" Fortunately, the cuts don't really affect the story in any way and the overall quality of the film, but still, it didn't need to be altered for the sake of a certain audience!

Not all is doom and gloom, though. The film has a chance to score great word of mouth, which Aardman films always get. However, with a 4x multiplier and a sub-$50 million gross, that won't look impressive alongside other animated films. Something subpar like The Lorax had no trouble making more than that on opening weekend. Losing 3D screens next weekend won't be a problem, since family films do better in 2D anyways. It'll need to pull some very strong legs in order to pass $50 million, because $100 million is probably out of reach by this point. A real shame, because this is another very good animated film that needs to do well, cuts or no cuts.

I was hoping that this year would be some sort of stop motion renaissance and be what 2009 wasn't. Well, with this film underperforming, we now have to see how ParaNorman and Frankenweenie will do. Stop motion films have a chance to perform well alongside the heavy-hitters, but poor marketing and the whole "animation is for kids" belief is what's holding them back. We need nice alternatives to the CGI films and family friendly films. These films, along with several independent animated films, are the alternatives. They'll never do a thing though, because many people still assume that "animation is for kids". Well guess what? It's time for them to wake up.

Anyways, did you see The Pirates! Band of Misfits? Or if you live in Europe, did you see Aardman's original unaltered film? Do you think stop motion animated films are just not marketable? Or do you think that non-CGI/non-family friendly films are marketed terribly and thus don't score? If you saw the original UK version of the film, are you upset that it had to be altered for American audiences? Sound off!

Sunday, April 29, 2012

"The Pirates!" is Another Winner from Aardman

QUICK FLICK REVIEW
The Pirates!
Band of Misfits
Directed by Peter Lord and Jeff Newitt
Written by Gideon Defoe
Produced by Julie Lockhart, Peter Lord and
David Sproxton
Distribution: Columbia Pictures
Studio: Aardman Animations / Sony Pictures Animation

Update: Turns out, the original British version of the film is different than the version we Americans got. In my original review, I referred to it by the original British title: The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists!, so I'll be going by the American title, the dreadful The Pirates! Band of Misfits.

Irreverent, funny and at times innovative, The Pirates! Band of Misfits is another home run hit for Aardman Animations. The film, based on the first two books in Gideon Defoe's The Pirates! series (he also wrote the screenplay), follows the adventures of the Pirate Captain (played by Hugh Grant) and his wily crew. The Pirate Captain desires to become the Pirate of the Year, but he's not that good of a pirate. The first act establishes this in a really fun way, as we see how the other contenders are so much better than he is. This plot is essentially the back bone to a much bigger plot, once the pirates wind up with Charles Darwin and his pet chimp, Bobo.

From there, the film becomes delightfully over-the-top. It's lot of fun, and best of all, the film itself knows it's ridiculous. It throws aways the rulebook and just simply goes out of its way to entertain, much like other irreverent films like Aladdin, The Emperor's New Groove and Shrek. It pretty much makes fun of several cliches while also poking fun at other films. The screenplay isn't spectacular by any means, but it does its job. It bombards you with silliness and humor that works. When I saw it, I noticed that the humor went over the heads of the audience members, both young and old. What a shame. Oh, and the cast? Most of them seemed to have a great time with this film, they give it their all. Hugh Grant shines as the lead. Unfortunately, the actors who re-dubbed the voices for this version didn't seem as enthusiastic.

The animation? Wonderful. Aardman's return to stop-motion animation is no dud, and the amount of work that went into making the film is astounding. This was probably a very tough project to tackle, and I'm guessing that this was in development for a while. CGI is used, which was inevitable, but it blends well although at times it didn't. (i.e. the sea monster that devours the ship) The film also makes use of (gasp!) traditional animation! That's right! The map montage scenes use classic hand-drawn animation, and trust me, the map scenes are very funny. The character designs are a return to the classic Aardman designs but with a few differences, something I missed in Arthur Christmas since their first CGI film (Flushed Away) still stuck to the classic designs. The character designs are fun, eye-catching and unique. They still have the Wallace and Gromit look, but they also look different in some ways.

If I had any problems with the film, it would've probably been the pacing. At times it really slowed down, but at other times it picked up and ripped through its runtime. At other times, the plot isn't anything special. It picks up significantly in the film's third act, which is wild and hilarious. By that point, the story's shortcomings don't matter. Another problem I had was that the version of the film we got was cut, apparently a few lines were re-dubbed to keep the PG rating and the Albino Pirate's voice was changed. In the original British version, he's voiced by Russell Tovey. In this version, he's voiced by Anton Yelchin. I noticed that his voice sounded different. A few other voices were changed as well. What a bummer. These changes were not necessary, but I'll save that for a rant.

B+. Another good film from Aardman that is significantly different from their earlier films, which is a good thing. Fine animation, a fun story and great performances make this film a riot worth seeing, despite the alterations made to this version of the film. Everything else works. Highly recommended.

Trailer Recap
I saw this in 2D in the afternoon. There weren't too many folks in the audience, and most of them didn't seem to enjoy it. It was pretty much the same reaction Arthur Christmas got when I saw that film a few months ago. The trailers we got? More of the same, but a few new ones... But no Brave trailer! Bummer.

Diary of Wimpy Kid: Dog Days - Ehhhh, not another one of these, but unlike most live-action children's films (yes, I consider these films children's films, not family films), this series is profitable. Thank goodness Judy Moody wasn't. - Opens August 3rd

To the Arctic 3D - This opened 9 days ago. Why did they show the trailer for this? We could've gotten the Brave trailer instead. Dang it!

Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted - This trailer wasn't as bad as the last one, but I'm probably going to pass on this one. It just looks so silly and over-the-top, and not in a good way. Oh well, the animation is nice and colorful. - Opens June 8th

Despicable Me 2 - This trailer got laughs from everyone in the audience, something the main attraction unfortunately did not. Again, this is only the teaser. I can't say much. - Opens July 3rd, 2013

ParaNorman - The same trailer that was attached to Dr. Seuss' The Lorax. It looks really good, but here's hoping we get another trailer that doesn't focus on the comedy and more on the ghoulish stuff. - Opens August 17th

Hotel Transylvania - It looks alright at best, not too crazy about the fact that it has a star-studded cast. Still, Genndy Tartakovsky is the director and the animation looks nice. - Opens September 28th

Next Up: The Avengers!