Box of Brilliance

A new trailer for LAIKA's The BoxTrolls has unexpectedly arrived!

This is no ordinary trailer either, and I must say, distributor Focus Features made something truly cool here! Rather than going for a stupid trailer that is a hodgepodge of antics and kid-centric jokes (like ParaNorman's near-disastrous trailer), they instead decided to craft something that could help audiences appreciate the beauty of stop motion animation and LAIKA's work in general. No dialogue or announcers, just a song and footage of the animators and artists at work… What more could you ask for?

Anyways, it's always staggering to see how much goes into their films and it's also a nice callback to the days when Disney would put behind-the-scenes footage in their trailers for their films in the 1990s. Showing the audience small bits of what goes into making animated features is such a great idea for trailers, and the fact that they're doing this for a stop motion film makes me very happy.

Now hopefully the full trailer, which should explain the story and whatnot, will make the film look like something worth seeing and not a bogus kiddie flick that's too scary for kiddies but yet too silly for adults. ParaNorman would've been the hit it should've been had it not been advertised that way, so hopefully The BoxTrolls is LAIKA's deserved box office break out. It's high time a film like this does well and changes the game for mainstream feature animation.

What did you think of the trailer? Great idea? Or would you have preferred to have seen more story-based stuff? Sound off below!

Out of the Box

LAIKA's third film, The BoxTrolls, is not due out until the autumn of next year... But that's not stopping Focus Features from getting the word out right now with a teaser! Despite what I may think of the way they advertise LAIKA's films, I will commend them for actually drumming up buzz a year and a half before the studio's next film even opens.

Since Universal's international distribution arm wants to be unfair and block it from YouTube in your country, you'll have to head over to iTunes to give it a watch for the time being...

Taking the Pixar route, this teaser shows us a fun little set of jokes, the setting and the BoxTrolls themselves. This will probably not be in the finished film. Visually, it's a lot like ParaNorman with its unconventional human designs, fun troll designs and the jagged, asymmetrical architecture. I absolutely loved that building style in ParaNorman. In this Victorian setting, it looks wonderful and refreshing. Aside from the usual lovely animation, this teaser is already notable (and soon, it'll be controversial) for its overt nods to same-sex couples.

LAIKA already got heat for a particular reveal in ParaNorman (which I won't spoil for you if you haven't seen it), so I imagine that this film will get some flack right off the bat. LAIKA isn't afraid to do this, though, and good for them I say. Being a studio whose films don't get the really wide audience that most other animated films get, they can somewhat slip under the radar with something like this. It begs the question: When will other studios do that? Or something similar?

All that aside, this is a great little teaser and the film is going to be another gem. LAIKA showed us with two back-to-back masterpieces that they a "new Pixar" of sorts, a studio that's going to try new things whilst also delivering good films. Their films may not be box office smashes, but they are a refreshing break from a lot of the animated films that litter the landscape today.

Reclaiming The Spot

Though it was kind of expected, LAIKA's The Boxtrolls will be opening nearly a month ahead of its last planned release date. The stop motion/computer animation hybrid is now set to open on September 26, 2014... Oddly enough, that very date was the first one distributor Focus Features had chosen despite the fact that Sony Pictures Animation had their Popeye film coming out the same day.

The Boxtrolls was then moved to October 17, 2014, which was a decent spot for it. Sony has delayed Popeye, which should be out in 2016 since they have two films coming out in 2015 (sequels to their biggest hits, no less). With that out of the way, I was wondering if anything would take the spot... Early, I had predicted that Henry Selick's The Shadow King would finally nab a release date and take that spot. But now, LAIKA is dominating it again.

Anyways, it's great to see that we're going to get this film a little earlier than expected. With this release date and good marketing, it could be LAIKA's first big hit... Something that even outgrosses Coraline even... But I'm probably being too hopeful here.

Trolls and More Shadows

Despite mass audiences' continuing resistance to stop motion animation films; projects are still in production. Two mainstream stop motion films, one from LAIKA and one from Henry Selick, are on their way...

Remember that untitled film that LAIKA announced a while back? Well it it has a title and a premise... The name? The Boxtrolls...

ComingSoon revealed the premise that's already getting me geared up for this exciting new project...

Set in the Victorian-era town of Cheesebridge, the Boxtrolls are creatures living under the streets that wear discarded cardboard boxes as shells. The wealthy and cheese-loving people of the town fear them, but the monsters are truly good creatures that don't steal children and cheese like the town's legend claims. The eccentric creatures raised an orphan human boy named Eggs. The boy and a wealthy girl named Winnie might be their key to finally help their world come together with the one above their home, though an evil exterminator named Archibald Snatcher wants to obliterate all the Boxtrolls so he can become accepted by the town.

From the sound of it, it'll be another quirky and unique story from the famed animation house. Proving their prowess with Henry Selick's excellent Coraline and the very bold ParaNorman, The Boxtrolls has instant masterpiece written all over it. The kind of animated film we need amidst the other films.

LAIKA President & CEO Travis Knight has mentioned that the film combines absurdist comedy, detective story elements and a steampunk vibe. He also touted that it's "Dickens by the way of Monty Python". The picture is being directed by Anthony Stacchi (visual effects veteran who also worked on Aeon Flux, Antz and co-directed Sony Pictures Animation's Open Season) and Graham Annable (who was a story artist on both Coraline and ParaNorman). The cast consists of Ben Kingsley, Toni Collette, Elle Fanning, Isaac Hampsted-Wright, Jared Harris, Simon Pegg, Nick Frost, Richard Ayoade and Tracy Morgan.

All I can say is... Color me excited. This may very well be my most anticipated animated film for next year. I mean... Steampunk, the usual LAIKA flare, Monty Python-esque humor and a compelling, heartwarming story. This may be LAIKA's biggest and most ambitious film to date.

The film will also be a hybrid of stop motion and computer animation, so it'll definitely be something different in the visual department. It's slated to hit theaters on October 17, 2014. Originally, the film was scheduled for September 26, opening against Sony Animation's Popeye. Focus Features and LAIKA made a smart move but pushing this to October, so now the film will have some time to breathe before Halloween and November animation competition.

~

Now in other stop motion animation news, Henry Selick's formerly canceled project is back on track...

The partially-completed The Shadow King, a film he was originally making for Walt Disney Pictures for an October 2013 release (then titled Shademaker), was unexpectedly shut down last year by Chairman Alan Horn because Selick and his crew were apparently behind schedule. I was saddened by this news, and was hoping that LAIKA would take the project from there - but they shockingly turned it down! It seemed like Selick's project was dead in the water.

The Shadow King is currently being backed by K5 International and should be completed sometime soon since they are going to be able use what was completed when they were working for Disney. An image and the film's premise have been revealed.

The Shadow King is the story of Hap Dagger, a nine-year-old New York City orphan who can't show his hands to a world that won't understand. A shadow war is being waged against a monster who can destroy all of New York, but a Living Shadow Girl teaches the boy how to weaponize his hands in order to take on the beast and save his city.

Like the LAIKA film, it's a very different premise and one that's positively Selick. Whenever it'll be completed, who knows. Reportedly a good portion of it is completed, so we can expect this film to come out some time next year. This does bring up an interesting question: Could the recent cancellation of DreamWorks' similar Me and My Shadow be linked to the resurrection of this project? Or is that a stretch?

That being said, it's great to see the film back in the works. I expect nothing short of brilliance from Selick and his team. It's just a shame that Disney dropped it, they had a potential winner with this one.

Are you anticipating these two films? When do you think The Shadow King will hit theaters?

Move Over

Though these dates for the following four animated films were announced a while back, it seems like the studios behind them aren't sure where to put their upcoming films. Mainly DreamWorks, Sony Pictures Animation and Laika...

Sony Pictures Animation's computer animated Popeye film is scheduled for release on September 26, 2014. They got that date first, but all of a sudden, Laika's next film (currently untitled) was announced. It's also slated to open the same day.

The same situation will occur at the same timeframe in 2015. DreamWorks' B.O.O.: Bureau of Otherworldly Operations was originally given a November 6th release date, but the company wisely moved it to September 25th in order to get it out before Halloween. Guess what else is opening that day: Hotel Transylvania 2 from Sony Pictures Animation.

I have a feeling that there will be some movement soon. Who will move? Here's my theory.

Laika's untitled project will end up being given an August 2014 release, since ParaNorman was an August release. ParaNorman might not have done so well at the box office, but I don't think this will deter Focus Features from releasing the next film in August. It's still a lucrative time of year, and it's away from all the heavy competition. Sony Pictures Animation always settles for the late September release date since Open Season, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs and Hotel Transylvania were all late September releases.

In 2015, I think Sony Pictures Animation will also keep the late September spot. Again, Sony usually has that date and Hotel Transylvania 2 opening that day would make perfect sense since it has Halloween-themed material in it. DreamWorks' B.O.O. is of course about ghosts, where will that go? September 25th seemed like the perfect day to release it, unless they decide to pull a Don Bluth and go head-to-head with Sony's film. That would make it the first big duel in feature animation since All Dogs Go To Heaven opened against The Little Mermaid in 1989.

Animated films opening weeks away from each other is the norm nowadays given the amount of competing studios, but two films from rival studios opening on the same day? That probably won't happen, but where else will B.O.O. go? DreamWorks could release it in early-to-mid October and still score a hit. Maybe they'll move it to the beginning of September, so it has time to breathe before Hotel and then the two can go head-to-head before Halloween arrives.

That all being said, I think Sony will keep the late September weekend for both 2014 and 2015. What do you think will move? And where will these films be moved to?

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!

Who Will It Be?: Oscar News and Revised Oscar Predictions

As Oscar season gets closer and closer, the more we find out. The critics' circles are currently picking the films they deemed the best of the year. Of course, they also have a slot for animated features. So far, the results have been... Interesting, to say the least.

It seems as if Tim Burton's Frankenweenie is getting a lot of love, on top of getting warm reception from critics. The Boston Society of Film Critics and The New York Film Critics Circle went for Burton's re-imagining of his 1984 short film. I have not seen the film yet, but I'm happy to see that stop-motion is getting some form of recognition.

Another stop-motion great got props from the Washington DC Area Film Critics, Laika's brilliant ParaNorman. How this one isn't edging out Frankenweenie on its story, creativity and originality is beyond me. Not that I'm decrying Frankenweenie, it could very well be a better film or one that's equally supreme, but ParaNorman seemed like it would be the year's best-received stop motion film.

The National Board of Review was the only force rooting for Disney's Wreck-It Ralph, which is the film I am personally rooting for in the race (as well as the Annies, of course). Perhaps the video game theme, the loud and busy pacing of the film and the familiar story turned off other critics. Or maybe they just felt that it held the film back from being the best of the year. That being said, it's still a very well-received film that's sure to at least get a nomination. I'm glad that one circle called it the best.

Brave, on the other hand, hasn't gotten any love. I have a strong feeling that the Academy Awards are just going to leave Pixar's film out of the race, since it got good-but-not-great critical reception. Then again, it was relatively more successful with critics than most of the films released this year, so it may get by on that. Disney's "For Your Consideration" ads are effective and striking, but who knows where that will get the film.

So what does that mean for this year's Best Animated Feature category? Here are my revised predictions for the Oscars.

Earlier Predictions

Brave

The Painting

ParaNorman

Rise of the Guardians

Wreck-It Ralph

Current Predictions

Brave

Frankenweenie

ParaNorman

The Rabbi's Cat

Wreck-It Ralph

I had assumed that The Painting, a 2011 French animated film that will be released here this year, would be the foreign title to snag a nomination. This is the Academy's deal now, as they want to honor animated films from around the world instead of American endeavors. However, I think the nomination will go to another French-Austrian animated film, The Rabbi's Cat. This hand-drawn animated film also got a nomination for Best Animated Film in the Annie Awards, so I think it'll be the Academy's foreign animated pick.

I eliminated Rise of the Guardians, as the reviews were positive but the consensus is that it isn't anything beyond something simple. DreamWorks is pushing for a Best Picture nomination for this film (and Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted, which is absurd if you ask me), but I have a feeling that it will be left out of the race due to the reception it has gotten plus the box office numbers. The Academy Awards won't nominate a film that's deemed a box office dud or failure. This doesn't apply to independently released foreign films, for the most part. The Academy does tend to contradict the "box office" rule. (After it, it is the Academy Awards...)

I kept Brave and Wreck-It Ralph, because both films got better reception than most of the animated films released this year. Brave might be axed in the end if the Academy doesn't feel like giving three slots to Disney, or if some behind-the-scenes work gets it booted out. There's no way Frankenweenie can be cut at this rate, given the acclaim it's getting, but the box office returns may hold it back from winning. Wreck-It Ralph got a small piece of the acclaim, but Brave didn't get any. It might just not make it.

But if Brave were to go, what would take it's place? Another foreign animated film? Perhaps the Academy will also nominate The Painting or something else. Maybe Aardman's The Pirates! Band of Misfits? That got warm reception, though a few dissenting voices thought it could've been better. Anything else? Well something like The Lorax or Hotel Transylvania certainly has no chance, so it's either Brave or a foreign film. I still think Brave has a good chance because the film still got praise from a good number of critics. The critical reception was Cars-level.

ParaNorman also remains on board given some of the love it's gotten, and there's no way the Academy Awards should snub the film because it's a Laika film, the critical reception was great and the film is seen as a real game changer for animation (which I believe it is).

So there you have it, three Disney releases (unprecedented), a foreign feature and a Laika film. Out of those, who do you think would take home the prize?

What are your Best Animated Feature predictions?

"ParaNorman", A New Height for Stop Motion Animation

QUICK FLICK REVIEW

ParaNorman

Directed by Chris Butler and Sam Fell

Written by Chris Butler

Produced by Travis Knight and Arianne Sutner

Distributor: Focus Features

Studio: Laika

Stop-motion animated films tend to go for material that is far beyond what most of our mainstream animation studios like to tackle, and its truly a gain for that medium. Stop-motion animation's inherent charm is what makes it suitable for like ParaNorman's wonderfully dark and often surreal story. It's no surprise that it worked for Henry Selick and Tim Burton's The Nightmare Before Christmas and Aardman's Chicken Run and Wallace and Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit. Stop-motion adds a whole new level of uniqueness to these kinds of stories, and ParaNorman was destined to be another film that benefited from this. After all, the film is from Laika, the stop-motion masterminds behind Henry Selick's Coraline.

ParaNorman takes a seemingly simple tale of a misunderstood boy who can talk to the dead and blows it up into this really elaborate adventure that is not short on the laughs and wit. Like Coraline and other spooky-themed stop-motion films, it does have some potentially frightening sequences, ones that have already garnered controversy amongst parents (typical of these kinds of animated films). What surprised me more than anything was that they actually went for some great themes. Aside from issues like bullying and accepting others for who they are, we also get some very meaningful insight on death itself. You know a family film is succeeding when it tackles this material, rather than relying on a joke-riddled script.

The twist that occurs in the last fifteen minutes was what really got me, it was so unexpectedly emotional and it added a new level of depth to the already solid story. How it ties to what Norman goes through in his life tops it off, it's brilliance. While its first act takes its time and has some familiar tropes (the bullies being punk-like, the older sister being the shallow "OMG" girl), it really starts moving once the zombies rise. The animators and writers have fun with this, giving the zombies distinct personalities, mixing gruesome designs and a comic coating. The balance between the darker underbelly and the sense of fun is also never off, though from time to time early on, we do get some toilet humor and immature "pseudo-adult" jokes. In terms of the comedy, ParaNorman succeeds. The references to classic horror films and B-movies was also a nice plus.

ParaNorman's greatest strengths lie in the heart of the story, and the themes of fear, death and tolerance of others' quirks. It's all handled well without ever being heavy-handed or preachy, but at the same time the story soars to emotional heights while also keeping the audience entertained with a healthy amount of humor. When you do what Pixar does, or classic Disney, you get an animated winner. Nothing's better than a strong emotional core to your story and fantastic characters. No matter what style you go for, it'll always be important. ParaNorman does that, and then goes all out with its visual zeal. It's truly the best of both worlds, and an unforgettable experience on top of that.

A+

- Visually beautiful and captivating, but told with honesty while journeying to a dark side that's lacking in many non-Pixar family films. A decidedly quirky and experimental tour de force, one that shouldn't be missed.

Trailer Recap

I saw this in 2D, the theater had a few people in it, and all of them seemed to genuinely enjoy it. It even got some applause at the end. Lots of laughs throughout too, and the theater went dead silent on two particular moments.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey - Yep, that same damn trailer. Will they ever give us a new one? - Opens December 21st

Life of Pi - Now this looks very interesting. I like how this trailer only gave flashes of the plot and what happens, as opposed to exposition. - Opens November 21st

Frankenweenie - As I've said before, I'm looking forward to it but I'm in no hurry. - Opens October 5th

Despicable Me 2 - If only my theater swapped this with the new Wreck-It Ralph trailer, then I would've been a happy camper. Every time I see this trailer, everyone cracks up at the bit at the end. - Opens July 3rd, 2013

ScaraNorman

Get ready for it, folks. Laika's newest animated film, ParaNorman, is right around the corner. From the ads and marketing, you know it's going to be about ghouls, zombies and other creepy things. It'll be spooky for the younger set, much like Laika's debut film, Coraline. You know exactly what's going to happen when it hits theaters next weekend. Parents are going to complain...

Just take a look at this review that was recently added to the film's Rotten Tomatoes page:

First of all, I am not a parent. I'm going by my childhood experiences here, and what my parents did about these kinds of situations. So for any of you parents who will see this and say "What are you, a psycho?", hear me out...

Yes, parents will have a field day complaining about this film, no doubt. Again, most of these parents blindly assume that all G and PG-rated animation is suitable for their children. Do they check ratings online anymore? Do they ask anyone else about the films themselves? From what I've seen over the years, no. Anyone remember what happened last year? Parents whined about the myriad violence in Cars 2. Parents freaked out over the edgy humor in Rango, as tons of angry reviews surfaced all over Yahoo and other sites. The Adventures of Tintin got complaints due to Captain Haddock's drunken behavior (the PG rating even states "some drunkenness"). Kung Fu Panda 2 also got some criticism for being too violent.

If their children were upset, that isn't the end of the world. Immediately, you hear idiotic gabbing like "[insert studio here] should be ashamed!" as they go on to complain about how scared their children were. But people get scared, it's part of life. As a young child, there were films that scared me. Films I had on VHS. In fact, a good number of the Disney films frightened me, but did my parents complain? Did they raise hell? No. Even if the Internet was the way it is now back in the mid-1990s, they still would not have complained. Instead, they would either talk to me about what upset me or simply tell me to not watch it. You know, doing what parents should do. As a kid, I normally just said, "I won't watch it." I waited till I was a little older and wallah! I began to like the films.

Sure, some films may have scared me or even given me nightmares, but so what? Other things in life gave me nightmares too! Children have to experience fear and the other harsh realities of the world. That doesn't mean showing them bloody violence, but still. Life isn't candy and rainbows, and children need to know that after growing out of something like Barney. Seeing scary stuff didn't scar me for life. I was able to live, I was able to go outside, I was able to see the world. There's parents who even shelter their children from films that have deaths or even implications of death. When I watched Bambi and The Lion King as a child, I knew early on that death is a real thing. I can only imagine how my life would've been if I hadn't known at a young age. Hide that from your children, you're going to do more harm than good to them.

"They should be ashamed!!!"

Unfortunately, these parents will probably just look at an advertisement for ParaNorman and think, "Oh, a cartoon! I'll take my kids!" and then come out angry. The big problem is, the ratings also fool these parents. The G rating certainly doesn't mean "suitable for all ages", it means "all ages admitted". Think of several G-rated films from the past and even now that have horrified many children: The Disney classics, the Pixar films, Don Bluth's films, The Wizard of Oz and several others. Another big problem is the PG rating.

PG is slapped onto many harmless films these days, whether it's something cutesy like Dr. Seuss' The Lorax, Alvin and the Chipmunks or something kiddie like Judy Moody and the NOT Bummer Summer (like we need to remember that sterling film). They may get that rating because they may have content that some parents may think is a bad influence on children such as childish name-calling, toilet humor, people doing immature things, or the kind of stuff you'd see on Nickelodeon and Cartoon Network. When you get down to brass tacks, though, these "PG" films are mostly harmless. But parents assume "PG is for kids", and they take them anyways (regardless of whether the film actually deserves that rating or not, and judging by what I've seen, ParaNorman looks like it deserves its rating) without checking any guides on any movie websites. IMDb has one that users can edit, and there are several other ones. It isn't that hard to do.

The MPAA's ratings are taken too lightly, despite the fact that their ratings are bullshit. Some parents don't seem to do their job, whether it's not checking ratings or finding a solution to their child's fears of a certain film. Going on the Internet and complaining? That'll sure solve the problem! Maybe they'll stop making these films all together because your child had a problem with it. Good grief...

The other main problem is the whole "animation is for kids" mindset and how animation is marketed. Brave already caught some hell this year, but of course, these parents probably assumed that because it is a PG-rated "cartoon" that looked cute from the ads, it's automatically a children's movie. I've said it many times and I'll say it again. People need to realize that animation isn't kiddie stuff despite what marketing or kids/family-oriented TV channels tell them. Why let that do your thinking for you? Sure, Disney and Pixar films appeal to lots of children and their families, but that doesn't mean they are aimed directly at children. Most mainstream animated films are aimed at the entire family. Barney the Dinosaur is aimed at children. The Teletubbies are aimed at children. Anything you see on Nick Jr. or PBS Kids is aimed at children. No one else but children. A majority of mainstream animated films? No.

The complaints will come anyways, but will it have an effect on this film's box office performance? Who knows. The angry parents will yell, bitch and moan all they want. It could either affect a film or not. In the long run, it just hurts mainstream animation's chances at aiming higher. Think of how insulting it is to the artists and writers, who make these films possible, yet they have to get the "not good for kids" sticker slapped on their craft. What about general audiences and children who can handle a good scare? Check the damn ratings, and show your child what he or she can handle. That way, you won't waste good money on something that may upset your child.

Mainstream animated family films aren't babysitters and weren't meant to be, and not all children can handle the same things...

The Second Half of 2012: A Closer Look

Halfway through the year, we have gotten four animated films: Dr. Seuss' The Lorax, The Pirates! Band of Misfits, Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted and Brave. Brave was pure Pixar brilliance once again with fantastic visuals and a heartfelt emotional core, whereas Dr. Seuss' The Lorax was more of a kid-pleasing romp (albeit with some funny bits and colorful animation) with a rote environmental message. Madagascar 3, which I have yet to see believe it or not, was called the best in the series and another good film in DreamWorks' recent line-up. The Pirates! was more inventive quirkiness from Aardman.

So, what's next?

Here we are, halfway through this year. We have less features than last year, which is for the better, and not too many low quality films spamming up the market. The second half of the year, however, brings six more animated features. Based on the trailers, promos and stills that we've gotten over the months, I'm going to analyze what we are getting this year which might be another strong year for the medium.

Ice Age: Continental Drift opens four days from now. From what I’ve gathered, this film looks like it isn’t ashamed of being of a cash grab. While it does aim to look like a fun entertaining romp for the family (I didn’t mind the most recent trailer), it’s just that the adventures of these prehistoric characters aren’t cutting it anymore. I got a Pirates of the Caribbean vibe from some of the scenes, since those films explode overseas. Combine Ice Age, which is already huge around the world with Pirates, and you get this. Blue Sky will probably take home more than a one billion dollars, but it’s so obvious that this was cobbled together to give foreign audiences what they want. Pirates and Ice Age, sounds like a marketing pitch.

However, the point of this series now is just an easy way for Blue Sky to get the dough to make films like Epic, which comes out next spring, which looks like a much more ambitious film than anything they've made. That said, will they make another Ice Age? Who knows...

This year, we are also getting a trio of Halloween-themed films. The first of which is Laika’s ParaNorman. Laika entered the animation scene with Henry Selick’s fantastic Coraline. It was a beautiful film that of course drew inspiration from the Nightmare Before Christmas book while also being a colorful, surreal endeavor on its own. Its use of 3D was quite something for its time (imagine that, 3D being good, before the onslaught of terrible post-conversion films) and the story was very strong.

ParaNorman looks a bit similar, as the plot involves zombies and ghouls. While I am certainly looking forward to this film, I do think that some of these studios tend to go for the Halloween theme a little too often. Tim Burton knocked it out of the park early on with The Nightmare Before Christmas and other works like Vincent. I don’t want to compare these films to Burton’s masterpiece, because it’s unfair. I just can’t help but notice that the Halloween theme is often used for animated feature films.

ParaNorman, however, looks pretty imaginative. The trailers apparently don’t give us a good idea of what this film is like, instead opting for constant jokes and editing that makes your head spin. I love the designs of the characters and sets, they are very jagged and unique. Everything is delightfully asymmetrical. The movements are very smooth too. Most of the humor surrounding the creatures is good, everything else? Not so much. I couldn’t help but also think that Norman’s everyday life seemed a bit cliche, with the dialogue and how the bullies treat him and such. I'm also not too sure what I think of the film having the adults being fools, since that's another trope that tends to get tiresome as we've seen it before in television cartoons many times. Hopefully I’ll be proven wrong.

Sony Pictures Animation will serve up Hotel Transylvania after that, which was directed by Genndy Tartakovsky. The recent trailer pretty much tells us that this will be a fun treat. The humor isn’t as hit-and-miss as one might think, as I myself found myself cracking up during the trailer. Dracula (voiced by Adam Sandler) is going to be a hoot. Early on, when I saw that this would have a star-studded cast, I wasn’t enthusiastic. The first trailer appeared, I was disappointed, but not surprised at the same time. With this trailer, I’m more interested. Adam Sandler basically parodies the “I vant to suck your blood” voice, but it’s hilarious when you actually hear it.

Dracula builds Hotel Transylvania to keep his daughter Mavis (voiced by Selena Gomez) and other monsters safe from humans. The monsters fear humans (which reminds me of Monsters, Inc.), but it’s all played for laughs. All goes wrong when a human finds the hotel and falls in love with Mavis. That said human, named ---- (voiced by Andy Samberg), seems rather obnoxious. He has a laid-back “hey man” attitude, but he seems all too talkative for my tastes.

What shines is the animation. It’s got a fun, somewhat colorful look that affectionately pokes fun at the Halloween monsters we all know (DreamWorks’ Rise of the Guardians could be interpreted as the anti-thesis of this film). Other than that, the film looks like fun.

The last of the Halloween-themed films is from Tim Burton himself, Frankenweenie, a re-imagining of his 1984 short film of the same name. From the trailers, it’s clear that he definitely expanded the story (we see a dinosaur in the final seconds). Visually, it’s pretty much him doing another Nightmare-style film. At the same time, however, I think more of Vincent, his brilliant 1982 short film.

The decision to shoot it in black and white certainly adds to it, reminding me of the 1930s monster classics. What really makes it for me, though, is the emotional content. When we see the scenes of the deceased Sparky and Victor trying to revive him, they draw an emotional response. They’re quiet and effective, so I can imagine them being tearjerkers in the finished film. However, things seem a bit giddy after said dog is resurrected.

Of course, knowing Disney’s marketing, the story won’t be as chaotic as the trailers make them out to be, but you never know. Frankenweenie looks like a good ride at the theaters. Out of the three Halloween-themed films, it doesn’t interest me as much as ParaNorman, but the writing is less gabby than Hotel Transylvania’s.

This trio of treats are still on my “most anticipated” list. From what’s been revealed, they look like they have strengths and weaknesses. ParaNorman has the best style, but the writing isn’t catching my interest despite some very imaginative visuals. Frankenweenie looks like typical Tim Burton, but the writing is a bit stronger. Hotel Transylvania looks like fun, nothing more. That said, I’m looking forward to all of them.

In November, we'll be getting two films from Walt Disney Animation Studios and DreamWorks Animation. Both of which excite me the most: Wreck-It Ralph and Rise of the Guardians.

Disney’s Wreck-It Ralph comes on like Despicable Me and Megamind in a video game setting. At first, it may seem like Disney is trying to use the same magic trick. Not likely. Something about it already seems unique on the surface, not because it’s a Walt Disney Animation Studios film, but rather an experience that you’ll remember for years. Despicable Me, by all accounts, is a very fun film. I personally love it, but it’s really nothing more than a fun crowd pleaser.

It’s got some heart, yes. The characters are very likable, yes. That’s about it, though. It’s like a live action comedy film, it’s really funny and enjoyable to watch, but that’s about it. It has some cartoony antics that couldn’t be done in live action, as it adds to the goofiness of the whole film. Nothing wrong with that, but Wreck-It Ralph looks like something a bit beyond that. The idea has been in the works for a while, but I have no clue when the writers ever decided to make the story about a bad guy trying to be a good guy. Even if they did after seeing Despicable Me, it shouldn’t matter, as long it’s pulled off right.

As for Megamind comparisons, Megamind was already compared to Despicable Me before it hit theaters since Megamind himself tries to be the hero for a change. It’s executed differently, but Megamind also lacked a punch. There wasn’t much heart or appeal, it just felt like a mindless comedy that didn’t know whether it wanted to be an all-out spoof of the superhero genre or an intriguing story about a bored supervillain with an identity crisis.

Ralph’s (who is voiced by John C. Reilly) quest to become a hero will probably be born out of a desire he’s had his whole life, being assigned to be the bad guy. In the trailer, it is implied that he is aware of people not liking him for his job. “It sure must feel great to be the good guy...” he quietly says at the “Bad-Anon” meeting. There’s already more emotion there than what I saw in the other two films. Knowing the Disney tradition of adding heart to a story, even a non-serious one (think The Emperor's New Groove), it’s possible that there will be more meat to this entire story than in those two similar films.

So what’s the best thing he could do? Go to another video game and be the hero for once, but what he does ultimately causes disaster for the entire arcade (a family fun center called “Litwak’s”). The trailer doesn’t show us what he could’ve possibly unleashed, though it could be the “Cy-bugs”, the robotic bug-like enemies he encounters in the game Hero's Duty. Since Wreck-It Ralph is a story that involves multiple video game worlds (Ralph’s own game Fix-It Felix, Jr., Hero's Duty and Sugar Rush), I was wondering how Disney would pull that off. The recent Disney animated features have scenes where the animation and art are a radical departure from the look of the rest of the films. In The Princess and the Frog, it was for the magnificent “Almost There” scene, where Tiana sings about her dreams of owning a restaurant. It’s all told through an Art Deco style that is very reminiscent of the Harlem Renaissance artwork. That’s just one of many great examples.

From the trailer, it looks like all the worlds will be done in computer animation. However, from a color and lighting standpoint, they are all unique. Fix-It Felix, Jr. is minimal in its design, with people who look like Little People-esque toys. Since it’s from the early 1980s, it would look like that. Hero's Duty on the other hand is more akin to Halo, Gears of War and most of today’s video games. It’s very realistic with lots of details. The lead character from that world, the no-nonsense Sergeant Calhoun (voiced by Jane Lynch) doesn’t look like a character you’d see in a Disney or Pixar film. She’s not overtly caricatured or anything, she looks like something you’d see in today’s games.

Sugar Rush on the other hand is more like a Nintendo game. It’s detailed much like Hero's Duty but it’s very colorful, bright and fun to look at. It’s basically Candy Land meets Mario Kart. It’s certainly creative, as the set designers had a field day designing forests and mountains out of candies while still trying to make it look fresh and original. The character designs here are less lifelike than the ones seen in Hero's Duty. Weird shapes and cute designs, all based off of sweets. Aside from Candy Land, the setting also reminds me of a Sega Dreamcast game called Pen Pen TriIcelon, a quirky kid-oriented game which had a level made of candies and sweets. Some may remember that title, some may not.

As for the arcade itself, everything is connected through Game Central Station, which is located inside the arcade’s power strip. I went over the details there before, like how the portals to others games are the insides of the electrical sockets (look closely and it says “Moore USA”, a reference to director Rich Moore). We’ve seen a good deal of that, but this brings up an interesting question: What about other arcades? What about other Fix-It Felix, Jr. machines across the world? Imagine a joke in the film where Ralph actually meets another Ralph. That could be the source for a ton of good jokes, since this is supposed to be a comedy adventure.

What about Fix-It Felix himself? The trailers show that he does care about Ralph, but we don’t see much of him. We don’t even see the game itself, just what it looks like to the player in the arcade (The details on the game cabinet are spot-on). We get brief glimpses of the interior of the arcade (look for a Pac-Man machine, to the left of Fix-It Felix, Jr.), which looks like your typical amusement center.

As for music, who knows what kind of score this will have. Henry Pryce Jackman is composing it, but what intrigues me about him is that he actually worked with Mike Oldfield, the man behind the legendary Tubular Bells album. Not to say I'm thinking this film will have a soundtrack like that, but I am hoping for one that weaves 8-bit sound effects into the typical lush Disney-esque score. Perhaps the score will change radically to suit the different video game environments, such as Hero's Duty having a more epic, perhaps electronic action film tone (a la Tron: Legacy) while Sugar Rush can be a bit on the whimsical side. The trailer gives us no hint of what this film will sound like, since it prefers to assault our ears with Flo-Rida.

So from an adventure comedy that’s a love letter to fans of classic video games (like myself), what can we expect from the dialogue? Luckily none of it is cringeworthy. First off, the cameos. This is the most talked about part of the trailer, and it seems as if this trailer has been getting very good reception. This bodes very well for Disney, who spent several years struggling to interest audiences due to several setbacks. Potential critical and commercial performance aside, Wreck-It Ralph seems like its jokes are not going to misfire. Those who have seen the film (which is of course a work-in-progress version), such as the minds behind the brilliant animation podcast The Rotoscopers, have confirmed that the humor does indeed work. Rich Moore, having directed several episodes of The Simpsons and Futurama (which coincidentally had a “what-if” episode where life was like a video game), probably littered the film with clever jokes, along with scribes Jennifer Lee and Phil Johnston.

Will all that said, Wreck-It Ralph looks like a game changer (no pun intended) for Walt Disney Animation Studios, as I’ve said many times before. I was always looking forward to this one, and the trailer only made me more excited.

An equally interesting and colorful film, Rise of the Guardians, looks like it'll be a new kind of film for DreamWorks. When DreamWorks announced that they were going to tackle William Joyce’s The Guardians of Childhood for an animated feature, I didn’t know what to think. Having been skeptical of DreamWorks’ output up until I saw How To Train Your Dragon for the first time on Blu-ray in October 2010 (which motivated me to check out their recent crop), I was expecting it to be another one I’d reject.

Having seen How to Train Your Dragon and not everything else around it at the time of the first trailer’s premiere earlier this year, I was surprised. For the first time, it was a trailer for a DreamWorks film that actually impressed me. The mood was great, it was all about the lovely visuals, the characters and surprisingly, no annoying jokes. I knew that DreamWorks was now serious about stepping up their game, the likes of Kung Fu Panda and How to Train Your Dragon were only the beginning.

Rise of the Guardians (which is not a good title, The Guardians of Childhood is much more interesting and intriguing) is about the fictional heroes of childhood that we looked up to once in our lives: Santa Claus, the Sandman, the Easter Bunny and Jack Frost. Now when I read this synopsis for the first time, I was only imagining how these characters would look. Being based on William Joyce characters, their designs could not be predicted. At least they weren’t going to look like their other characters.

... And they didn’t! Santa Claus is redesigned to look more like a tough guy but with a warm heart. Alec Baldwin gives him a pseudo-Russian accent that’s a little bit too hard to get behind, though it shouldn’t be much of an issue. They’re trying to keep him as far away from a jolly man going “Ho ho ho!” as possible. His workshop isn’t your typical Santa’s workshop, but then again, Aardman’s Arthur Christmas presented an interesting take on Santa’s workshop, though the character designs were much more traditional. In addition to being with a band of elves, he also has these strange fuzzy bipedal creatures. His workshop is high up on an icy mountain, but there’s a lot of imagination put into the building’s exterior. His sled? Not so conventional either.

The other childhood heroes come off as characters you’d see in an epic fantasy saga, and their designs are all very creative. The Sandman comes off as silly-looking gnome-like man. His trails of sand are like pixie dust. The world he comes from looks like a magical version of the Sahara. He will be a mute character who can apparently create things out of sand, such as a toy-like biplane that he uses to fly around. E. Aster Bunnymund, the Easter Bunny (voiced by Hugh Jackman), has the most interesting design. Jack Frost even mistakes him for a kangaroo in the latest trailer. He isn’t presented as a friendly-looking bunny, cutesy or anything of the sort. In fact, he looks like he means business. I like it! His world is a bright, colorful forest with Easter eggs that can walk. Last but not least is Tooth, the Tooth Fairy (voiced by Isla Fisher), whose design is very colorful and coated in feathers. Her world is full of hummingbird-like creatures, but the rest of it isn’t clear. It looks like an enchanted forest from her character poster and some shots in the trailers, but we see an opulent castle in the new trailer, so that could be a part of her world.

The main protagonist of the film is Jack Frost (voiced by Chris Pine), who is from our world of course. He’s a mischievous teenaged boy who causes trouble with a magical scepter that freezes things. How he got it? Who knows. With that, he is chosen to team up with the guardians, as established in the latest trailer. Not much to say about him or his design. It’s fine, but he isn’t necessarily interesting. Perhaps over the course of the film, he’ll mature.

The worlds of the guardians are stunning, some of the finest you’ll see in a computer animated film today. DreamWorks’ animators knew that presenting these worlds would require a load of imagination, especially since countless other interpretations are rather basic and lack the magic seen in this film. Our childhood heroes go from what we know to something truly imaginative and breathtaking. It shows what you can do with this kind of story in the animation medium.

For many years, DreamWorks’ animation quality was always compared negatively to that of Pixar’s. Earlier, their style was simply competent. The crew weren’t aiming for visual thrills in fare like Shark Tale, Madagascar and Bee Movie. Shrek had some imagination, while its first two sequels were truly lacking in that area. Rise of the Guardians is DreamWorks unleashing all of that potential they had in the last six years. Comparing Pixar and DreamWorks negatively was never a good thing, but with this film’s look, it should rightfully be positively compared to the visually dazzling works of Pixar’s.

At the same time, Rise of the Guardians’ story seems to be right in line with a Pixar film. There’s characters you already like, an interesting execution of the good vs. evil story, and heart. The story is to involve a young girl who ceases to believe in the guardians, so it’s possible that the story will be very heartfelt. I definitely got this vibe from both trailers, but both trailers actually seem more fantasy adventure-oriented than anything. Comedy is (rightfully) downplayed in both, but heart is too. I’m not saying it won’t be heartfelt, it probably will be. Most trailers for Pixar’s films hide the heartfelt side of the story and go for haywire editing and pacing (with some exceptions of course, mainly BRAVE’s wonderful “Family Legends” trailer). Again, the film might possibly be a tearjerker since How to Train Your Dragon attempted to be one.

Aside from comedy and heart, this looks like DreamWorks’ darkest film to date. I never thought I’d put the two in the same sentence, given the unabashed comic nature of their older films. Kung Fu Panda had sheds of this, and so did How to Train Your Dragon. Kung Fu Panda 2 had some wonderfully dramatic scenes that were fairly dark. Rise of the Guardians goes all out due to its villain Pitch (Jude Law), the Bogeyman. I initially didn’t like the design as seen on his character poster, but in the trailers? Never mind...

Depicted as a tall, thin, dark and revolting figure, his world looks like a total nightmare. It’s a bleak and creepy medieval-like world, with empty cages everywhere. (For who?) He wants to bring total darkness to the world and ruin the dreams of children forever. Wow... DreamWorks had a convincing villain with Lord Shen in Kung Fu Panda 2, but he ultimately fell victim to some villain cliches. Pitch doesn’t seem to. He’ll be one that’ll probably scare young children. Pixar and Disney were never afraid of this, as Disney villains have always frightened the younger set. Pitch looks like he can match up to those villains, as he doesn’t come off as the typical baddie: Hammy, over-the-top and comedic. In the trailers, we see him travel by the means of dark, shadowy horses. His voice is also very creepy and menacing. I think we have a great villain with this one.

Rise of the Guardians will kick off a new chapter for DreamWorks Animation, it'll show that the studio has more to it than silly comedies with childish humor. In the same month, Disney will widen their scope with their action-oriented Wreck-It Ralph while also preparing for an oncoming new Renaissance. Both of these November releases are my top picks for the year, now that Brave has come out. To see these two other studios trying to expand the medium in the world of computer animation (I didn’t call them the “Big Three” for nothing) is quite thrilling. The Third Golden Age has only gotten more exciting.

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...