Worst animated feature. Ever.
That wascally miscweant Joe Strike
to see something really charming & different & saw the most boring,
self-indulgent, un-involving piece of artsy-fartsy cartoon crapola
that's ever been committed to film. Absolutely NO warmth, no
characterization (& no dialog) whatsoever. Also no anthropomorphism,
save a very mouselike (he even squeaks) big-eared handyman. (More a
zoomorphic character actually.)
A few intersting visuals, but horribly ugly character design & a
non-story that takes forever to get nowhere. Weird thing is this film
got a lot of rave reviews, probably from critics who thought they were
watching 'arte' made by an 'artiste.' Even the Disney cheapquels are
more entertaining than this turd. (Oh yeah, the film also has a shot
of an overflowing with shit toilet.) YOU - HAVE - BEEN - WARNED; STAY
- AWAY...
Caged_Horse
>Even the Disney cheapquels are more entertaining than this turd.
While I've no desire to see it, are you really saying that this turd is worse than, say, that misconceived and mendacious pile of buffalo dung known as 'Pocahontas'?! 'Triplets' may be bad, sure, but is it pernicious?
Mike and Carole
"Caged_Horse" <oaco...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:25287ab6ba547973...@localhost.talkaboutpets.com...
Oh, come now. Nothing is as bad as SHINBONE ALLEY.
Mike
Ostrich!
F.R.O.7'.
--
-Ostrich! <")
Juan F. Lara
That wascally miscweant Joe Strike <joestr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Run away, run away from 'Triplets of Belleville.'
Hmm. I saw it on Sunday and I enjoyed the movie.
> I went in expecting to see something really charming & different & saw the
> most boring, self-indulgent, un-involving piece of artsy-fartsy cartoon
> crapola that's ever been committed to film.
I agree that the movie is SLOW. A couple of scenes, like the dinner scene
at the start and the scene in the middle at the Triplets' home, indeed are
excruciating to sit through. But I still thought the movie was strong in
character design and in set up for gags. I saw the movie with a packed house
and the audience laughed a lot throughout the feature. The movie was a big
crowdpleaser.
> Absolutely NO warmth, no characterization
The audience warmed up very much to Madame Souza and Champion. Madame
Souza's perserverance was admirable. A grandma doting on her grandson is going
to be appealing to a lot of people. Likewise a kid with a loyal dog.
> Also no anthropomorphism
OTOH, the pet pooch Bruno was the most realistical portrayal of the dog
brain I've seen in a a cartoon movie. Dog lovers will love him.
> save a very mouselike (he even squeaks) big-eared handyman. (More a
> zoomorphic character actually.)
More like an Uncle Walt character actually....
> A few intersting visuals, but horribly ugly character design
I thought the character design was imaginative. The shorter pudgier
characters had a cuddliness to them. Old world charm. My favorite characters
were the bricklike henchmen though.
> Even the Disney cheapquels are more entertaining than this turd.
Director Sylvan Chomet toiled away on cheapquels in WD-Canada for a few
months before he went independent. In all his interviews he'll tell you about
how lousy his bosses were over there.
> (Oh yeah, the film also has a shot of an overflowing with shit toilet.)
So he included a Hidden Mickey to make his statement. :-)
- Juan F. Lara
http://bellsouthpwp.net/l/a/lara6281/intro.html
Juan F. Lara
I liked "Shinbone Alley". :-) It's definitely not great, but I thought it
was fun. Amazing what you could do in a G rated movie, at least in 1971. :-)
"We're Back: a Dinosaur's Story", "Tom and Jerry: the Movie", "Lady and
the Tramp 2", "The King and I", the "Swan Princess" movies, "The Mighty Kong".
Those are a few flicks I'd pick for worst.
Samantha Ann Patterson
to the Curtises, Hatfields, or McCoys ment)
In many presenations of Triplets, the Disney film 'Destino' played
before the film. Hate to break the 'animation is only for kids'
thing for you but there are hundreds of excellent animated films that
do not involve talking animals or farting statuettes. Triplets is
not my favourite film but I did enjoy it. I also enjoyed 'Yellow
Submarine', 'Fantasia', and 'The Wall' which are some other animated
films that you might recognize and categorize with this film.
Wake up and smell the coffee, or at least read the writeup on a film
before you go see it. Sheesh.
In article <972e8999.04020...@posting.google.com>,
That wascally miscweant Joe Strike <joestr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Wanderer
news:bvooji$j41$1...@hubcap.clemson.edu...
> I liked "Shinbone Alley". :-) It's definitely not great, but I
thought it
> was fun. Amazing what you could do in a G rated movie, at least in 1971.
:-)
> "We're Back: a Dinosaur's Story", "Tom and Jerry: the Movie", "Lady
and
> the Tramp 2", "The King and I", the "Swan Princess" movies, "The Mighty
Kong".
> Those are a few flicks I'd pick for worst.
>
I almost *liked* "We're Back", thank you.:) Good voicework, and the
animation wasn't bad... but Lawsey, the writing!X( If Heinlein was still
around, he would've sued for the steals from "Something Wicked This Way
Comes" that make up the second primary plot. I've since read the book, and
for crying out loud, why did they feel the need to introduce that whole
"Carnival of Souls" schtick just to pad out the movie? They could've had a
whole other song plus five more character-development scenes... but, no,
they had to rip off Heinlein and turn one good movie into two halves of a
good movie.:P
Yours with a few writing issues,
The wolfish,
Wanderer
wand...@ticnet.com
"Where am I going? I don't quite know.
What does it matter *where* people go?
Down to the woods where the bluebells grow!
Anywhere! Anywhere! *I* don't know!"
-- a. a. milne
David Opstad
"Wanderer" <wand...@ticnet.com> wrote:
> I almost *liked* "We're Back", thank you.:) Good voicework, and the
> animation wasn't bad... but Lawsey, the writing!
The movie had its moments for me, too. I liked the energy in the "Roll
Back the Rock" song at the parade. And how many other times are you
going to hear Walter Cronkite and Julia Childs doing voicework for an
animated movie?
As to "Triplets", I really enjoyed it. It was so refreshing to see a
movie whose visuals were not rooted in either the Disney or the anime
styles. It was earthy, funny, surreal and quite beautiful in places. And
the dog definitely acted like a dog!
I've seen all three of the nominees for Best Animated Picture this year,
and I liked them all. From a furry perspective I guess I was most fond
of "Brother Bear," but I'd also be happy for "Triplets" or "Nemo"
winning.
Dave
Wanderer
news:opstad-8B39D0....@news-central.ash.giganews.com...
> In article <101vt4v...@corp.supernews.com>,
> "Wanderer" <wand...@ticnet.com> wrote:
>
> > I almost *liked* "We're Back", thank you.:) Good voicework, and the
> > animation wasn't bad... but Lawsey, the writing!
>
> The movie had its moments for me, too. I liked the energy in the "Roll
> Back the Rock" song at the parade. And how many other times are you
> going to hear Walter Cronkite and Julia Childs doing voicework for an
> animated movie?
>
<snip>
<LAUGH> A-men to that!:) Not to mention Jay Leno as that little green
man.:> But yeah, if only they'd had a better story, that picture would've
been perfect.:) John Goodman has the kind of voice you expect a big guy
like him to have, and which so few do: Deep and resonant. It's why he
voices almost nothing but large characters.:) Cronkite was terrific as
Professor Neweyes... his style is perfect for any "elder statesman" type of
character. (I loved the in-joke, too. At the ending, as they're doing
little "bits" for each human character, Professor Neweyes turns to the
camera and says, "And that's the way it is.":)
Julia Child I *normally* wouldn't like as a voice artist. Here, though,
she's terrific playing the rather scattered museum curator.:)
Yours wolfishly,
The movie-memoried,
George Partlow
> I almost *liked* "We're Back", thank you.:) Good voicework, and the
> animation wasn't bad... but Lawsey, the writing!X( If Heinlein was still
> around, he would've sued for the steals from "Something Wicked This Way
> Comes" that make up the second primary plot.
Ummmm... AFAIK "Something Wicked This Way Comes" was written by Ray
Bradbury, not Robert Heinlein!
;-)
George
Wanderer
news:e5dfe6d0.04020...@posting.google.com...
> Ummmm... AFAIK "Something Wicked This Way Comes" was written by Ray
> Bradbury, not Robert Heinlein!
>
> ;-)
>
Oops!X( <Maxwell Smart> Sorry about that, Chief... </Maxwell Smart> I
hate it when I get my references wrong...
Yours having oopsied a fur-fectly good rant,
DishRoom1
Mike and Carole wrote --
>> Oh, come now. Nothing is as bad as SHINBONE ALLEY.
>
> I liked "Shinbone Alley". :-) It's definitely not great, but I thought
>it
>was fun. Amazing what you could do in a G rated movie, at least in 1971. :-)
I agree with the sentiment. mehitable was my most favorite reason for watching
the movie. Rroowlll. ^_^
> "We're Back: a Dinosaur's Story", "Tom and Jerry: the Movie", "Lady
>and
>the Tramp 2", "The King and I", the "Swan Princess" movies, "The Mighty
>Kong".
>Those are a few flicks I'd pick for worst.
>
I guess I vote for Michael E's "Lady and the Tramp 2: Scamp's Adventure" as
well. I often like animated movies about dogs, but this is the first
doggie-toon flick to disapoint me. It's very cold and doesn't have the
originl's charm. The animation was so-so; looking close to the originals'
design and colors, but not quite too much convincing in animation acting and
movment as the first movie. None of the original characters move or act as well
under the Austrailian TV/cheapquel shop as when the Nine Old Men and company
masterfully animated them over a half century ago. (One most obvious was with
the mean old Aunt from the original; the one with the wicked Siamese cats. In
the cheapquel hshe acts like some typicaly kindly old lady too much.) The
thing with Scamp and the girl pup from the neighborhood dog gang is arushed
repeat of the original movie with a pretendous "family is important" moral
hurriedly tacked on. And having a mean spirited gang of dogs doesn't seem to
fit too much in the Lady and the Tramp universe very well. Maybe in the Oliver
and Company universe. Maybe it's just me on that last one.
Other animated films that I vote the worst are:
The anime "Silent Service": It start's out OK . But c'mon, a group of Japanese
Marines go AWOL along with submarine and then declare to the world that they
and the sub are a sovreign nation? That's too much for one animation to ask for
my suspension of disbelief.
"Outlanders" Too convolted in plot and having the ugliest spaceship designs in
a sci-fi flick, live-action or animated.
The Black Caudron: This Disney 1985 have had some pertaintal and a good
concept. But the story and the characters didn't add up during the second half
of the movie.
John Shughart
Skytech
I also thought 'artsy-fartsy' as they tried to describe it. Give me
Treasure Planet or Titan AE anyday!
--
Skytech
Skytech
> Oh, come now. Nothing is as bad as SHINBONE ALLEY.
>
Wh-wha?! I *liked* Shinbone Alley!! I have a tape copy. I mean,
Mehitabel is such a loveable tramp.
WHAT ABOUT THE REVOLUTION?!!
--
Skytech
William Earl Haskell
It was televised, but the rating sucked - so it was cancelled after a short
run.
Chris Sobieniak
wrote:
>Other animated films that I vote the worst are:
>The anime "Silent Service": It start's out OK . But
>c'mon, a group of Japanese Marines go AWOL
>along with submarine and then declare to the
>world that they and the sub are a sovreign nation?
>That's too much for one animation to ask for my
>suspension of disbelief.
Perhaps I should see this someday!
>"Outlanders" Too convolted in plot and having the
>ugliest spaceship designs in a sci-fi flick,
>live-action or animated.
Still, Johji Manabe's anthropomorphic designs facinate me anyway (though
I haven't see "Outlanders" yet anyway)!
>The Black Caudron: This Disney 1985 have had
>some pertaintal and a good concept. But the story
>and the characters didn't add up during the second
>half of the movie.
>John Shughart
I have to agree there as well.
From the Master of Car-too-nal Knowledge...
Christopher M. Sobieniak
--"Fightin' the Frizzies since 1978"--
Wanderer
news:20040203192210...@mb-m25.aol.com...
<snip>
> The Black Caudron: This Disney 1985 have had some pertaintal and a good
> concept. But the story and the characters didn't add up during the second
half
> of the movie.
>
To give credit where credit is due, that's because it was an adaptation of
not one, not two, but at least *three* books, all compressed into one movie.
"The Chronicles of Prydain", by Lloyd Alexander, is a long and rambling
saga, and extends well past a trilogy. Small wonder the story had a few
(dozen) fracture points, considering the seismic toss it underwent...
Mind you, I actually understood the story. The artwork, though... yick, if
it were any darker, you'd never see the scenery!
Yours wolfishly,
The never-rented-it-never-will,
DishRoom1
I wrote --
>> The Black Caudron: This Disney 1985 have had some pertaintal and a good
>> concept. But the story and the characters didn't add up during the second
>half
>> of the movie.
>>
>
>To give credit where credit is due, that's because it was an adaptation of
>not one, not two, but at least *three* books, all compressed into one movie.
>"The Chronicles of Prydain", by Lloyd Alexander, is a long and rambling
>saga, and extends well past a trilogy. Small wonder the story had a few
>(dozen) fracture points, considering the seismic toss it underwent...
One woders what it could have been like if they took the Peter Jackson route
and did "The Chronicles of Prydain" trilology instead.
They also had to remove an important character in the original novels, which
perhaps helped more to the movie's senslessness than whatever strenghs it had
left. There were also stories when the movie was finished, that then-partener
of the then-new Eisner regime, Jeff Katzenburg, snipped out some scenes for
being too dark for a Disney flick, much similar to how Eisner would have edited
and reanimated "Treasure Planet". (Cauldron was the last Disney animated
feature made under the Ron Miller leadership.)
>
>Mind you, I actually understood the story. The artwork, though... yick, if
>it were any darker, you'd never see the scenery!
>
The artwork and animation looked fine to me in the beginning of the movies, as
did the story. Everything, both the animation slightly, and the story seemed to
weaken greatly when Tarin got inside the Horned King's castle and was caught.
It seemed like the animators often stopped caring about the movie. The color
schemefor the film seemed to get more or less muddled then from the beginning.
The only thing I took the most amusment for the film involved a buxom,
cleavage-reavealing member of a trio of witiches and the musician sidekick who
briefly gets turned into a frog, ensuring a joke about the witch's breasts.
This is the first time an animated female character is drawn with such
volumousness for a Mouse flick, which predated better films like "Who Framed
Roger Rabbit" and"Beauty and the Beast"
John Shughart
DishRoom1
I wrote --
>>Other animated films that I vote the worst are:
>>The anime "Silent Service": It start's out OK . But
>>c'mon, a group of Japanese Marines go AWOL
>>along with submarine and then declare to the
>>world that they and the sub are a sovreign nation?
>>That's too much for one animation to ask for my
>>suspension of disbelief.
>
>Perhaps I should see this someday!
>
>>"Outlanders" Too convolted in plot and having the
>>ugliest spaceship designs in a sci-fi flick,
>>live-action or animated.
>
>Still, Johji Manabe's anthropomorphic designs facinate me anyway (though
>I haven't see "Outlanders" yet anyway)!
>
The furries drawn for the movie seemed very cool, but even they weren't enough
to save the loonng, hard-to-get-involved plot.
Like Disney's "Black Caudron" took a three-chapter novel and rather badly
compact it all into one feature lengh movie, "Outlanders" was based on a
long-running magna of the same title. The filmmakers tried to shoehorn it all
into one feature, as it seems, and it got rather convolted and uber-slow plot.
John Shughart
Doodles
One cannot please everyone and one should not even try. I, however, have
now seen it three times in the theatres and several times on a screener tape
provided to members of ASIFA-Hollywood. And if there's any justice, it'll
get the Annie for Best Feature come this Saturday. (If that happens, look
for it to win the Oscar, too.)
2. "Triplettes of Bellville" is _not_ for the Disney or Animu fanboys. It's
an animated film that sees the world from a viewpoint that is as unique and
distinctive as any out of Japan or Hollywood. The canvas it uses is broad,
stark and expressionistic, like a Picasso painting or an orchestral piece by
Carl Orrif. It tells it's story with subtle glances, small smiles and quiet
moments of reflection, mixed in with a broad sense of farce. Along the way,
it pays tribute to such sources as the Fleischer Brothers, Django Reinhardt,
Josephine Baker, the Tour de France, and Jacques Tati. It's not a film
created in a vacuum, and I hardly expect it to be appreciated by people who
have no reference point for the film.
3. Not every animated feature has to have anthropomorphic characters.
Humans can be just as wild and funny, and sometimes the greatest challenge
is to depict people warts and all.
4. Not one of you has come even close to the worst animated features ever.
Thanks to the Annies, I've seen movies that make your listings look like
cinematic delights. Last year I saw a CG feature from India that recieved
limited release that was another version of the "Aladdin" story, and all I
could do was wail and gnash my teeth through the horror. However, it was
still better than any Scooby-Doo DTV flick I've seen. Or the "Care Bears."
5. There's _two_ digs at Chomet's former bosses at Ditzy in the movie. The
Toilet Mickey and the photo of the mechanic at the theme park. Pay close
attention to his shirt in the picture...
Juan F. Lara
Doodles <dood...@cheesies.pacbell.net> wrote:
> 4. Not one of you has come even close to the worst animated features ever.
> Thanks to the Annies, I've seen movies that make your listings look like
> cinematic delights. Last year I saw a CG feature from India that recieved
> limited release that was another version of the "Aladdin" story, and all I
> could do was wail and gnash my teeth through the horror.
Hmm. Would that be Pentamedia's "Son of Alladin"? Or "Alibaba"?
> However, it was still better than any Scooby-Doo DTV flick I've seen.
I liked the first one, "Zombie Island". It's maybe the only good "Scooby
Doo" cartoon ever made.
> 5. There's _two_ digs at Chomet's former bosses at Ditzy in the movie. The
> Toilet Mickey and the photo of the mechanic at the theme park. Pay close
> attention to his shirt in the picture...
Not to mention the fact that the ladies laughed derisively when they saw
the picture.
Skytech
> It was televised, but the rating sucked - so it was cancelled after
a
> short run.
It was a series?! I thought it was a one-shot movie based on a play.
--
Skytech
Chris Sobieniak
wrote:
>Chris Sobieniak wrote --
>>facinate me anyway (though I haven't see
>>"Outlanders" yet anyway)!
>The furries drawn for the movie seemed very cool,
>but even they weren't enough to save the loonng,
>hard-to-get-involved plot.
Thanks for the info.
>Like Disney's "Black Caudron" took a three-chapter
>novel and rather badly compact it all into one
>feature lengh movie, "Outlanders" was based on a
>long-running magna of the same title. The
>filmmakers tried to shoehorn it all into one feature,
>as it seems, and it got rather convolted and
>uber-slow plot.
>John Shughart
I know how that could be. It probably worked as a TV/OAV series of some
sort if they would've stretched it out into a number of episodes
instead. I just got to see an OAV based on another Manabe creation,
"Capricorn", which I liked but I wished they had more time to set the
pace of the film as it seemed rather too fast in the way they had to
cram it all into 50 minutes.
iBuck
>>but even they weren't enough to save the loonng,
>>hard-to-get-involved plot.
>
>Thanks for the info.
The plot suffers the same problem as the black cauldron does, it's a
incredible compression of a -very- long manga series, that leaves a great deal
behind...
"You can have it Quickly,Correct, Complex - Pick 2"
Ken Pick
I think South Park even parodied the Vision Quest shtick from that
flick in one episode with a gerbil making a vision quest up the
digestive tract of Mister Slave the Leather Boy...
DishRoom1
Being a fan of the original "Balto", The "Balto meets his wolf heritage" thing
is a good concept. Plus unlike the producers of most animated sequels, the
"Balto II" producers tried the most with what they had, but they were left with
a plot that halfway lost direction.
John Shughart
PeterCat
> Run away, run away from 'Triplets of Belleville.' I went in expecting
> to see something really charming & different & saw the most boring,
> self-indulgent, un-involving piece of artsy-fartsy cartoon crapola
> that's ever been committed to film. Absolutely NO warmth, no
> characterization (& no dialog) whatsoever.
Oh come on! Tastes differ, obviously. I got a screener VHS from having
joined ASIFA, the animation society that votes on the Annie awards, and
I watched it expecting to be fairly bored, as from the trailer I didn't
much care for the style of animation.
But it grew on me quickly -- the story was quirky and funny and utterly
unpredictable. The characters are utterly memorable, as are some of the
sequences. (Frogs, anyone?) The animation was lush and well-crafted. And
in fact, as it's playing in theatres here this week (well, one theatre,
anyway), I'll likely go pay to see it, especially as the acclaimed
Disney/Dali short "Destino" wasn't on the tape.
Now, as for the true worst animated feature, ever, that would have to be
"Gandahar," a 1988 production (in a style I'd have sworn was Filmation)
of a semi-erotic French graphic novel, with a screenplay by Isaac
Asimov. (In the English dub, Glenn Close voices a main character named
Ambisextra. 'Nuff said.) I saw it at an SF con a few years ago, and that
had to be the most tedious movie of any kind I've ever seen, apart form
training films; so much so that I'd completely blocked the title from my
mind -- unfortunately now refreshed for the cause, thanks to IMDB.
<http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095525/>
--
The Furry InfoPage! http://www.tigerden.com/infopage/furry/
pete...@Furry.fan.org (PeterCat) Anthrocon Art Show director
--
If this helped you, please take the time to rate the value of this post:
<http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=PeterCat>
Chris Sobieniak
>Oh come on! Tastes differ, obviously. I got a
>screener VHS from having joined ASIFA, the
>animation society that votes on the Annie awards,
>and I watched it expecting to be fairly bored, as
>from the trailer I didn't much care for the style of
>animation.
Neat that your with ASIFA. I'm hoping to join it someday as I hope it
might help me in my future career as an animator (finances pending).
DishRoom1
Joe Strike --
>> Run away, run away from 'Triplets of Belleville.' I went in expecting
>> to see something really charming & different & saw the most boring,
>> self-indulgent, un-involving piece of artsy-fartsy cartoon crapola
>> that's ever been committed to film. Absolutely NO warmth, no
>> characterization (& no dialog) whatsoever.
>
>Oh come on! Tastes differ, obviously. I got a screener VHS from having
>joined ASIFA, the animation society that votes on the Annie awards, and
>I watched it expecting to be fairly bored, as from the trailer I didn't
>much care for the style of animation.
>
>But it grew on me quickly -- the story was quirky and funny and utterly
>unpredictable. The characters are utterly memorable, as are some of the
>sequences. (Frogs, anyone?) The animation was lush and well-crafted. And
>in fact, as it's playing in theatres here this week (well, one theatre,
>anyway), I'll likely go pay to see it, especially as the acclaimed
>Disney/Dali short "Destino" wasn't on the tape.
>
>Now, as for the true worst animated feature, ever, that would have to be
>"Gandahar," a 1988 production (in a style I'd have sworn was Filmation)
>of a semi-erotic French graphic novel, with a screenplay by Isaac
>Asimov. (In the English dub, Glenn Close voices a main character named
>Ambisextra. 'Nuff said.) I saw it at an SF con a few years ago, and that
>had to be the most tedious movie of any kind I've ever seen, apart form
>training films; so much so that I'd completely blocked the title from my
>mind -- unfortunately now refreshed for the cause, thanks to IMDB.
><http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095525/>
>
"Gandahar" was also known as "Light Years" when it was released into the US. It
was made by the same French animation-director, Rene Laroux, who also have
helmed over "Fantastic Planet" (1973) and "Time Masters" (1982), animated over
in South Korea, and US distribution by Mimarax back in its pre-Disney years.
I once won a videocassette copy of "Light Years" on eBay and watched it. It
has a nice sci-fi concept (citizens living on some alien fantastic world are
turned to stone by an evil force and the hero tried to end it in an adventure
involving a giant brain in an ocean and time travel) but it didn't seem too
well paced in how the scenes and the dialouge play out. And I got queasy over
the scenes were the Deformed race appeared. I mean, yeah, *I know* that they
need to be designed with abnormal anatomies, so that there would be a reason
why they're refered to as the Deformed and be the tragic rejects of science,
and that Laroux has a taste for the surreal, but boy there were some extreme
cases where they went overboad with the Deformeds' graphic design.
I had to turn my tape over to my sister on Christmas.
John Shughart
Samantha Ann Patterson
(adds to Amazone wishlist. :)
Thanks! :)
In article <20040213235500...@mb-m14.aol.com>,
Doodles
news:23053-402...@storefull-3131.bay.webtv.net...
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2004, 7:18pm, pete...@furry.fan.org (PeterCat) wrote:
> >Oh come on! Tastes differ, obviously. I got a
> >screener VHS from having joined ASIFA, the
> >animation society that votes on the Annie awards,
> >and I watched it expecting to be fairly bored, as
> >from the trailer I didn't much care for the style of
> >animation.
>
> Neat that your with ASIFA. I'm hoping to join it someday as I hope it
> might help me in my future career as an animator (finances pending).
If you're a student, it's $20 per year. If not, it's $60 a year. But you
make up for it with all the free screenings and other events you get to
attend.
Chris Sobieniak
(Doodles) wrote:
>"Chris Sobieniak" <chrism...@webtv.net> wrote
>in message
>news:23053-402...@storefull-3131.bay.w>ebtv.net...
>>someday as I hope it might help me in my future
>>career as an animator (finances pending).
>If you're a student, it's $20 per year. If not, it's $60
>a year. But you make up for it with all the free
>screenings and other events you get to attend.
Too bad it looks like I'll have to pay more then for not being a student
of any college or art school (though animation in Toledo was never
developed long enough to have any impact on anyone interested in
learning, so I'll have to be the first here). And since I'm practically
a shut-in, I can't partake of the free screenings that might take place
elsewhere in the country or such.
But I'll do it anyway (might as well blow my wad where it counts,
perhaps I'll get something out of it one day).
Dub273
>Run away, run away from 'Triplets of Belleville.'
When reading a review of a piece of work that claims "worst ... ever"
, two things spring immediately to mind: 1) visions of the corpulent
Comic Book guy; 2) the over-use of hyperbole. If that's the kind of
guy you wanna be... well, hey.
>I went in expecting to see something really charming & different
I went in with those expectations and came out 2 for 2. It was
charming, it was different, and for the most part extremely engaging.
The car chase at the end did feel a bit monotonous, but other than
that, each new scene brought amazing characters and situations to
life.
>Absolutely NO warmth, no characterization (& no dialog) whatsoever.
While there was a dearth of character DEVELOPMENT, the movie had loads
of characterization, which it achieved through its visuals and audio
without the need for dialogue.
>Also no anthropomorphism,
I don't understand WHY you feel we need another Disney talking-animals
clone in the world, or even why you should expect to see such a thing
in "Triplets". The dog Bruno was exquisitely portrayed as a dog --
that was the point, and it was marvelous.
> save a very mouselike (he even squeaks) big-eared handyman. (More a
> zoomorphic character actually.)
Regarding anthropomorphism, to quote "Princess Bride": "I do not think
that word means what you think it means."
> A few intersting visuals, but horribly ugly character design
If by "horribly ugly" you mean "incredibly unique, stylized, and
beautifully keyframed" then OK. The characters certainly did not look
like Smurfs, I grant.
>Weird thing is this film got a lot of rave reviews, probably
>from critics who thought they were watching 'arte' made by an
>'artiste.'
Don't blame the critics who "get" something that you may not. It
deserved those rave reviews. The movie wasn't trying to be cerebral,
or artsy; it told a rather simple tale set in a rich, living world,
meant simply to be enjoyed.
==\dub/==