Award archives...

Post by **ShyViolet** » January 24th, 2007, 9:25 pm

Maybe it's just that I pay very little attention to studio politics, ShyViolet, but I haven't heard (or seen) anyone directly blame DreamWorks for the 'abandonment' of the traditional 2D animated film .. as far as I can see, every studio made that (very sad and unfortunate) choice, on their own.

It was mostly people on a bunch of sites saying how lousy the "tradigital" animation thing was and how it and those movies destroyed 2d, etc..."serious" film destroyed 2d, etc...etc....Then people got all worked up because DW said they wouldn't make any more of them (right after almost no one went to see them) So by that logic DW destroyed 2d animation....

I'm glad you liked Sinbad Droosan!

Actually almost everything you said about it (especially the lack of Arabian culture and about Spike the dog) I felt exactly the same way about.

And you're right about not getting worked up over stuff like this; it is stress inducing (especially AICN and IMDB)....thanks for reminding me.

Post by **ShyViolet** » January 24th, 2007, 9:27 pm

I have an idea - let's make an official topic on Disney VS Dreamworks VS Pixar! Then no one has to complain about getting off topic.

Maybe.....

Despite hating the film, it is part of the Supes box I bought and I tried again the other night. At least on home video, blown up on my projector screen, the plane sequence had a very rubbery CGI Superman bouncing about all over the place.

I have to say I mostly agree with Ben even though I liked some of the flying shots, mostly Supes speeding past the Daily Planet building. Other than that...not very good. Especially those horrible fake CGI icebergs...ugh...!

Not to mention the "romantic" flight between Lois and Supes....

If you go to VFX hell and read some of the comments by guys who worked on this film's FX (well, minding the heavy profanity) they say that the film was very "rushed", particularly the FX, they were treated very contemptuously by the "management" (I think they mean Singer here) and their anger towards the production and hate of the film is extreme even for that site.

I think Borat should have gotten nominated Best Documentary...(or Mockumentary)

If F: 9/11 can get it, (entertaining but sometimes inaccurate with some really cheap shots, much more so than Borat) whey can't this film??

Post by **Meg** » January 24th, 2007, 9:57 pm

Because the Acadamy hates you. :[

Personally, I think that as long as you enjoyed the film, ya should be happy. Awards are like an added bonus, but when it comes down to it, the thing that matters most is if you liked the movie or not.

Post by **ShyViolet** » January 24th, 2007, 9:59 pm

Yes they do.....

Pixar thinks they're so great ever since they swept the "Princi" awards. Those things are rigged.

Post by **James** » January 24th, 2007, 10:08 pm

ShyViolet wrote:BTW I can't believe Borat didn't score ANYHTING! Some people said it was because Cohen was "improvising" not writing/actiing but that's not true because he DID write it all out before, he took it very seriously and pretty much knew what a lot of the "subjects" were going to say and how they would react...

Actually Borat did get a nomination - for writing!

Post by **James** » January 24th, 2007, 10:27 pm

ShyViolet wrote:I guess to fans, Pixar will always walk on water no matter what they do.....*sighs* )

Does that not apply in reverse?

The problem is that you seem to take any criticism of DW and turn it into a Pixar debate! This thread is the case in point. No one was debating DW vs Pixar, until you got a little too defensive when I complained about the Weinstein Co. and compared their decision to a similar decision by DW a few years ago. Then we start getting 3 year old quotes from Catmull for some reason!

Stop bringing up what you see as Pixar's problems when what you're really trying to do is defend DW and others won't have to feel the need to join the fray! Defend DW on their own merits, not by putting down their rival!

Post by **ShyViolet** » January 24th, 2007, 10:51 pm

OK.

Post by **ShyViolet** » January 24th, 2007, 11:05 pm

until you got a little too defensive when I complained about the Weinstein Co. and compared their decision to a similar decision by DW a few years ago.

True, and I apologize for that.

I'm also sorry if I offended all you guys who really love Pixar....I guess I kind of lost it there.

Actually Borat did get a nomination - for writing!

Oh, O.K. A friend told me it didn't score anything. Good to know.

FYI: I deleted most of my last few posts.

Post by **ShyViolet** » January 25th, 2007, 5:36 am

OMG Ben you read my mind!!!

Um, I think anyway....

Isn't that the South Park spoof that made him like Steve Irwin looking around for Crocs, except he was looking for "fights"? I laughed so hard at that one...

Um....I know this was 2 weeks ago or something, but did I get this right Ben? If so I want my ten points!

****************************************************

Also, the Brew has some interesting Animated Oscar talk, plus some cool stuff about Oswald!

http://www.cartoonbrew.com/

Post by **Ben** » January 25th, 2007, 9:15 am

Throwing in a spanner:

I just saw Hoodwinked, finally last night, and LOVED it. I know that has nothing to do with this topic, but there ya go.

Post by **Meg** » January 25th, 2007, 9:28 am

Yeah - once your eyes stop bleeding, Hoodwinked is pretty enjoyable (my family HATED it though.)

Post by **Ben** » January 25th, 2007, 9:40 am

10 points to Vi!

Post by **James** » January 25th, 2007, 10:18 am

Hoodwinked was a great film. And it proves the point that story can trump animation.

Post by **Meg** » January 25th, 2007, 10:24 am

...Although pretty animation *Does* give an extra oomph to the story.

Post by **Ben** » January 25th, 2007, 11:03 am

Actually, I liked the designs very much and really only noticed three, maybe four or five times in the movie when the animation had an "ouch!" factor.

On the whole, they nailed a great deal given the puny budget and the lighting and visual effects were pretty darn good.

Just like the story harked back to the Fractured Fairy Tales, I thought the animation was akin to the limited techniques used on that show too. What is important is the <I>direction</I>, and Hoodwinked had a good director who understood the limitations of what he had to work with.

Pretty animation helps when you have a good director, but if you have limits and you <I>don't</I> have a good director, that's when any film's shortcomings are all too evident.

And dare I say I think there's more replay value in Hoodwinked than in Shrek?