So now that Rango has won the Critics Choice Movie Awards for "Best Animated Feature", I guess we all know what picture goes on to win the Oscar ...
Or do we wait to see what some of the other Gold Trophy Ceremonies designate as "Best" before we fall all over ourselves with congratulations.
The thoughts and observations of the leaders of The Animation Guild (TAG), Local 839 IATSE. Jason MacLeod is the Business Representative, KC Johnson is the President. Mike Sauer is Assistant to the Business Representative.
This weblog reflects their individual personal opinions and does not necessarily represent the official position of the Animation Guild.
This blog is updated weekly. If the most recent posts have not appeared, hit the Refresh button.
Let us know if you're an Animation Guild member with a blog
Posts
15 comments:
Jumping the gun.
Shows what a scam it all is.
'Rango' is my favorite movie (animated or otherwise) of the year. It would be an oscar well deserved.
To me, it's this years "Fantastic Mr. Fox". A quirky little film loved by critics and most of the general public who saw it (aside from the "I hate Rango" guy who posts here at every mention of the film), but not doing that great at the Box Office because it's poorly marketed and audiences, who are still in the "animation is just for kiddies" mindset, are unsure what to do with it.
It was certainly better than tangled...
jesus.
Better than jesus?
Mon Dieu.
I've tried--really I have--to find what people see in this film to like. I've watched it through several times, and just don't get it. The story is paper thin. Not a criticism, as many of my favorite cartoons are based on simple ideas fleshed out with great character, acting, storytelling, design, and technique.
Aside from the appealing approach of the main character, and the brilliant animation working within the limitations of the anatomy of a [somewhat] real chameleon, I find the story to be hackneyed, and the storytelling to be staid, inefficient, and bland. Beyond the main character, the rest of the cast are nothing but "types," not fully fleshed out characters. And I find the designs and animation repulsive and juvenile--like the scribbles in the notebook margins of a junior high kid entering puberty. This works well for the likes of Beavis and Butthead (REAL characters), but not for the inconsistent world of rango.
The only reason I've yet to come up with that this film has garnered the patena of success is that it's "different." That is not to be scoffed at. I like "different." I WANT "different." But "different" doesn't necessarily make a film great, or even good. I don't blame the hard work of all the artists who worked on the film. I see the hard work and can fully appreciate it. The FILM just doesn't make me CARE.
In a year filled with animated features in full "content retreat" mode, I understand why people consider rango the "best" of 2011. I don't agree, but I understand.
If all the virtual (if not financial) success of a cartoon like rango does is lay the gauntlet for more progressive animated films this year and moving forward, I'm all for it.
Congratulations to the crew of rango for the accolades they are receiving. I hope I like your next film more.
To the above poster, what a well put comment! It's nice to see someone who thinks before he/she writes.
I'm curious though, what made the animation repulsive and juvenile compared to other animated features?
Primarily the poor , and exceedingly repulsive and unappealing "designs" that sacrificed character for toilet humor--as if they weren't "designed" at all! But they (apparently) WERE. Someone put THOUGHT into designing something that juvenile. And lazy.
AH, so it's more about the design, not the movement then.
What's interesting is that people rarely comment about the crazy scale inconsistencies. I don't mind the "ugly" look though and I thought the design of the turtle and the main henchman was great.
Well, the designs weren't taking animation in to great concern, so yes, it did affect movement. Also, the staging further compounded confusion, especially in crowd scenes. It wasn't helped by the weak lighting, which appeared to rely on as few lights as possible instead of using the lighting to isolate specifics and heightening emotions of scenes.
The big inconsistencies in the world were also a big negative. Real world objects next to fantasy world objects always beg questions. A real world scaled Sparklet's water bottle next to a (not sure what kind of animal it is) sized beer mug and six shooters? Lazy. Bats with gatling guns? Not very creative.
First -
Awards shows are shams, who still watches them? Everything is bought and paid for in that buddy system
and second -
Rango had some amazing visuals and may have been the most daring animated film last year but not definitely not a great movie.
anon 12:34's comment is welcomed, not because of it's conclusion,I happen to like the film, but because it's a well reasoned argument. The appeal of character design is subjective. And so it's the quality of the animation. I though the lighting was very good. Also a subjective thing. The bird movement was pretty stiff, but that's cosmetic. The reason I enjoyed the film was because of some of the set pieces, like the chase through the cannyon, and the many references to "Chinatown". I did come to care about the main character. And while I agree the rest of the characters might have felt like stock characters, you cant really say that about the main villain, who's based on the John Huston character in "Chinatown". We could disscuss this for hours I suppose, but in the end we're gonna have to respectfully agree to dissagree. I enjoyed it, you didnt. I can live with that. Can you?
el diablo
"may have been the most daring animated film last year "
No. If you're going to attempt a remake of Chinatown, TRY and do it better. And the visuals are very so-so. OK for small children, but that's about it.
who said it was remake of Chinatown? referencing another movie does not constitute a remake....
Post a Comment