Sunday, June 08, 2008

Nikki's Snark

The Nikster has taken time away from denigrating AFTRA to throw a little snark animation's way:

Kung Fu Panda's success just goes to show that DreamWorks Animations' strategy of making 90-minute toons is shrewd: not only can theaters get in a lot of screenings, but both parents and offspring can sit through anything that short without too much squirming. (Actually, this panda received rave reviews.) Plus, I have a pet theory: almost any animated film featuring characters with fur does better at the box office.

Ms. Finke yields in her breath-taking ignorance to no one. And not just about animation, but labor issues.

(Thanks to the commenter below who referred to this.)


Anonymous said...

I saw KFP today and, stupid me, I thought it was an excellent film with top-notch design, animation and directing but now I know better; it was just the fur!


Anonymous said...

Oh, so it was DreamWorks who came up with the idea for a 90-minute animated feature.

Don't tell Walt.

Anonymous said...

90 minute animated features are relatively rare before CG. Most of the Disney classic hand-drawn features were in the 75 - to - 85 minute range. Of course , back in the day those were almost always released in theaters with short cartoon (or two or three ) so the total program ended up being over 90 minutes.

Anonymous said...

72 minutes is, for some reason, the minimum length necessary for a film to be designated a feature (sorry Dumbo) and so if Finke's theory is accurate then you would assume that DW would try to make features no longer than 72 minutes to squeeze in an extra screening or two.
Proving once again she is without an oiunce of knowledge.

Anonymous said...

Actually it's Brad Bird's penchant for 2 hour films that has recast the standard for feature animation lately-IIRC the Disney fare-Mermaid, Rescuers, Basil, Chicken Little, Robinsons, Nemo, Toy Story, etc-were much closer to 90 minutes, weren't they?

I don't read Finke's "theory" about funny animals doing better animation B.O. as being at all snarky. I don't think she meant it that way. She didn't seem to have a negative view of the film overall or the studio for that matter(pointing out that film got "raves" for one). That said, I'm at a loss for which NON-fuzzy movies she's thinking of that don't so well? Ratatouille's humans? Shrek? Both hits. And there are of course plenty of animated animal films that didn't make dollar one no matter how good they were(Surf's Up). Maybe she's thinking of "Beowulf"? *shrug*

Steve Hulett said...

I guess I could cut Ms. Finke some slack.

I mean, her job at Dateline is to be provocative, the better to garner eyeballs. And she's provocative with a carefree abandon.

Anonymous said...

kungfu panda is hardly worth the ink. it's a fine kiddie movie, but certainly nothing new. And the designs are so attention grabbing as to detract from what little story or character there was.

That said, I'm happy it's successful so far.

Anonymous said...

I gonna guess you didn't see the movie, and you're just basing that off of trailers and so forth.

This is one film where there's been astonishing uniformity of opinion on. Everyone I've talked to has really enjoyed it. No, not the most incredibly original story ever, but so what? Very, very entertaining.

Anonymous said...

Nikki Finke doesn't know what she is. A journalist, an advocate, or a frustrated Hollywood actor/producer. A very common blogger identity crisis.

Anonymous said...

Oh know, I saw it. Or should I say, I sat through it. I do not have a seperate set of standards for animation and live action. Obviously, you do.

Anonymous said...

How's it feel to be out of touch with the public?

Site Meter