Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Junior Mintz looks at THE KING AND I and THE IRON GIANT

mononoke by kadabra	Mar 5th, 1999 05:39:13 PM
Hey, speaking of Princess Mononoke, does anyone know when this is going to be released? I got sick of waiting and got a really crappy copy but it only made me want see a good copy on the big screen even more!
The Fate of Iron Giant...? by Prankster	Mar 5th, 1999 06:37:35 PM
Warners pulled the plug on The Thief and the Cobbler with only fifteen minutes of animation left to finish, and they kept throwing money at Quest for Camelot despite the fact that it was an obvious dog. So obviously this is a studio that doesn't prioritize making money enough to avoid boneheaded decisions. It comes as no surprise to me that they are choosing to give The King and I a widescreen release, instead of shipping it direct-to-video where it would be less of an abomination and might even turn a profit. It also makes me worry about Iron Giant. They recently sacked their CG animation unit, who's to say they won't simply dump Iron Giant without even bothering to finish it? It makes no sense, financially, but as I mentioned they already did it with The Thief and the Cobbler, thereby screwing what could have been one of the greatest animated films ever made. And if IG does get finished, maybe they'll go bass-ackwards on us and release IT direct to video. Or add songs. Or...oh shit, the number of horrors that could still be visited on this movie make me cringe. I want to see this the way it was meant to be seen, and on a big screen, is it still possible? Or should I give up on this project, my #1 most anticipated animated film of the year?
KING AND I REVIEW by ROBO	Mar 5th, 1999 07:14:48 PM
Although I think that you are entitled to your opinion, your recent review on "The King and I" was a little extreme. I have worked on this film for the past two years and it has been a wonderful experience. I think you are extremely bold to kiss the boot of the studios by attending these screenings and then have the nerve to bad mouth them under a "Jr Minz" name. But then again, if you were bold enough to come out from under your rock, your comfy life of press junkets and screenings would certainly come to a quick halt. By the way, how many films have you worked on or produced that makes you such the movie maven? Over 5,000 people worked on this film from around the world and the film has already seen rave reviews(some people of course did not like it).I guess it's easy to piss on the rug and run out the door isn't it Mr Pez-head?
Robo: Jr. Mintz has a right to criticize by ToastyKen	Mar 5th, 1999 07:54:12 PM
Robo, Just because Jr. Mintz got to attend a screening doesn't mean he has to like the film. And just because YOU spent oodles of time on it and love it, doesn't mean everyone else has to, either. You say it's gotten rave reviews from many people, sure, I can believe that. But you also said it's gotten some negative reviews. Jr. Mintz's review is simply one of the latter. I'm especially worried by your statement: "By the way, how many films have you worked on or produced that makes you such the movie maven?" Why does not being a filmmaker preclude him from judging a film's quality? If anything, not personally working on the film allows him to have a more unbiased opinion about it. Jr. Mintz is judging the end product, not the process. He's not saying that all the people who worked on it are bad, he's just saying the film is very critically flawed in many areas.
Warner Bros. is a disgrace to Capitalism, as well as Hollywood by CmdrStraker	Mar 5th, 1999 08:04:32 PM
The most infuriating thing about being an animator nowadays is working for suits who don't have the balls or brains to compete in the marketplace... We animators are scapegoated for box office failures... We are ridiculed as child-like adults who are most content when drawing playful bunnies frolicking in fields...We really are filmakers who know that the next Star Wars or Raiders franchise can be an animated film, if it is produced with competency... The problem with Warner Brothers is that they have the Goose who lays Golden Eggs in the form of Brad Bird and Iron Giant, but they're too stupid to know it...and speaking of fowl, if Lorenzo is truly a lame duck on his way out, his replacement had better get on the stick right now and decide to make some money with the Giant! How can such morons be running such a powerful company???? How can the idiots who lost so many TENS of MILLIONS on 'QUEST FOR COMPETENCE' be trusted to turn a profit with an animation studio????
KING AND I by ROBO	Mar 5th, 1999 08:06:18 PM
I guess I think there is a tactful way to pan a film and a ruthless......Candyman decided to opt for the later. And by the way, no noted film critic has the audacity to give such a negative view since their careers depend on their relationships with the studios. Nobody's baby is that wickedly ugly my friend and this film certainly deserves a little less of a beating. but then again, the fil was never made for this computer crowd anyway. To each his own.
Warner Brothers by ROBO	Mar 5th, 1999 08:16:31 PM
Believe it or not, running a multi-million dollar entertainment conglomerate is a little more difficult than you might think. Warners actually has a very competative slate for '99 and has gone through a postive transition that will allow it to return to it's glory days of yesteryear. Of course there are the politics and the mistakes made at every level, but isn't this true in all businesses? Everyone tends to point to the entertainment industry as our national scapegoat. The entertainment industry is made up of people just like you and I. We make movies just like some people sell stocks or drive taxis. To point at the studios as the source of the corruption is insane. You guys have to much free time......first Disney now WB....who's next Nic....Cartoon Network.......maybe MGM should get into animation......
ROBO=delusional by rob zombie	Mar 5th, 1999 10:19:08 PM
Robo, shit is still shit no matter how much Chanel No. 5 you pour on it. Anyone with the power of sight & vision can tell that "The King & I" is an abomination that should never see the light of day. As for your ridiculous comment about film critics and negative reviews/studio support, that's simply wrong, plain and simple. Any critic with an iota of integrity would care less about what company released a shitty film...I'm not talking about those suck-asses that exist solely to be quoted in ad campaigns (i.e. "'Analyze This' is the best film of the year!" In March? What the fuck...?), but the truly respected ones. Do you think Siskel & Ebert went easy on Disney releases just because BV syndicated their show? HA! Just look at their reviews for crap like "The Waterboy" and try to tell me that again.
Corportate Ostriches and the Wise Fans by fafhrd	Mar 5th, 1999 10:29:30 PM
From what I have heard about Iron Giant, it looks like a gem. I'm looking foward to this film regardless of how it is released (unless it is disneyfied...). King & I, well I've seen the Yul Brynner version of it and the animated version's trailer alone shows me what a disgrace the animated version is. The bigwigs in control haven't a clue what has been happening internationally with animation. They have been told by their ass-kissers that their animated ideas are what the public wants. Obviously that is utter bullshit. Even little kids are getting tired of the 'song and dance' routine. Adults wish to stay away from these films, wishing to see QUALITY films... The educated fan of animation knows what is garbage and what isn't. We know that the animated industry has massive potential as an ART MEDIUM. POE was a step in the right direction. For Japanese animation fans, they know that 99%of American animation is crap. I don't see how Tarzan is going to match up against Mononoke Hime. If anyone ever gets to see Hime, they'll understand. I've seen such films like Wings of Honneamise, Neon Genesis Evangelion, Visions of Escaflowne, Mobile Suit Gundam, Macross Plus, Giant Robo, etc. These are all brilliant animations, that are FAR ahead of American animation WB hasn't had good management recently, with their track record as proof. Hopefully, they'll get something right for once, and do justice by Iron Giant. No kiddie influences, no musical crap, no dumbing the plot down to a slug's IQ, and for god's sake, no Mcdonalds' Happy Meal toys of IG. Eventually, the studios will get the drift that they are screwing up royally, and they'll try to find new ways to save their asses. Let's hope we can drive them in the right direction...
Corportate Ostriches and the Wise Fans by fafhrd	Mar 5th, 1999 10:37:32 PM
From what I have heard about Iron Giant, it looks like a gem. I'm looking foward to this film regardless of how it is released (unless it is disneyfied...). King & I, well I've seen the Yul Brynner version of it and the animated version's trailer alone shows me what a disgrace the animated version is. The bigwigs in control haven't a clue what has been happening internationally with animation. They have been told by their ass-kissers that their animated ideas are what the public wants. Obviously that is utter bullshit. Even little kids are getting tired of the 'song and dance' routine. Adults wish to stay away from these films, wishing to see QUALITY films... The educated fan of animation knows what is garbage and what isn't. We know that the animated industry has massive potential as an ART MEDIUM. POE was a step in the right direction. For Japanese animation fans, they know that 99%of American animation is crap. I don't see how Tarzan is going to match up against Mononoke Hime. If anyone ever gets to see Hime, they'll understand. I've seen such films like Wings of Honneamise, Neon Genesis Evangelion, Visions of Escaflowne, Mobile Suit Gundam, Macross Plus, Giant Robo, etc. These are all brilliant animations, that are FAR ahead of American animation WB hasn't had good management recently, with their track record as proof. Hopefully, they'll get something right for once, and do justice by Iron Giant. No kiddie influences, no musical crap, no dumbing the plot down to a slug's IQ, and for god's sake, no Mcdonalds' Happy Meal toys of IG. Eventually, the studios will get the drift that they are screwing up royally, and they'll try to find new ways to save their asses. Let's hope we can drive them in the right direction...
Corportate Ostriches and the Wise Fans by fafhrd	Mar 5th, 1999 10:38:23 PM
From what I have heard about Iron Giant, it looks like a gem. I'm looking foward to this film regardless of how it is released (unless it is disneyfied...). King & I, well I've seen the Yul Brynner version of it and the animated version's trailer alone shows me what a disgrace the animated version is. The bigwigs in control haven't a clue what has been happening internationally with animation. They have been told by their ass-kissers that their animated ideas are what the public wants. Obviously that is utter bullshit. Even little kids are getting tired of the 'song and dance' routine. Adults wish to stay away from these films, wishing to see QUALITY films... The educated fan of animation knows what is garbage and what isn't. We know that the animated industry has massive potential as an ART MEDIUM. POE was a step in the right direction. For Japanese animation fans, they know that 99%of American animation is crap. I don't see how Tarzan is going to match up against Mononoke Hime. If anyone ever gets to see Hime, they'll understand. I've seen such films like Wings of Honneamise, Neon Genesis Evangelion, Visions of Escaflowne, Mobile Suit Gundam, Macross Plus, Giant Robo, etc. These are all brilliant animations, that are FAR ahead of American animation WB hasn't had good management recently, with their track record as proof. Hopefully, they'll get something right for once, and do justice by Iron Giant. No kiddie influences, no musical crap, no dumbing the plot down to a slug's IQ, and for god's sake, no Mcdonalds' Happy Meal toys of IG. Eventually, the studios will get the drift that they are screwing up royally, and they'll try to find new ways to save their asses. Let's hope we can drive them in the right direction...
Look for-the Union Label... by CmdrStraker	Mar 5th, 1999 10:58:27 PM
Jeez Louise- Robo must be a proud union member at 839..."Mediocre and Proud of It!"
robo... by Tom Lee	Mar 5th, 1999 11:01:41 PM
Sigh. It's kind of sad to encounter the people we rip apart. But that doesn't make the criticism invalid. I saw the preview for The King & I a couple times, and emerged with a very negative expectation for the movie. This is not a condemnation of you specifically Robo -- but to quote judge judy, don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining. I don't know exactly what that means, but it seems applicable.
farewell Lane, WB, Analyze This, Robo etc... by Martin Q Blank	Mar 6th, 1999 03:53:56 AM
1) Farewell Lane. Although we did not always agree with what you said, I always enjoyed reading your comments and loved the stimulus. Remember people, as much as you may have disagreed with him, it sure gave us something to talk about! Farewell (p.s. lane, did you like grosse pointe blank?) 2) Maybe Warners can do some good this year. With the unbelievably good-looking Matrix, the much-hearlded Iron Giant and... 3) I just saw Analyze This. I don't know about the rest of you but I thought it was hilarious. I'm not necessarilly saying that it's the funniest film ever, but I can't remember laughing that hard in a film, i.e. the intensity of the chuckles. Much recommended. 4) Robo, unlike Lane's comments, yours just make my blood boil. You are such a hypocrite. Reviewers have a right to give good reviews? I spit on you from a high altitude. ******* P.S. Those of you in NY and LA, go see Lock Stock And Two Smoking Barrels. It's SOO good. Rest of America 19th of March. Australians : Video release is March 24th. ***** Whew. Seeya all!
Additions to previous post (farewell Lane ...) by Martin Q Blank	Mar 6th, 1999 04:28:58 AM
A few additions. I meant to say responsibility, not right. WHOOPS. And Lane, interesting turn of events. 'Just when I though I was out, they pull me back in!' If you choose to return, I welcome you. If not, farewell!
Bart's words by Airborne	Mar 6th, 1999 06:11:53 AM
With regards to The King and I, in the immortal words of Bart Simpson, "I didn't think it was physically possible but this both sucks and blows."
ROBO: You suck, trick! by American Psycho	Mar 6th, 1999 11:20:14 AM
Who the fuck are you? (Your immeadiate reaction is probably: Well, who the hell are YOU? My reply: I'm the one telling you how it is.) Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, regardless of how many movies they worked on. And, from what I hear, the KING AND I thing (read: "movie") is so bad, you probably shouldn't be running around bragging about any kind of involvement you had with the thing. Keep in mind that everyone's opinion counts, except for yours, and if you can't say anything nice, say it loudly. AMERICAN PSYCHO
Robo's name by Everett Robert	Mar 6th, 1999 11:30:06 AM
I find it intresting that in Robo's first talkback he complained about JR Mintz using a fake name to review yet he comes on Talkback and claims to be a animatior who spent time working on the King and I(and I'm not saying you aren't)but uses a nickname on talkback to do that. Finally on his comment about movie reviewers as a newspaper movie columnist I can tell you that WE don't have the right to give good reviews just to keep the studio happy. That's called being a sellout and after awhile people stop listening to sell-outs. And as for good reviews, I'd like to know who gave the film good reviews and remind you that a lot of crap has gotten good reveiws(movies like The Waterboy, BASEketball, and Father's Day)
King and I by Netminder	Mar 6th, 1999 11:31:57 AM
**************************** * I don't care if the movie is horrible or not, but my girlfriend who has thai parents wants to see it so i'll be there when it opens **************************** *
Dreamworks is to blame! by Walter	Mar 6th, 1999 12:34:21 PM
First of all, I agree with most of you about "King and I" because the animation looks real week in resemblence of the old efforts of Disney. But, we should see it before we totally misjudge the movie just based on its animation. We haven't known much abuout the story that can greatly affect the movie. Just as Little Mermaid had a poor animation but a great story. Still, I'm predicting a dissapointment out of this movie, but I'll still see it for I'm an animation fan(especially Disney). On the other hand, I totally welcome any criticism against Dreamworks(animation unit). Dreamworks animation is basically run the Jeffery Katzenberg, the ex-Disney who sued the company and now much worst wants big vengeance. Just the path Don Bluth took when he left Disney. But, I have nothing against Bluth, but much against Katzenberg. And I dislike Katzenberg's entire Dreamworks animation team for Katzenberg is basically the backbone of it. Their company steals ideas from Disney's projects to partly draw audience appeal away from Disney and also to claim those good ideas as their own invention. Just as they steal the idea of making CGI ants in resemblence to Disney's CGI Bugs. Katzenberg and company quickly released the film one month ahead of Disney's Bugs to claim the market first in a very greedy and annoying way. Just as he tried to steal the animation "Adult" market awy first by releasing Prince of Egypt ahead of Disney's "Adult" animation path they're heading with next year's Atlantis and Dinosaurs. No, I don't blame audience for liking Antz and Prince because those are good movies I admit. But, people like they films and start criticizing Disney's formula and a very ignorant way. Dreamworks basically not only stole animators from Disney(by higher payroll) and also by stealing nearly every idea Disney comes up with. Believe me, in a next few years, you will see Dreamworks having more similar films with the mouse. I'm not writing Disney to bash any of Dreamwork's films in particular(PoE and Antz), but I'm bashing Jeffery Katzenberg and his Dreamworks team. I'm very happy to know that their films failed at the box office against Disney's films. Fox and Warner wanted competition, but they have their own wisdom in creating own ideas(Anastasia) and having mostly their own animators. Fox and Warner have a long history of animation either in shorts or in features, and there are fans. But, Dreamworks(animation) was a studio that came out just four years ago and introduced audiences some pretty good films. Those PoE or Antz fans ignorantly spit on Disney not knowing the business behind it. Katzenberg and his team are greedy, intolerant, stealers who want direct veangence which they will never get. I hate Dreamworks(animation unit), I only pity Warner Bros. and Fox. -Walter-
Warners and Critics by breakdown	Mar 7th, 1999 02:52:52 AM
Robo ... you might be interested that there are plenty of producers on the Warners lot who have the same criticism of The King and I. Everyone I know who has seen it has been critical and they all have cited the animation as being particularly bad. Now, is Warners the root of all evil in Hollywood? Far from it. Look just a half mile away over at Universal. And geez, we don't want to even mention the reputation DreamWorks has acquired with writers in the last year. The key problem at Warners is that even though they have some good execs in the ranks, the main men in charge are named Bob Daly and Terry Semel. And these two guys are so corporate, so middle-aged, so out of touch with today's movie audience that it is really shameful. They need to do what Arnold Kopelson did when he relented to his young execs who wanted to make Seven. Bob and Terry, you guys have got to let your young execs make decisions. You've got to let Lorenzo and Co. have control of the studio. You can't run it all by yourselves. You need fresh blood and you need to delegate. Oh ... and the btw ... when people talk about new Warners films that might really make the studio hip and cool all over again, there are two that very few mention: 1) Three to Tango with Matthew Perry, Neve Campbell and Oliver Platt. It's a RIOT! Best new romantic comedy in ages. Look for it around September. 2) Three Kings. George Clooney, Mark Walhberg, directed by David Russell. This is the hip, weird Kelly's Heros of the 90s set in Operation Desert Storm. This film is looking pretty cool.
Walter...slow and easy breaths, man... by Prankster	Mar 7th, 1999 09:51:11 AM
Take it easy, Walter. You admit that Antz and POE were good movies. But you still hate Dreamworks? I'm annoyed at how Katz handled "Antz" as well, but...to be fair...the idea fo doing an animated movie about insects is one that's been kicked around by a LOT of CG production houses in the past, including PDI long before Katz came anywhere near it. Now obviously Katz rushed Antz into production to top ABL. But how can you complain that POE is a ripoff of Disney? It's a ripoff of Katzenberg's own style, which he developed while at Disney. Haven't you noticed the differnce in storytelling between the time Katz was there (Lion King) and the time he left (Pocahontas)? The stories were certainly better told when Katz was there. Better paced, not so glaringly inconsistant with their mixture of humour and drama. POE is part of the natural evolution of Katzenberg's style, not Disney's. As for El Dorado vs. Kingdom of the Sun...well, Kingdom is not being made, now. But don't jump to the conclusion that Katz stole the idea from Disney...Disney themselves are prolific idea-snatchers. Ever see "The Thief and the Cobbler"? It was in production decades ago, yet the characters bear a STRIKING resemblance to those of "Aladdin." Hmmm...anyway, except for El Dorado and Antz, I don't see any other of Dreamworks' features as being stolen from Disney. Shrek, Chicken Run, Tusker, and Spirit are all original projects that owe nothing to Team Rodent. By the way, how come you don't feel the same way about other studios that have stolen Disney's thunder (or tried to) in the past? Anastasia was pretty blatant, and unlike POE it didn't have a life of its own...
criticism by capt jack aubrey	Mar 7th, 1999 11:27:46 AM
every now and then someone pipes up with the old, "unless you can do better, don't criticize an artistic effort." of course this is a silly, pointless argument that would seek to utterly neuter all artistic discussion. samuel johnson said it best: "You may abuse a tragedy, though you cannot write one. You may scold a carpenter who has made you a bad table, though you cannot make a table. It is not your trade to make tables." ding. it's certainly not all of our trades to make movies, or animation, but as someone else pointed out, we sure as hell are paying for them, 8 bucks a pop.
of course... by capt jack aubrey	Mar 7th, 1999 11:42:49 AM
of course, if you feel someone's opinion on a work of art suffers from their not understanding the work, or the effort and difficulty that went into creating it, or if you feel their opinion is simply wrong-headed and mis-guided and ignorant, then of course you should try to 'educate' and 'enlighten' them to your way of thinking -- that's the nature of discussion and discourse. but to simply forbid criticism (which is the underlying tone of such 'if you can make a better movie...' comments)is counterproductive. and finally, most criticism, negative and positive stems from comparison to what the critic personally considers to be the highest prior artistic achievements in that field or medium -- that's the only criteria they need, not a timesheet showing how many hours they logged in an animation studio. which is why older folks often get frustrated with young fans' tastes -- the elders feel the youngsters haven't seen enough films, heard enough albums, fully explored the history of the medium and don't have a wide enough perspective on a particular art form to offer informed, thoughtful criticism. but it's one big learning curve -- but hey, there are always going to be people who've seen more and understand the medium better than you, and always those who are newer and more naive. but if you chop off critical discussion at the knees, nobody moves up the ladder...
Walter's attack on Jeff K/Dreamworks by HIFIDOGSC	Mar 7th, 1999 03:13:38 PM
I am not sure what part of your comments seemed to bother me the most. But, I have to respond to your attack against Dreamworks. Especially since you've chosen to cast Disney is the role of trampled defenseless victim of some corporate shark. Now, that is funny. I will point out that it was Disney who perfected the art of releasing films with the primary intent of damaging competing animated efforts. They pulled Lion King out of theaters and rereleased it to thwart the Swan Princess. The film had major retail and fast food tie-ins and was still almost ignored until it's video release. Disney wins big! Let's not forget how they positioned their rerelease of The Little Mermaid (Limited to only two weeks in theaters) to thwart Fox's Anastasia. Bookended between 'Mermaid and Flubber, Anastasia performed exceptionally well. It went on to gross well over 100 million worldwide. Mixed results Disney. Which brings us to the past year. A year that saw Dreamworks move ANTZ from spring 1999 to fall 1998 so that it wouldn't be "the other bug movie." ANTZ had a record-breaking opening. Disney's A Bug's Life also opened to record-breaking (and considerably larger numbers). Both Films received favorable reviews. Then Disney positions a sneak of Mighty Joe Young with added bloopers on A Bug's Life during POE's opening weekend. POE opened strong and received very good reviews. Most importantly, POE will become the first Non-Disney animated feature to gross 100 million domestic. Too Bad Disney. Walter, the fact is that Disney can do more damage to others than their competitors can do in return. But, with Films like POE and IRON GIANT coming out, the quality of the films and the word of mouth trumps stunt releases etc. Dreamworks and Disney are in competition for all of our dollars. We'll all benefit by getting better films. seeing Disney get some of what they've dished out shoved bak on them is a bonus! HifiDOG
King and I by Bob the Tomato	Mar 7th, 1999 05:47:48 PM
Now this comment is coming from a filmaker's (which would be me) this film is not quite that bad. While it is not as good as Anastasia it is leaps and bounds better than Camelot. Don't expect brilliance and you will come out happy.
by Walter	Mar 7th, 1999 06:21:19 PM
First and again, I'm not bashing Dreamworks for making entertainment. But,since Dreamworks(animation) is run by Jeffery Katzenberg, I have to blame the acts of their animation unit. Katzenberg wants vengeance by (you can say a little jealousy against Eisner) and he doesn't have much power as an amateur(studio). Therefore, he must commit greedy ways of making his animation. Agains, stealing lots of ideas of Disney. I don't mean ideas needful of storytelling or animation, I mean things that originally derived from Disney that Katzenberg got a hold of. Yes, Antz and Bugs were different stories, but... the idea of making computer insects were thoughts of Disney as they begin production years of Katzenberg's departure. And besides, I doubt Katzenberg would even come of with the Antz idea if he haven't known Disney was making A Bug's Life. I'll care to site some other similar ideas of Katzenbergs attempts on Disney. PoE has a story of its own but Katzenberg knew that Disney was taking the "Adult" market in the future and he greatly knew that the future of animation will be very broad for adults. Now, after PoE's release, he's starting to claim that idea as a Dreamworks invention and now I'm hearing critics and people talking around as Dreamworks being the Adult Animated Studio.(Those people lack any knowledge in the business going behind this). Shrek is a monster CGI project of Dworks similar to Disney's Monster's Inc coming out 2000. Ash, is being coproduced between Dworks and Japanese producers in similar to Disney's Mononoke Hime out this July(Katzenberg learning that Mononoke was the biggest film in Japan). I was meant to only attack Dwork's animation unit, but in tip, I will emphasize some of the entire Dreamworks SKG's Disney attack attempts. Remember Armeggedon and Deep Impact, Small Soldiers in similar to Toy Story, the recent rerelease of Saving Private Ryan(to top Armeggedon as top of 1998). Yes, I know Dworks live actions films are not run by Katzenberg, so I'll excuse those last one. Going back to animation, isn't it just coincidence to how similar Dworks films are with Disney. Katzenberg is to blame because he runs the animation unit, therefore I hate that entire unit. Rephrasing, I'm very happy their recent films didn't succeed box office expectations. Bug's nearly doubled Antz, Rugrats will be the first to claim the $100 million non-Disney rather than PoE if you care to check the box office(not to mention it trailed good distance behind Mulan). No, I'm not bashing Antz and PoE through box office, but I'm pointing out the unsuccessful aims that Katzenberg(Dreamworks in fact) want with these maiden films and personally hoping similar results in the future. About Disney's believe weak efforts after Katzenberg left, that is all just a matter of taste an d opinions. Yes, Pocahontas and recent films have weak storytelling than old efforst of Alladin era, BUT... recent films such as Pocahontas, Hunchback, and Mulan are much more quality films than Lion King efforst if in regards to animation and technology(which greatly effects animation today). Personally, I thought Mulan(with PoE near) are the most quality animated movies ever. But, I prefer Mulan over PoE simply because I dislike Katzenberg and his team's greedy actions and I'm ready to dismiss every film that have to throw out in the horizon. Yes, I should welcome all quality animation that could benefit we, the audience. But, I don't welcome films that were taken from Disney to nail Disney. And simply, that's what Katzenberg is doing, just to revenge Disney on Katzenberg's personal hate(He failed to get the position as president by Eisner). Other studios are doing the same things, and I respect them for coming up with original ideas and not stealing animators, composers(Alan Menken, Elton John). Of course Disney has to protect their business when someone wants to take their long time dominating market(Don't tell me you wont if you were in the same situation). But agains, if these films were strong enough, they could've of survived just as PoE did as well as Antz(which had no competition). Remember, PoE and Antz as I said were pretty good films but I personally don't prefer those movies deserve the bucks they earned. I would prefer Anastasia to be the first $100 million film. I pity other studios who must come up with amateurish efforts to play the game, and Disney shall have no fear of them. But, Disney shall fear Dworks because again, those guys use the greedy act of Disney to kill Disney. Requoting "Ill welcome any criticism against Dreamworks." -Walter-
You're reaching... by Prankster	Mar 7th, 1999 08:59:02 PM
Walter, I'm afraid you've lost me. I still don't understand how you can claim POE is ripped off of Disney, or that Dreamworks is bad for calling themselves "the adult animation studio". Lord knows Disney can't lay claim to that title. Despite the promise of Tarzan, from what I've seen it is still very much a kid's movie, one that owes a lot to "The Lion King". At one point, li'l Tarzan says, "I'm gonna be the best ape EVER!" Does that sound to you like a studio interested in making adult cartoons? Katzenberg has released two movies that are far more mature in sensibility than anything Disney's done since he left. Why shouldn't he call himself the adult animation studio? Furthermore, I STILL don't see how you can label POE a Disney ripoff while praising Anastasia. Isn't 'Ana' a LOT more of a soulless Disney clone than POE? And comparing Ash to Mononoke, and Shrek to Monsters Inc...VERY tenuous. Shrek is a fairy tale giant, Monsters is about classic movie monsters (I think) and furthermore, Shrek was in production a LONG time ago. As for Ash/Mononoke...Disney re-releases (not makes but rereleases) an animated movie in the anime style, and therefore Ash is a ripoff because it has the director of Akira on board? All Japanese animated movies have had the same style for a long time, but if two western studios try to do something in the same style, THAT'S stealing? Come on. Dreamworks has some political motives, and they have done some spurious things behind the scenes. But all things considered, they're a remarkably ethical studio...especially when compared to Disney. But even if Dreamworks was run by, say, the current management of WB, you still can't let it blind you to the quality of the work they're turning out. Saying "I liked Mulan better than POE because I hate Katzenberg" is unfair and foolish. If you're going to judge a movie, judge it on its own merits. If you're listening to one of Mozart's symphonies, you don't care that the man who wrote them was an alchoholic wife-beater, do you? ****By the way, POE has grossed WAY more than Rugrats, and almost as much as ABL, if you factor in the worldwide box office for all movies. A flop it is definately not.
Antz Adult???? by Walter	Mar 7th, 1999 11:38:34 PM
Antz is adult, excuse me. I would never consider that movie adult. It is exceedingly obvious that it was given a PG rating on purpose. I don't blame PoE getting a PG rating, but I do reject Antz being believed as ADULT. First, there is a difference between a mature story and a story that are not appropriate for kids. What is so adult about Antz besides those profanity words and unneedful blood and such? To my view, the plot of the movie, the score of the movie, and the animation(character designs and effects) were totally enjoyable for kids and easy for kids to understand. I don't understand how people could use a little swear words in a particular movie and call it mature or adult. It's like saying if we add lots of profanity to Hercules, therefore it is an adult movie. Why don't people consider the villain of "A Bug's Life" get eaten by the bird or Shan-Yu(Mulan) get blast to bits? In fact, the first time I saw Antz, I felt like the swear words were there for no reason rather just Dreamworks(Katzenberg's) attempts to make this film adult. Remember, there is a difference between a mature movie and a movie that is violent(kid inappropriate). The key is at the judgement of the plot, not dialog or such specific visuals. PoE was mature because the story is a biblical theme and very non-understandable for kids. I would still consider it adult if there are talking animals. The Hunchback of Notre Dame is on the same track. People who cald Antz as an adult film must be very ignorant in judging a movie's genre. About PoE's box office concern, I simply said PoE didn't claim the $100 million dollar mark first but rather is Rugrats in domestic dollars, becuase someone earlier posted or claimed PoE as the 1st non-Disney animated film to reach $100 million dollars domestically and I find this information to be political therefore wanted to verify the matter. Sure, worldwide it made much more than Rugrats but not anywhere near Bugs. If you're box office knowledgible, you should know that PoE barely passed $200 million recently(in over 50 countries) meanwhile Bugs have reached $300 million worldwide(on par with Mulan). Now how do you call those numbers to be close? No, I'm not saying PoE failed box office but it did fail expectations as to Dreamworks' prediction, and much worse, not near any of Disney's films. And I'm greatful of this, becuase I said before, I don't appreciate any of that studios' films whether it's good or not in the present or the future. Lastly, about the other films being in similar to Disney, you can come up with lots of excuses for Dworks to claim those ideas, but just consider a thought of coincidence. Everything else I've said. Later. -Walter-
Dreamworks by The Graduate	Mar 8th, 1999 12:25:49 PM
I can't comment about the studio politics, but I think it's ludicrous to claim that Dreamworks is "ripping off" Disney's ideas. Like all films, Antz and A Bug's Life began pre-production years ago; the fact that they neared completion around the same time was coincidence. Sure Dreamworks moved up the Antz release date to compete with A Bug's Life, and why not? Instead of being crushed by the Disney merchandizing juggernaut and written off as "that other bug movie," they pulled a slick maneuver and insured a good box office take. Believe me, A Bug's Life in no way suffered from Antz's early release (that had a fabulous take, a wider audience, and I don't know of a single person who chose NOT to see it just because they saw Antz). On the broader issue of Dreamwork's animation style: I think they have make a determined decision to pursue animation projects DISTINCT from Disney. While Disney tells terrific stories, they are first and foremost directed toward children (and hopefully parents will like them, too). Dreamwork's tales, while not inappropriate for children, feature slightly more mature themes which aim at an older audience. Disney would never have made a film featuring the Twelve Plagues of Egypt, and about a dozen slightly dirty jokes in Antz (not to mention the termite battle) would have been excised. In conclusion, Dreamworks is increadibly saavy: they realize that Disney has the children's animation market sealed up, so they have chosen to make animated films that appeal to a slightly different audience, one that wants something slightly "edgier" than Disney fare.
Antz vs. Bugs by breakdown	Mar 8th, 1999 01:49:08 PM
I'm not really in Walter's point of view on this one. I have no side to take in the Disney/DreamWorks discussion/debate. They're both big studios with big grown men running them. However, I wonder if any of you people who claim that Katzenberg could not have or would not have ripped Bug's Life off, ever read the LA Times interview with John Lassiter and Steve Jobs. Both men went on at length to describe how and why Katzenberg ripped off A Bug's Life to make his own computer animated bug movie. And how, as they claim, he put out a false late release date for Antz he intended all along to release Antz in the fall of '98, and how Katzenberg made a condition of giving the contract to PDI only if they could promise that they could deliver the film before Disney could deliver theirs. No, this is all coming from two men. But two prominent men who went on record in the major daily paper in the city where the movie business resides. Does anyone think for a minute that Katzenberg never saw this interview and these allegations? And what can we determine from Katzenberg's silence in response? Katzenberg never a man to flinch from aggressively protecting his properties or his image. If these things that Lassiter and Jobs said are untrue, they would liable and they would have made themselves vulnerable to a lawsuit from DreamWorks. Something tells me that Jobs and Lassiter were very comfortable about going on the record. They didn't seem at all worried that DreamWorks would sue them for liable.
Don't let the Iron Giant get wet.... by Wolfpack	Jul 10th, 2006 08:56:14 AM
Or else he'd be the Iron Oxide Giant.

Talkbacks

Junior Mintz looks at THE KING AND I and THE IRON GIANT

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks