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

A Rebuttal To An Earlier HORTON Review!

testing 1 2 3 by xega	Mar 9th, 2008 10:54:23 PM
test
Jim Carrey and Steve Carell by Osmosis Jones	Mar 9th, 2008 11:12:39 PM
I can't watch the trailer without picturing both of them in a recording booth somewhere. REAL VOICE ACTORS, PLEASE!
leafy green... by neverhed	Mar 10th, 2008 01:44:20 AM
...what could that mean?
A Plant tries to do Damage Control to an Earlier Horton Review! by ShiftyEyedDog2	Mar 10th, 2008 02:11:58 AM

Hello, Mr. Planty McPlanterton by Flip63Hole	Mar 10th, 2008 03:49:57 AM
I still won't be seeing this...
SIGH. by The Reef	Mar 10th, 2008 04:41:22 AM
It's a kids film. They'll love it. When you're six you don't care about "stylistic jarring" or "the essence of Seuss", it's just a cartoon with a silly elephant and tiny people in it. It is so un-worthy of comment when we should be discussing things like Mushishi - getting set reports from Watchmen - following rumours of new films - not talking about an unacceptable ninja section in a kids film. C'mon guys. Really.
i wish people wouldnt confuse 'visuals' with animation by Obscura	Mar 10th, 2008 06:09:16 AM
all the pretty colours in the background are not animation. character design is not animation. layout isnt animation. what IS animation, the character movement, and ice age really are damn good at that, and im talking to pixar standards. the problem is they get let down in other departments (usually story.) if you compare this to any dreamworks film and actually look at the animation, Blue Sky are so much more advanced. They just need new story and script guys, ad then we'll have another genuinely great animation studio.
how hard is it to make a good animated film? by greyspecter	Mar 10th, 2008 08:06:35 AM
Seems like brad bird's the only one who gets it. it's visuals, animation, and story, all three woven seemlessly together. Incredibles, Ratatouille are the only ones modern examples I can think of since Lion King or Toy Story. Maybe Finding Nemo.
Expanding a 30 min. idea into a 2 hour movie by Crimson Dynamo	Mar 10th, 2008 10:50:26 AM
is part of the reason the Seuss adaptions have gone wrong, because some hack writer has to fill-in Seuss's original idea with 1 1/2 hours of bullshit. Has anyone tried to see if Carrey's "Grinch" could be edited down to a 30 min. decent movie, for instance?
Obscura by 4we8have15to16go23back42	Mar 10th, 2008 02:40:30 PM
I agree with you 100%. I am sick & tired to people confusing Animation with Visual Development.
For children, yes, but... by Brunomac	Mar 10th, 2008 03:18:47 PM
...for somebody who loved these things and grew up with them, it's like rape seeing our beloved properties being reshaped for the new generation (i.e. a generation that will except any pile of shit, talentless project).
I'm interested in seeing this by Ray Gamma	Mar 10th, 2008 03:56:21 PM
Despite the obvious fact that this 'review' is a textbook 'plant' review (love ths bit where he has a pop at the exec that forced them to add the 'afterthought' sequence; i wonder how the exec feels about the filmmakers making this remark in their viral marketing plant campaign)... However, yeah, it does look fun.
plant by zabladowski	Mar 10th, 2008 06:14:44 PM
hi, im zabladowski. actually i'm not a plant, whether you believe me or not. not sure what i need to say to prove i'm not a plant... i'm just someone who likes dr. seuss and is glad that after a few failed attempts, someone got it right. and i was disappointed the first review on aicn didnt see the spirit of seuss in the film. i mean, the proof is in the pudding or the eating or whatever the darn expression is ( i bet someones gonna hate write a talkback saying they hate people who dont use the right food expressions!). the film is out soon so once you see its good, you'll remember this post and think.. gee he wasn't a plant after all. though lets face it, the chance of anyone remembering this post is slim, ha ha. oh except for those guys who hated the way i used the word animation so nonchalently. what a pr*ck i am! oooh i've just read the variety review...they weren't too hot on horton, but good to see hollywood reporter loved it. and last thing... i know that animation refers to the movement, but i was being lazy with my terminology by just referring to animation as a catch all to encompass all the visual development, character design, movement etc. apologies. i forgot how easy it is to get people upset on here! i was just quickly trying to show how much i liked the movie...
by HoldynTwyst	Mar 11th, 2008 01:06:47 PM
That's "the proof of the pudding is in the eating", which is a good point. Sadly it means that no matter how much you talk about how good the pudding is, the only way we'll know for sure is to eat it ourselves. That being said, I like the earnest feeling behind the review, and the reference to Mr. Zabladowski from Dr. T made me laugh. The Reef, taste dictates worth. I could dismiss Watchmen as being worthless if I looked at is as another overblown Hollywood attempt to make a buck off of a trash literature satire of kiddie books, but that's a really limited view of Watchmen that marginalizes art and limits all of us. Just decide this isn't your cup of tea and let others enjoy their drink instead of pissing in the pot. Obscura and 4we8have15to16go23back42, animation is a visual medium, and trying to divorce motion from images when talking about animation sets you up as elitist, picky and rude. Feature animation especially is a hugely colaborative process, and the outside viewer shouldn't have to consider each part seperately to judge quality, and if they were to seperate the aspects of animated films into categories, I don't see why your personal view of them should be seen as the accepted delineation. I hope this is good and look forward to trying the pudding for myself.
thanks... by zabladowski	Mar 11th, 2008 05:36:12 PM
for the considered reply. i like and agree with your appraisal of animation. and anyhow i find it pedantic to separate all those things, as you note they really are linked. it makes no sense to have great movement if the character design is cruddy, etc etc etc. anyhow, please do let me know on here if you liked horton mister holdyntwyst. ta!
Horton Hears Rambo Gunfire! by santi01	Mar 17th, 2008 11:35:42 AM
Rambo 5!
I liked Horton! by HoldynTwyst	Apr 8th, 2008 11:35:24 AM
I'm glad I got to see Horton on the big screen. Definitely a loving treatment of the book, really using the events of the book as solid markers along the plot. Images like the first fly-through of Whoville with various vignettes of Who-life felt very lovingly pulled from Seuss, and the cavernous hall of great mayors and the daughters' room were charming and awe-inspiring images, and the pull back to reveal the epic field of flowers was beautifully handled and emotionally powerful. Some great performances by the animators, and, although I think there were definitely times when they should have been pulled back, the voice actors also had a good ammount of charm and reverence for the book. I think this film does speak well for a future for Dr. Seuss films, and I'd love to see a similar team tackle weightier books like the Butter Battle Book or the Lorax.
To eat rainbows and poop butterflies by Orcus	Apr 8th, 2008 01:37:16 PM
They should try an anthology of stories as opposed to stretching out a 10 minute story

Talkbacks

A Rebuttal To An Earlier HORTON Review!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks