|
Cheapsteaks posted:Also Kuzco is an rear end in a top hat who is put in a pitiable situation caused by an even bigger jerk while Smithfish puts himself in a lovely situation all on his own (by gambling away money that wasn't even his) but then puts himself at the top of the world by being a lying rear end in a top hat. Right, if this were framed more as a fight for survival against mafia boss Lino, it might work, but Lino isn't even aware of Smithfish prior to him becoming famed as the Shark-Slayer. And also Lino is exclusively seen worrying about his sons, so he lacks a wee bit of sting as a villain.
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2013 22:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 20, 2024 04:40 |
|
|
Tartarus Sauce posted:Just once, I'd like to see the outsider hero take the village or the tribe to task for having been dicks in the past, and I'd like to have the mob have to apologize for their previous behavior. Princess Mononoke comes close. Some Guy TT posted:I suspect that at least a part of it is wrapped up in American culture. It's quite common to get political or social arguments that boil down to "at least we're not as bad as those assholes over there!" There's this weird mix of superior condescension coupled with an expectation for pity that probably sounds great to someone who identifies with the speaker, but is extremely alienating to just about anyone else. Even though Lenny and Smithfish are both quite annoying, I like Lenny vastly more, because at least he's not a dick. MinionOfCthulhu posted:Well, yeah, he turns into a train and a space shuttle, of course that's his name. Casimir Radon posted:Teenage girls like dragonheart? I remember it has dragon Sean Connery, and Dina Meyer who is a c-lister, but really hot. I also enjoy Dragonheart, but in that way I like Brotherhood of the Wolf, not the way I enjoy American Beauty. Pick fucked around with this message at 23:46 on Apr 10, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2013 23:40
|
|
|
Shark Tale Plot 4: let's just wrap this up I'm going to try to quickly get through the plot so I can go back and discuss certain segments of it in more detail. The plot writeup is supposed to be more for context than anything (unlike for Bee Movie) since I've seen Shark Tale before. Oh god! I watched this film twice on purpose! gently caress! gently caress gently caress gently caress! pick is dumb okay  Smithfish the Shark Slayer! So anyway, he and Lenny agree to a setup that will make Smithfish look like he is indeed a slayer of sharks. This is pretty easy because Lenny is a shark who is willing to pretend to die, like Sean Connery did when he was a huge lizard. BUT I realized during my previous writeup (which was written at work and based on memory) that I forgot that the funeral scene happens prior to this. Which I really do need to explain because it's quite important. Yep, we get to see Frankie's coffin, and his father grieve over said coffin. So we've seen Don Lino: 1. Prepare to give his sons the family business 1a. (Which he explicitly states is his life's purpose) 2. Threaten a scumbag for implying that one of his sons was inferior to the other 3. Worry about said son (because, as Frankie says, if a shark is weak, it'll get killed) 4. Ask other son to try to teach the troubled son how to behave in a way that will facilitate the transfer of power 5. Grieve at his son's funeral for both the child he believes was murdered and the child who is missing He has done nothing actively harmful to anyone, as far as we can see, in the entire movie. Staggering villainy, I guess. Bear in mind that the film never really explains what a mafia is or does, so to any kid who is unfamiliar with this genre, there is no real indication of what these sharks even do (aside from eat fish, an act we do not see).  Guy with dead son, and suspicions of a second dead son, villain extraordinaire! It's actually Lenny overhearing his father's sorrow at losing Frankie that precipitates him running off. (And Lenny does overhear his father mourn the loss of a "perfect" son.) It's also at this funeral that Don Lino receives news of a "Shark Slayer" from an older member of the mafia. ... Who farts for no reason, totally disrupting an otherwise intense scene (well, for this movie anyway) with an over-long poopgas gag. I think this is one of the movie's biggest sins (and we'll see it again with the "Can't touch this!" joke someone mentioned in the comments). There are some scenes here that are good enough that they belong in a better movie. And without exception, they are interrupted with unbelievably irritating and distracting jokes that gently caress up the tone of what's going on. SO. Back to the PRESENT, which I'd been talking about : Lenny and Smithfish. Okay. So they agree to do stage a scene so that both Lenny and Smithfish can be free of the influence of the don. It's worth noting that this is where Smithfish first finds out that Lenny is the don's son (as was Frankie). The exchange is written poorly, script-wise: quote:
... and yet delivered really well, so it ends up sounding good. Hard to explain. A skillfully avoided fuckup on someone's part. The way it plays out is actually kind of funny, and the dialogue preceding it is pretty sweet and it's nice someone said it. Actually, everyone's nice to Lenny. A lot nicer than you'd think considering the type of character arc they put him in. But whatever, Lenny's a nice dude and since they're playing it as a specific real-world analogue, it's rather refreshing. Anyway. Pufferfish, who, remember, had a direct line to Don Lino from earlier... calls Don Lino (since now he's the Shark Slayer's manager). Smithfish walks in on this conversation, and pufferfish puts him on the line (against Smithfish's wishes). Due to quirkiness, Don Lino thinks that Smithfish is directly insulting him on top of having killed his son. So he tells him that his enforcers are going to tear him fin from fin. I'm with this guy! Okay, so anyway, Smithfish and Lenny DO BATTLE! Well, they pretend to. The shark enforcers witness this firsthand:  Oh, and so does Don Lino, since it's being broadcast on TV. Lenny "falls into the abyss" (convenient to have an abyss there in the analogue to Times Square) and then goes back into the sewer system (???? underwater??? i don't) to return to the whalewash shack. (This is how he got taken to the whalewash originally, don't know if I mentioned.) Meanwhile, Lola swims up to Smithfish and kisses him. Actually, maybe they weren't officially an item before this? Whatever, I am not interested in paying that much attention to fish romance. This ends up being a problem though, since when Smithfish returns to the whale wash shack, Angie is waiting for him, and she is pissed off. She's reading a newspaper about the event, so apparently this is a bit later. The timeframe for nothing is ever clear, to tell you the truth. Anyway. She's angry at him for letting false fame go to his head. She tells him she loved him, but only "before the money, before the fame, [and] before the lies." Well, good on you, because yeah he's being a huge turd, capitalizing on Frankie's death and Lenny's fear.  I hate this character design. Smithfish comes to realize that he's "a joke", and that he isn't happy where he is. He dumps Lola, which infuriates her. She slams him against the glass doors of his apartment... heh, which kind of rocks. Domestic violence usually isn't funny, but it's hard not to love Smithfish getting his rear end beaten. He goes to buy some valentines chocolates for Angie, since he decides he loves her now, and swims to the whalewash. Here we see that Lenny has disguised himself as a dolphin so he can work there. It looks weird and unnatural and rather wrong relative to the somewhat decent shark design. There's a glaring blue/yellow color contrast that doesn't work for me. But that's not important. It turns out Angie is missing. Kidnapped, as it turns out. Pufferfish overhears Smithfish and Lenny talking and finds out Smithfish's ruse. He's freaked out as hell since he too has made an enemy of Don Lino, and not from the position of power he'd originally thought. Smithfish decides his only hope is to negotiate with the sharks before they find out that he's a fraud. He takes pufferfish and Lenny (still disguised as a shark) for a meeting with The Family... and the don. Smithfish acts like a huge arrogant cock to all the sharks (and marlin) and others in the room while he waits for the don. A shark whispers to another shark about the "dolphin muscle" that Smithfish brought. This is scientifically legitimate, because dolphins love to kill sharks, especially by ramming their sensitive gills with their hard noses. The don enters the room for another intense scene which is of course broken up by another stupid joke, this time from the green octopus guy, whose purpose in the film is 100% distracting stupid jokes. The Don posted:So, this is the Sharkslayer. I've been lookin' forward to meeting you. I feel like we're practically family. You know that? Funny, ain't it? I brought my kids into the world, full of love and care, and you took them out. You know who I am? Do you know who I am? I'm the Don. The boss of the Great White Sharks. Ah yes. He does indeed have Angie, tied up on a silver platter. ... I guess I do need a part 5.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2013 00:37
|
|
Nothin' is wrong with you, man. I think all sharks should be like you.
God, that's sweet of you to say.
Whatcha mean, "yeah"?
!)
|
Hammer Backspace posted:Am I right in reading this, because it looks like you're saying that the villain of this movie is a guy who thinks both his sons were murdered, and that the hero is the man who capitalises on their real/fake deaths for personal gain, in a society where a fish who kills another different fish is publically lauded and given money and hot (fish) women want to jump his bones, and you're also saying this movie was marketed towards kids? As in little impressionable children? And it seems like some kind of error has taken place here, either during your write-up, or during my reading about it, or during the writing and production of the film, and I'm not sure which it is because of the growing pressure in my brain. Thank you in advance for clarification. Killing other fish is only okay if you don't eat them, apparently. Also, there's a joke earlier in the film where a (non-shark) fish is running a sushi restaurant. This movie is like an onion. A really old onion, when it the sulfur is released and it gets all farty.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2013 01:42
|
|
|
Shark Tale part 6: okay so THIS is the rest of the film All right, so Angie has been kidnapped and is now on a platter in front of Don Lino. Smithfish says he don't even care, who she?  "You got nothing! NO-THING!" A bluff! Say, how'd Don Lino know to kidnap Angie? ... Oh, Lola told him, as we discover when she, well, swims into the scene and tells us. She wants revenge on Smithfish for getting dumped. Maybe Lola is technically a secondary antagonist? I don't really consider her as such, since she's exactly what she always said on the tin. Smithfish knew what he was getting into since day 1 at the racetracks. If you court a woman who says she's a certain way, don't be surprised when she is indeed that way. Lola tells Don Lino it's just an act and he does in fact love love love Angie. Anyway, Smithfish has to think fast. He tells Lenny (who he calls "Sebastian"... maybe it's a Little Mermaid joke and maybe it isn't) to "take her out!" So Lenny swoops in and appears to eat Angie. He returns to his former position, only now holding Angie in his mouth. This was not terrible thinking on Smithfish's part, except for the fact that Lenny can't stand the taste of fish, which Smithfish knows from their earlier faux fight. OH YEP HERE IT IS He starts singing "da da da na can't touch this!" and dancing on the table. This is awful. See, this meeting scene--generally speaking--has an undercurrent (huuurrr) of being good, but it just keeps inviting these loving annoying additions. Criminy. It's also weird to see the sharks hanging out in such a decrepit hideout, considering Smithfish lives in this super-sweet penthouse we've been witness to several times. In fact, it sort of seems like the sharks have the depressing, crappy life and the fish have the cool underwater New York City life. Ehhhh. He then proceeds to insult and intimidate those present, culminating in Don Lino.  ... all while ignoring warnings from Pufferfish and Lenny that Lenny's about to hurl. Which then happens. He pukes up Angie and a bunch of random garbage, including a license plate and a violin. Sharks do swallow lots of random poo poo so this is sort of a shark joke and one of the few jokes that actually applies to them being fish. (And I mean jokes as in legitimate jokes, not just references to fish existing.) I have a (horizontally-flipped!) video here of the confrontation that follows. It's worth watching, sort of, because it does a good job encapsulating what's wrong with this movie: Lenny, Smithfish, Don Lino, and stupid joke octopus Okay, so I haven't mentioned this up to now, but great white sharks don't have that distinct gray collar stripe. That's part of the character design, and I do like it, because it suggests a mafia-style suit collar. So that's good, I like that. The entire mafia actually looks pretty good, and good together, even. However, the combination of Don Lino, Lenny (with that awful yellow/blue/black thing going on in his dolphin guise), Smithfish, Angie, pufferfish, and stupid joke octopus is visually a loving mess. Really, it should just be called Shark Tale and--oh, wait, it is called Shark Tale. I mean it should be called Shark Tale and only have sharks in it. Actually, ditching Smithfish's entire plot and making it just about the mafia sharks would have instantly made this a way way way WAY WAY WAY better movie. Plot-wise and art-wise. Now, onto the characterization. Angie's still mad that she's been put into this situation: totally justifiable. Smithfish actually tries to stand up for Lenny--that's a good thing to have happen as well. So they're, I don't know, sort of fine during this one minute here (although this comes after Smithfish being SUCH a cock--you don't really feel anything for him when he's behaving submissively because his previous arrogance was so grating). But compare him, or I guess even him and Angie, to Lenny and Don Lino. There's obviously so much more going on there, and it instantly makes them more sympathetic than the ostensible main characters. You're actually  annoyed that Smithfish, Angie, and of course stupid joke octopus are there, because they're interfering with one of the few interactions you have any reason to care about.And frankly, once Don Lino's attention turns to Smithfish... he's still the character you're identifying with. I mean, really. How many times have you seen a film where a villain defensibly begs, "What did I ever do to you?!  "I mean, I get that you don't want a villain who is 100% pointlessly evil. I mean, except in a very particular kind of story (say, Lord of the Rings). But if you're trying to fill the role of a villain, it has to be with, like... the person... who is... wrong about things? I guess he's mistaken about Smithfish killing his son, but he has ever reason (including Smithfish saying that he killed his son) to believe this is the case. As you can tell from the end of the video, we're about to enter a chase scene. And we do! "Swim! Swim for your life!" Lenny screams. "You're going to regret the day you became the Shark Slayer!  " yells Don Lino.Probably would have helped if Lenny had mentioned Smithfish never killed a shark. But that's not important. What is important is that Don Lino gets stuck in a porthole! And as he struggles, we see the return of REALLY REALLY loving ANNOYING SHRIMP GUY! Yes, the one from earlier who swore revenge. Yes, the one who is actually THE MOST ANNOYING FEATURE OF AN INCREDIBLY, INDESCRIBABLY ANNOYING MOVIE. He and his shrimp buddies, who I guess were just hanging around the mafia hideout for no reason, start beating on Don Lino. But this doesn't matter since he gets away none the worse for wear. A pointless callback. Smithfish swims in the direction of... the whalewash! Well, we don't want to have to build a whole new set. He uses the features of the whalewash to... accidentally trap Lenny on some sort of robot arm apparatus earlier used for calming a panicking whale (They're not even remotely the same size as the whales in the movie, but this doesn't really matter, since it's been a while). Whoops, wrong shark! He then traps Don Lino similarly. The result is that Lenny and Don Lino are conveniently trapped face-to-face in the whalewash. There's another stupid joke. Also, Angie gets trapped in a bubble, which Smithfish pops. Hows does that work? This isn't Spongebob world where there are pools underwater and stuff. It just seems really off. Katie Current is there, like, instantly with a horde of people. How?! Don't know. As she starts interviewing him, or trying to over the rabble, Smithfish screams "I AM NOT A REAL SHARK SLAYER!" Angie's expression indicates that she's proud that he came clean. Better late than Bee Movie.  quote:
I mean, I guess not, but I cannot understate how ... not-angry Don Lino was about this. Worried, I guess? But never "I must fake death" angry or disappointed, so-- quote:
Man, he is the LAST loving person who should be lecturing anybody. Much less Don Lino, because he has no idea what he is thinking or doing. And we sort of don't want him to even be there, because can't Lenny speak for himself? Like he was just doing? Doesn't Lenny understand this situation in a way Smithfish inherently doesn't? But apparently Smithfish gets to do that. And also we, the audience, get to forget the part earlier where other sharks state this kind of behavior puts Lenny's life in danger (not that we really know why). If we don't know the reasons for this, then we don't know Don Lino's reasons for worrying about it. And thus we aren't in a good position to evaluate it. Really doesn't work. Also, that line about "dressing like a dolphin" is pretty weird, since we're under the impression he did that to disguise himself so he could work in the whalewash. Feels like something foisted on him. But yeah minor issue maybe or maybe not you decide tune in next time for augh Video time! Smithfish, Lenny, and Don Lino Shame! Shaaame the father! But at least they had the decency not to kill him, which would have been problematic for various thematic and common decency reasons, but not unexpected. After this, the film is basically over. And I say that because Don Lino is the only character I care about particularly. But if you must know, Smithfish and Angie hook up. Also, Smithfish surrenders the fruits of his Sharkslayer gig and returns to the whalewash, now co-owner of the joint with the pufferfish. Though Angie still has the same bullshit desk job (lame). Don Lino agrees to stop terrorizing the fish, an act that apparently he does even though we've never seen it. I guess he can still alcohol and drugs and other mafia stuff so he'll probably be fine. Also he's a shark! The whalewash now paints/details sharks and the pufferfish guy is wearing a pimp hat? It's really confusing. The point is that they can play the Carwash song, which was apparently a thing in 2004. If it wasn't dated then, it sure is now! I don't even recognize it. Dance party!!! daaance party!!!!!!! dance party!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! the movie is over!!! daaance party!!!!!! ~the movie is over~ [next up: discussion of the movie's strengths (ways it is not like Bee Movie) and weaknesses (ways it is like Bee Movie)] Pick fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Apr 11, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2013 02:32
|
|
It was an anchor that killed Frankie. I didn't have anything to do with it, and neither did Lenny.
|
Some Guy TT posted:Please, please tell me you don't mean this literally. I hate even having to ask this but the whole story's been so tasteless it honestly wouldn't surprise me. Oh god no, I was just trying to go for a topical bad fish pun. They just smooch. Macaluso posted:Smithfish going "What is your PROBLEM" is infuriating! I know! It's so insanely inappropriate! Especially from the guy who was abusing Lenny's relationship with his father the entire time he knew him!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
What Shark Tale did Wrong: Okay, we're done with the summary. That was just so y'all know what happened. Now I can talk about it! The most glaring flaw with Shark Tale, at least in my opinion, is it has no faith in its core material. Which, you know, I can kind of understand, since the plot isn't particularly creative or substantial. However, they seem to have tried to compensate for this fact by adding in superfluous, grating bullshit. You have a man being told how his son dies by a guy who farts halfway through. This feels like Patton Oswalt's "punch-up" talk all over. (If you haven't heard it, do so now. It's very, very important to understanding these kinds of films. It's about people who are hired to add jokes to essentially finished films.) Wait, you didn't click that link, did you? Gooo back. Cliiick the link. Okay. Now we can move on. If there are any good scenes in Shark Tale, they're good in spite of, and not because of, these distractions. Now let me make myself clear: farts are hilarious. At the right time. Not when they're interrupting the tone of an important scene! Toy Story is also a hilarious film, but did Buzz crash-land on the stairwell, close his eyes, and loving fart? No! Also, these "jokes" usually aren't funny, so they don't even lighten the scene, they just muddle it. The entire green octopus fellow (whose design is simply gross, but we'll get to that) serves no other purpose in the movie. Also, he's associated with an otherwise completely serious character. You'd think they'd play off one another, but they don't. You just feel increasingly bad for the villain, because his family is falling apart, and some rear end in a top hat is farting! Or saying something pointless! These jokes also don't work at his expense because you already feel bad for him during these scenes. Sure, if this were Death at a Funeral, it'd have some black comedy appeal, but this is not that film. Instead, it's somewhere between padding and the film equivalent of getting lime juice in your eye. There's another character I didn't even mention, a homeless hermit crab (with a shell... okay, there's some sort of humor in a hermit crab being homeless, but whatever). He also serves only this purpose, but for Smithfish. Even at the Smithfish/Angie emotional climax, this pointless character is interjecting and generally disrupting the narrative flow. He, like stupid joke octopus, never contributes to the plot in any way. That's why the summary didn't even include him, and hell, it only included stupid joke octopus because he was inextricably going to be in a clip I knew I had to post. The jellyfish henchmen also bear this angle, but to me they're okay (not GOOD but PASSABLE in this one particular respect) because their jokes tend to involve their electric stings, plus the henchmen are almost solely present for comic scenes. So it's something that actually requires them to by jellyfish (unlike most things in this film which are only marine-by-fiat) and is usually appropriate to the nature of what's going on around them. They're never really around Don Lino or Lenny, who together form the most serious part of the movie. They do however contribute to the plot, which also sets them apart. Now, whether they should be portrayed as walleyed and gaptoothed is another thing, but that's more for the character design section I'll get to in a bit. So anyway, we have characters who honest-to-god serve no purpose but to derail the film at times when it otherwise might demonstrate quality. Upon reflection, it's really more of a subset of the "annoying" problem. I promised myself I wouldn't do it, but okay, you force me. Watch this clip of the awful shrimp: Kill Every Shrimp Yep, that's something you have to endure if you watch this movie. And he and his friends attack Don Lido later, an act that you, an audience member, are expected to cheer. How can you do that? Does the movie actually think you like this and identify with it? That this will make you smile? Did any of you, watching this, smile? The film thinks you should! They also think that reminding you that Burger King exists, and could exist for fish, is also an inclusion that will help carry this film and make you reflect upon in positively. It's literally called Fish King, in case you were curious (as our own version is known as Human King). The GUP, Coral-Cola, Martha Surgeon's Flowers, Starfish Tours, Mussel Crowe, Jessica Shrimpson, Cod Stewart, Laurence Fishburn, etc. Now, occasional referential humor is okay, but this is just lazy. The laziest incarnation of an often lazy art. Thankfully, the film does have a few examples of where it's done better, such as using Commerson's Dolphin (Cephalorhynchus commersonii) as police cars:  That's actually a pretty good joke, because they are naturally policecar-esque. But again, they use this to try to "compensate" for weaknesses in the plot and instead weaken the plot further by diverting people's attention to where it isn't helpful. I mean, no, Shark Tale doesn't have a great plot, but unlike Bee Movie it does have a recognizable plot. And people are going to be looking for it. So give them what you've got, you know? I feel awkward writing this, because I'm reminding myself of the Red Letter Media review of Revenge of the Sith, when Plinkett is railing against the idiotic use of slapstick in an intro that also features loving murder! I mean, true, the point is fundamentally the same, but 1) it is slightly more excusable here since it's openly a comedy film, I guess, and 2) aping Plinkett is horribly old hat, isn't it? I don't want to be one of those people complaining about "shot/reverse-shot" just because it's a recognizable phrase. (Good example: people whining about shot/reverse-shot in Bioware games because they think shot/reverse-shot means showing the person who is speaking when they're speaking.) But really, it's a shame that they create such an effective atmosphere only to periodically sabotage it for little to no reason. Actually, it sort of reminds me of this one guy who sat in on one of my college courses. He never brought his materials. He always came late. And he spent the entire class period sniffling, cracking his knuckles, and tapping on the desk. I wanted to murder that guy. No matter how interesting the lecture was--and it was usually pretty good--it was made intolerable any day that this jackass motherfucker maundered in. Somehow, that dude's essence is in this film. He's cracking his knuckles with misplaced farts and non-puns. So yeah, I'd say the film's overarching flaw is that doubt in the product infected the product and made it incessantly annoying. And no one wants to be annoyed for an hour and a half. That's not entertainment. But that's not, of course, the film's only problem. I mentioned that the movie had a plot, but it's just not a very good one. The movie is generally predictable (or where it's not predictable, it should have been, the film just wasn't communicating as well as it thought it was). It's also pretty flaccid. There's nothing new about it, really. And it didn't take advantage of its setting to make itself cleverer. The idea of a mafia movie with sharks is actually pretty appealing to me. Mafias are normally terrestrial! The ocean is very different than land! But nah, this could have been Dhole Tale and it wouldn't have made a lick of difference. Let's look at each character's basic arc: 1. Smithfish learns to appreciate what he has, even though it's not prestigious 2. Lenny learns to accept himself the way he is and discovers that people who love him will support him 3. Angie gets the guy she sought after beating some sense into him 4. Don Lino learns to ignore ambiguous risks to his son's wellbeing (since he clearly loved him the whole time, so it's not that) 5. Pufferfish learns nothing Okay, that's not too awful fundamentally. Those are really familiar ideas. It's not ambitious or nuanced, but it makes sense to me. It just suffers from mediocre-to-poor implementation. Smithfish's storyline doesn't work for me at all, but it's mostly because his character doesn't work for me. He's just too arrogant and dismissive of others from the outset. He wants more, but he's not even working hard where he is (the film begins with him late for work because he's posing in front of a billboard, and Angie having punched him in so he doesn't get in trouble). He doesn't want to earn success, he just wants success handed to him. The second he gets the money that could put him back on his feet (so to speak), he gambles all of it. His desire for more doesn't resonate with me because he doesn't seem to be working for it, just dreaming of it. He treats other characters as tools for his grand plans. He is already abusing Angie's affections from the get-go (having her cover for his laziness at work, for example). He pawns her family heirloom for cash, even though in his original scheme, it'd only be enough to pay back the pufferfish. He'd never be able to afford its return from the pawn shop. When he finds that Lenny is afraid to return to his father, he uses Lenny to further the lie that is propping him up financially and socially. (Something he was milking long enough for long enough to have a video game made about him!) Once pufferfish agrees to be his manager, he welcomes him into a partnership, even though they should be enemies--it's after pufferfish had him sent off to be killed (!). He dates a woman who uses the word "superficial" to describe herself openly: Smithfish doesn't care. And why should he? Other people's feelings, genuine or not, don't seem to factor in. His plot doesn't connect with me because I never want him to be successful. I'm averse! Smithfish is going to come out ahead one way or another because he's the main protagonist in a family film. But I don't like him or approve of his goals, so even to the extent that his plot works (and it does follow through), I'm not particularly invested in watching it. Compare this to Tiana's storyline in Princess and the Frog (which is a good movie). Yes, she also wants to move up in the world. However, she is working her goddamn rear end off, and they tied it in with her deceased dad's dream of something better for his family. It's ambition done right. This is ambition done wrong. Now, Lenny and Don Lino are basically on the same thread. This is the one I have mixed feelings about, since there are some things about it I really enjoy and some things that suck garbage. I think I'll mostly talk about it in the "like" section, for fairness' sake. But while I'm in the whining zone, I will say that it is a plotline that relies on Lenny and Don Lino being characterized differently than they actually are. One half of the movie wants us to see their relationship as Virtuous Cute Black-Sheep Son must Find his Way from the World of Terrorizing Murder-Dad, and the other half wants it to be Shy Effeminate Son and Struggling Compassionate Traditionalist Dad Can't Speak About Their Feelings. The distinction is slight but important. Ultimately, it's far more the latter than the former, but--let's not forget--Don Lino is a cannibalistic mafia boss. I mean, cannibalistic in the sense of fish-eating-fish, though Stephen J Goulde might object to that description (one internet kingdom for whoever gets the reference). Those are the starting conditions. The movie just completely fails to deliver on any aspect of that. He doesn't... mafia-ize anything, so it takes a while to finally get the story they're actually telling as opposed to the one that you'd expect from cannibalistic mafia boss. Ultimately, I prefer the angle they took here though. I mean, call me a weenie, but that's a story I like. They spoke to each other and affirmed how important their relationship was. Lenny loves his dad, Don Lino loves his son. That's nice, and I like nice things. We didn't have to introduce some artificial and theme-confusing battle sequence at the end just for the hell of it or because that's what the audience expects. This conclusion is infinitely more satisfying than if Don Lino had exploded. However, it feels like they needed more conflict at the outset, because honestly, what the gently caress is Don Lino apologizing for? The entire film, he's worrying about his son, not berating or shunning him. They throw in lines about a shark's life being in danger if it's not a killing machine, but since they fail to address this with its underlying logic, we--or at least I--tend to throw Don Lino the benefit of the doubt. He's fretting about leaving his empire to his sons and whether they're ready. Far as I can tell, he's just trying to ensure they'll be safe when that time arrives. Yes, Don Lino has a vision for his son, and he makes it clear that there are things he expects, but we don't know how necessary they are versus just culturally preferred. They are sharks in the movie and this does in fact make a difference. We need to know this information to know how wrong Don Lino is (because he is at least some wrong, Lenny's life is ultimately his own). There was room for compromise in how this was resolved, but it's full capitulation on Don Lino's part without so much as being able to offer an explanation. Ehhh, but they were kind of stuck, since--not to get all Republican Congressman in here--but they're really, really strongly implying Lenny is gay. But like, shark-gay, which is vegetarian or something. You get what I mean. Any kind of compromise could be misread, since their perspective on the issue is quite transparent. Which is also nice. It's nice! This movie came out in 2004. This was probably a riskier move back then. Maybe I'm giving this too much credit, but you know, I'm going to give an automatic kudos to any film that ends with a peaceful and loving conflict resolution as opposed to violence. I think it's much, much harder to do. Frankly, I do not give a gently caress when Auto is destroyed in Wall-E. Like, I totally don't loving care. But yeah, I admit, I'm a little touched when Don Lino wants to hug his son. (Technically again, since he hugs him when he first sees him in dolphin getup as well.) Blinky13 posted:Maybe Lenny's fear of Lino had more to do with projection based on him feeling pressured to conform? Does that even work? This one is nowhere near as awful as B-- Movie in a lot of ways, would the writing have been that subtle? It seems like there was more care going into the shark parts of the movie in general. You could convince me of this. The shark parts are much, much better done than any of the others. Perhaps it's just that they're less explicitly developed... in the film's favor. Hard to know! Anyway, onto Angie.... Hrm. Well, I think she's too good for Smithfish, but that's problem is like... epidemic in film. But generally I don't mind her, since she's the film's moral center and plays it well--in a fun way, since she's a little crazy and she does have some good lines. It's unobjectionable. And that's higher praise than you think, because often in movies like this, the female lead will end up having to apologize as well, even if there's no good reason. Not here! She was right, he was wrong, she forgives him but it's up to her discretion. And she does stand up to him when he's being a dick, so she doesn't have doormat-itis. I'm lukewarm. There's not a lot to say here. And even less to say about pufferfish guy! He just sort of does whatever the film needs doing. It doesn't work though, since he goes from immediate antagonist to quirky side character to partner with the aid of very poor transitions. But ultimately he's not interesting enough for me to type about. He is annoying though. Buzzword! We're bringing it around! [continued below] Oh my god i just found out Bee Movie has a commentary track. I... Pick fucked around with this message at 17:29 on Apr 11, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2013 06:24
|
|
|
Das Boo posted:I couldn't help myself. Oh my god  . Cute cute cute cute!Kittowns  .
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2013 17:02
|
|
|
What Shark Tale Did Wrong Part 2 So, the plot of Shark Tale is mediocre at best, and then in a scramble, they made it worse. But what else is wrong with this movie? Well, the characters. I expanded on this a bit when I was complaining about the plot. This doesn't surprise me and shouldn't surprise you; character and plot is inextricably intertwined. But there are some aspects which are best discussed independently. So, Smithfish is an rear end in a top hat. He's incredibly, glaringly arrogant with (as far as the audience can tell) absolutely nothing to back it up. The fact that he takes everything for granted and then... eventually learns not to do so is his arc, I suppose, so he had to begin this way, but they went far overboard. He comes across as willfully blind, not just ignorant. Also, he might not have a penthouse, but we don't really get the impression he's suffering. The flashback of his school makes it seem like a cute, middle-class institution of education, which you'd imagine results from a middle-class life (we don't see too much of Smithfish's circumstances, honestly). He isn't hungry or, as far as we can tell, languishing in any real way. He just doesn't have a wealth of luxury goods. This is also a problem with the film, I think. They're trying to suggest that Smithfish is poor, but they fail to deliver on how being poor is anything but a social inconvenience. There are some convenient children for him to be nice to, but he doesn't seem to be particularly nice to them either, come to think of it. He tells them to clean up a billboard they've graffiti'd (which comes off like chalk, so no huge deal), and later he tells them to go home when he fears they might see Lenny, who he is trying to smuggle back to the whalewash shack. At his best moments, he's a normal dude, but he never rises to the point where he earns our admiration as a hero. Lenny, for his part, is a better character, but he's still not great. He's too comically effeminate. Now, being effeminate is not the problem with him or anyone, but you really have to read it as the combined phrase: comically effeminate. The kind of pseudo-effeminacy that is played for laughs, but isn't really representative or women or homosexuals, more like middle-schoolers pantomiming what they think women and homosexuals are like. This would be a hugely bigger problem if the film weren't 100% on Lenny's side. This was a major, major bullet only somewhat dodged. It weakens his character for him to be such a stereotype. Also, nothing about him complicates this stereotype at all; there's no "he's this stock character, BUT--". They missed an obvious chance to give him nuance. Lenny does seem genuinely kind, though, which gives him a lot of leeway that you just can't grant to Smithfish. And you understand why he feels what he feels; his shame and dismay are familiar enough. However, the gently caress up some scenes, like his Star Wars "Noooo!" at his brother's death that come at cost to the character and your ability to relate to him. 6.5/10, ADEQUATE. Now, Angie... hrm. I'm so conditioned to awful, awful female characters that they exist on a different scale, really. She avoided a lot of pitfalls, and in such a way that you can tell that an honest-to-god woman was involved in this production SOMEWHERE. Small mercies. She's assertive and a little wacky.... Honest and outspoken, but prone to anger. She gives the film's only decent moral speeches, and part of the reason they can work is they feel justified coming from her (you know, and not Smithfish). Her biggest problem is that she's the love interest. If she weren't the love interest, she'd be great. I'd have loved her as "wise best friend who is onto you and knows you're loving up and TELLS you but jesus you're not listening!" (who happens to be female). But ultimately, she gets defined by her relationship with Smithfish. She's better than you'd expect from the film, but problems remain. Lola, the other female character (TWO?! Oh yeah, but they both relate to Smithfish's love life, natch) is an odd bird. Or fish. She's a superficial person who says as much and acts as much. And there are people like her; I've met them. Maybe it's fair to have someone like this. I don't like how she's cast as a villain, though. She and Smithfish are exactly the same over most of the film, but he gets to be a protagonist? Bullshit. Lola has ambitions, too. She even seems to be working and scheming towards them. They're the same! And when she's dissed, she beats the poo poo out of him and releases a can of quality vengeance. Cool, she seems motivated! Ultimately, I'd be angrier, but she escapes the film having lost nothing. She isn't killed or marginalized or what-have-you. She just returns to where she was at the start of the film: looking for a hot prize to seize. Best of luck, Lola! Pufferfish doesn't have a personality at all and he's awful. What he wants and why he's doing it and his angle and his nature all remain open to speculation because he has basically no development and makes no sense. At least his henchmen are consistently stupid henchmen who act like canned henchers. Pufferfish is evil mafia connect--no, bumbling dork--no, slimy white guy--no, blah blah. He's used as a tool to progress the film, but in the process, they forget that he's supposed to be a person. Horrible. I'll talk about Don Lino more in the "things the film did right" section, even though, to be honest, he wasn't really done right. But he is my favorite thing in the movie. You can't not love the caring dad + cannibalistic mafia boss combo. I mean come on! No other characters are even identifiable as "characters", as in having, you know, characterization. (See: stupid joke octopus.) Oh boy, and now it's time to complain about the art! This movie looks like a huge butt. The design is probably the most butt. Smithfish looks just... kind of gross. It's a hugely ineffective and unpleasant caricature. Lola's right up there too, though. They both look flat, plastic, unnatural, and just... weird. The hands at the ends of the fins are something the three main fish share, by the way, and it's weird. Smithfish's sort-of legs? Also weird. They're sometimes bent like human legs and sometimes used as fins and it's just visually confusing and... bad. Also, the faces aren't really set up for the kind of distortions they're attempting. They're trying to push these models far beyond where they comfortably go. [still writin' 'bout sharktale] Pick fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Apr 11, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2013 17:54
|
|
|
Inspector Gesicht posted:Say, what other forgotten Dreamworks movies are going to cover? No one remembers that Sinbad movie or that horse flick, or will you do stuff like Delgo? I actually like Spirit: Stallion of the Cimmaron and Sinbad. In fact, I like them better than the Dreamworks 2d films that people actually remember, like Road to El Dorado, which I... don't like?  Of course, Spirit benefits from horses horses horses!  For a girl who loved horses, there were horses in the horse horse movie, horses.Also, Spirit was co-directed by a woman as well. Man, Dreamworks has a way, way, way better track record of that than Disney/Pixar. Pick fucked around with this message at 02:36 on Apr 12, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2013 02:19
|
|
|
majormonotone posted:Spirit's a beautiful movie and the animation on the horses is fantastic. It's a shame it's boring as hell to sit through though !Yeah, it is kind of boring. And the CG backgrounds look terrible. But really, the rest of the animation is loving great. Plus I have a soft spot for the wild west (especially as told from the perspective of people other than white male settlers). Das Boo posted:All I remember from Sinbad is that Eris was voiced by Michelle Pfeiffer and her animation was utterly amazing. And then they... did nothing with her. Yeah, it's a total waste, but her hair .
Pick fucked around with this message at 03:35 on Apr 12, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2013 03:33
|
|
|
Xander77 posted:Really? Road to El Dorado had decent... pretty much everything, really. You could take exception to the religious thing, I guess, but it didn't really go for the "poor benighted savages" angle. I don't think it's a bad movie at all, I just don't care for it for whatever reason. I readily acknowledge that my tastes are not 1:1 with quality, though I like to think there's overlap. Some Guy TT posted:I don't think the movie is on Lenny's side so much as it is against Don Lino's. The whole gay shark thing is more a wedge issue than it is a genuine character conflict. Note how Don Lino is shamed at the end as if he hated his son for being a gay shark even though there's no real textual evidence to support this reading of his actions. With the characters we have, the most reasonable interpretation is that Lenny's conflict should be about learning to trust his family enough to be forceful with them about how he can't change himself. But that's no fun at all, since this plot has no room for a final act that culminates in the humiliation of our "villain". Hmm, yeah, there are some very good points here. Really, it should have been Lenny asserting himself and assuring his father that his fey personality was not synonymous with weakness. Which was core issue, though the movie does a bait-and-switch in its regard, it feels--resolving a similar issue, but not actually the one we were presented with initially. Also, I can't overstate how much this resolution is weakened by Smithfish stepping in and doing it when Lenny had begun that conversation himself. And in a way more likely to get at the real issue. But I guess there was a scene that Smithfish didn't obnoxiously dominate, and we can't have that, now can we. We can't have that. They won't give it to us  .Smithfish seems unusually genuine with Lenny (I'm trying to be fair here, but nnrrrr) but it really can't compensate for what an rear end he is for the rest of the film. It really seems like it's more of a result of how the filmmakers wanted Lenny to be treated by any and all protagonists than how they wanted to characterize Smithfish specifically. Pick fucked around with this message at 19:19 on Apr 12, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
I like Antz. It's not super, but it's pretty good. Better than Bug's Life, which I also hate, but isn't technically awful. Delgo was a legendary bomb. I wanted it to succeed--=it had a great backstory in terms of development--but nooooooooooope!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2013 20:18
|
|
|
What's Wrong With Shark Tale part 3 I was sort of procrastinating on this, since it requires me to go back and get more screencaps. Bleh. In my mind, Shark Tale has two dominant design problems: 1. Inherently bad design of specific characters (not really settings... honestly the sets all look fine, or in the case of the sunken Titanic, pretty good.) 2. Inconsistency of design. The former is easier to point out than the latter, since the latter is only really hammered home if you watched the damned thing. Which I can't, in good conscience, recommend. Just try to keep this problem in mind as we explore that first problem. Many of Smithfish's problems are evident in this .gif. Actually, it sums up a lot of what's wrong with this character, period.  Da na na na can't touch this! But some static caps too!  He looks insanely weird when he's swimming like a, you know, fish. It sort of reminds me of the Dr. Killinger episode of Venture Brothers when Rusty is hallucinating his father's huge penis with Killinger's face on it. Oh, hey, thanks, internet! (Vaguely  ?)  *It's worth noting that he makes faces like this a lot, and they're not exactly endearing. But on a more technical standpoint, they distort badly. I could find better examples, but it's not really worth it to me. This was just from moving the little bar along the bottom of VLC media player I mean poo poo legal dvd program legal.  The slope of his face also makes just about every angle look awkward. This is probably why he seems to be at 3/4 at a flat angle as much as humanly possible. It took me a few minutes to find him in pure profile. His eyes are located oddly. I mean, trust me, pufferfish looks like hell too, but you can at least show him sideways without the audience feeling uncomfortable.   This is the worst incarnation of this incredibly cliche reveal shot I've ever seen in film.  ooohhh mr. darcy Anyway, these problems are also evident in Angie and Katie Current (who was actually voiced by Katie Couric), but not nearly to the same extent. So what the gently caress? Why are your similarly-structured peripheral characters so much more appealing than your main loving character?  They normally even have the good sense not to have Angie use her tailfin as legs. But even when they do, it looks better than on Smithfish! I don't understand it. Villains notoriously get cooler designs than heroes, since they can be further exaggerated in novel ways, but honestly it's baffling why two characters so similar can have such a quality gap. And in this direction!  One reason Kate and Angie look better is that their profile isn't nearly as alien and off-putting. Also, both of them are represented by one dominant color. This helps them stand out and appear discrete when in crowded scenes. Smithfish's blue and yellow pattern disrupts his silhouette far more, and looks terrible as lighting conditions vary. To further complicate this non-pattern of design quality, Lola looks like crap.   Still not as bad as Smithfish though.  However, the human-skin-color they used for her is creepy as hell, especially since it's found on no other fish. Other than that, her colorscheme is okay, and I like how they made her hair glitter. Ugh, I'm complimenting anything about her design. Meanwhile, pufferfish's biggest problem is that his design is just completely loving uninspired.  Only with a weird face that god drat reminds me of something, but I'm not sure what. If I can place it, I'll let you know. I don't like it though. Oh, and weird eyebrows that are too gray for his otherwise brown color palette.  His face distorts poorly too. But I swear to God, it's still better than Bee Movie. Oh, relatedly,  These two henchmen are the ones who try to have Smithfish killed. But latter they get to change alignments along with pufferfish with zero consequences at all. (They even get to hang out in Smithfish's penthouse and play video games?) They were voiced by Ziggy Marley (son of Bob Marley) and Doug E. Doug. Some people might see the presentation of these two characters as racist, and maybe it is, but I'm not going to discuss that because I'm white as hell so it doesn't really feel like my place. Like Will Smith and Oscar (which, as noted, is his real name), the design is strongly informed by the voice actors. Their heads move really well underwater. It's remarkable, considering that basic things like Lola's lips have huge, huge problems. Jelly underwater? No problem! a main character blinks? Disaster zone! Two characters in particular look loving awful, and they're the two superfluous joke characters. In both cases, their silhouettes, textures, styles, everything are jarringly awful. They don't look good, period, but more than that, they just do not stylistically belong in this film at all.   Ugh. Muddy, splotchy, creepy, and not streamlined whatsoever (which, all other faults aside, is something the creators remembered to keep consistent among the other characters). They clash with everything. And they're awful characters. They're an eyesore visually and a brainsore conceptually. So loving bad. Oh man, and yet somehow I hate the design of that loving shrimp even more!  loving christ. They were intentionally trying to push cutesy too far, but it's too loving far, knock it off!! Anyway, I'm going to talk about the shark designs in the "good things" section. Sure, they're not great designs, but they really shouldn't be in the same post as the travesty you have just witnessed. I also think I'm done with the "what's wrong" section, because mostly it's hammering home the same basic point: this movie sucks. And I want to make sure you know that--I mean really, really know that. ... So that when I move on to "what's right" (or "what could have been salvaged") you realize that I am not trying to excuse this film. But. Some very talented people were working on this film, and I want to acknowledge that I noticed. I'm sorry, whoever you are, that you got assigned this project. But thank you for trying. If you worked on the Titanic set, you did a good job, regardless of the quality of the film as a whole. You did good. You couldn't have saved this film, but you bore your torch bravely, and prevented this from being Bee Movie. I know it's cheap to keep referring back to Bee Movie. It's basically my Godwin's Law of film by now. Except Hitler had the decency to be right about smoking.
Pick fucked around with this message at 03:26 on Apr 13, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2013 02:42
|
|
|
Ineffiable posted:Anxiously awaiting a report on the Bee Movie commentary and see if it reveals any suspicions we had about the production. I genuinely don't know if I can survive that sober. I might just do a commentary track of the commentary track, drunkenly weeping "gently caress you" over and over. Yonic Symbolism posted:Maybe a review of Delgo or Foodfight could be next for the QDZ (Quality Dead Zone). After all, it seems difficult to believe at this point that a movie could be less intelligent, more poorly thought out, and altogether terrible than Bee Movie but those two movies hold the title. Delgo is tempting (in part because I feel sorry for it), but Foodfight is just too awful. To tell you the truth, I wouldn't have watched Bee Movie if I'd known how bad it was either. Some Guy TT posted:I could get behind a Pick's Animated Narrative Analysis thread. Part of what I like about the writing style is that she presents a lot of information objectively so it's easy to form opinions without assuming an agenda behind her motivation. That's the main problem I have with most lovely movie bashfests. I was doing an in-depth review of Brave Little Toaster before the animation thread pissed me off. I might re-do it, since that's my favorite film and it's absolutely begging for this kind of analysis. It's an unbelievably dense story. Rango is also a strong contender. They also benefit from me putting them on in the background dozens of times as I've painted or cleaned house, so I feel I have an unusually deep familiarity with both. As my ParaNorman thread indicated, I love, love, love ParaNorman, but it's not perfect. But I think I'd need to stew a little more before I wrote a review of it. But as one example, I think Norman's dad is visually overexaggerated in a film that is almost artistically unassailable. I have some concerns about the two police officers as well. What's weirdest to me about them, though, is that they are almost exactly like the two cops in Gravity Falls, but those two products are contemporaries and there's no reason to assume either one "stole" from the other (though for the record, Gravity Falls is newer). Super weird. ...of SCIENCE! posted:Honestly, I'd rather read earnest reviews by Pick, positive or negative, than become yet another lovely movie circlejerk like every other internet reviewer out there that covers this kind of material. Having an extensive knowledge and passion for animation and zoology is plenty. I'm actually really glad to hear this, since I felt... almost guilty after writing the Bee Movie review. I have a deep respect for animation and those who produce it, so to just... hate something they've made without reservation felt very out-of-character for me. For god's sakes, I have Quest for Camelot on DVD. But I just couldn't find anything to like about it. Pick fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Apr 13, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2013 03:23
|
|
|
Macaluso posted:Wait what happened in the animation thread? I remember a really long look at Brave Little Toaster and how utterly loving depressing it is if you really pay attention, but I thought that went through the whole movie. Was that someone else? That was me, but I quit in a huff partway through. e: Oh, apparently not in a huff, the huff was something else. I don't know why I quit the BLT one actually. Pick fucked around with this message at 03:46 on Apr 13, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2013 03:40
|
|
|
Oh woah I totally forgot this huge problem!! (Part 5?) I can't believe I almost forgot to mention something hugely and obviously wrong with this movie! The whole "vegetarian" thing. This is particularly conspicuous in the context of Madagascar, which was released a year later (2005). ... And really, the whole food chain thing as it relates to fish society. Now, who here remembers Madagascar? Most people look back on it fondly, even as a turnaround for Dreamworks, but I am not a particular fan. One reason I don't particularly enjoy Madagascar is the Alex plotline. In sum, he's a zoo lion who has been fed steaks all his life. Once he gets out to the wild, he realizes that he needs to eat meat, and meat is actually... other animals! There's an angsty sequence where he realizes it isn't safe for him to be around his old friends any more. He needs to eat, is obsessed with it really, and in the wild, it means that you must kill. Woah. Woah that's harsh. How do you resolve something like that? Lions need to eat meat, end of story. Lion King remembered to... steal the solution of insectivory from Kimba... temporarily... anyway. And Madagascar continued that noble tradition and had Alex realize he can eat fish! This is lazy as gently caress, in my mind. The conflict is interesting: Alex has a need inherently in mortal contradiction with that of his lifelong friends. Must they part? Is it worth it to stay together knowing one may put the rest in danger? And how do you, a zebra, handle this revelation? A terrible reality has been unmasked. But don't loving worry, he'll eat fish. You always have to be careful with anything that can be read as an orientation/race/religion/whatever analogue. Having Alex shuns what he needs and naturally should partake in (you know, as a lion who was born a lion and wants to be a lion) in lieu of some bullshit substitute he's never formerly wanted.... I don't know. It feels off. The suggestion, to me, is that if your natural desires make other people uncomfortable, instead of assert your fundamental needs, you should make weird sacrifices to facilitate them. I mean, maybe if Alex were a pedo this would make sense, but that's not really the vibe you get from the film. And if it's more a homosexuality/race/religion/whatever analogue, what the gently caress is the movie telling us here? So in Shark Tale, Lenny is a vegetarian, which is pretty strongly implied to be  . This already seems like a bad move. Vegetarianism is a popular whipping boy on the internet OF BACON, HAHA. BACON. but there's nothing wrong with people choosing to avoid meat. (And some religions, such as Jainism, require it.) And it is almost always a choice. So conflating these two seems to invite a few translation problems. ... But more than that, Smithfish says that more sharks (all sharks!) should be like him. Isn't it as wrong to force that on other sharks as for other sharks to force it on him? I mean, if it's not a choice, which they're suggesting it's not? (Since Lenny barfs if he tastes meat.) And if we're using this as an analogue for homosexuality, is he saying all sharks should be gay? This isn't reaaaaally what the gay rights movement is about. Well, okay, other fish are sentient. So that's a complication. We'll ignore that Smithfish is, as far as I can tell, a bluestreak wrasse (Labroides dimidiatus) which eat parasites, which are still, you know, living things and technically made of flesh. But does "eat kelp!!" actually resolve anything in a satisfactory way? This issue of who can eat what, shark-...wise... gets brought up in Finding Nemo, and I have the same problems with it there as here. Sharks are supposed to goddamn eat meat. That's their role. Anthropomorphizing animals this way is, in my view, morally wrong. It tends to make people have negative views of creatures just doing their goddamn jobs. Sharks are in the middle of a global extinction crisis due to wasteful overfishing. They don't need your judgmental bullshit. It's not evil for animals to do what they do. And if you don't want me to get annoyed at that, don't make it a central point in your movie! By the way, none of the other sharks go vegetarian as far as I can tell, so I guess they still get to eat people at least ^  ^.Or what if they can't?! What if they have to rely on eating humans now?! ... That would have been a great ending  .
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2013 04:36
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:I've never seen Shark Tale. All I remember about it from the media was gay sharks, bad reviews, and why did it get an Academy Award nomination no one seems to know. Obviously, I wasn't expecting it to be a great movie- but your write-up genuinely surprised me in how badly this metaphor was fumbled. I've tried to write in this thread before about how the movie's "progressive" message is wrecked, but I gave up because I couldn't figure out how to make the analogy work. If Smithfish is self-serving for befriending a shark that doesn't want to eat him, what possible counterpart could that have with an actual gay person? Who's existentially threatened by heterosexual sex? It's like this completely insane riddle. If you watch the film, I think you'd see it more, and in fact I've considered making a "shark scenes only" video because the sharks, including Lenny, feature in maybe 1/3 of the film. Smithfish vastly dominates the runtime. I think part of it is Jack Black's delivery, which had to be intentional. I mean, if you told me that Kung Fu Panda and Shark Tale shared a voice actor for their titular animals I'd be all, "whaaaaat?" No matter what you might think of Jack Black as an actor, I think he's a very convincing voice actor. I usually ignore Cracked, but for some reason, I read an article they posted about comedy performance in film, and it included this line: "Some of the jokes [Leslie Nielsen] saves in The Naked Gun movies should be verified by the Catholic church as miracles." That stuck with me, because I tend to remember dramatic and comedic lines like this--Star Wars is full of them, for example. A few lines in Shark Tale definitely qualify as well (and to some extent KFP. I always laugh at the "can't even beat you to the stairs" line, even though on paper it's not really that funny). But Lenny wiggles suggestively in his chair, has to be "pushed off" by male characters for being too touchy-feely, does the whole hands-to-face thing (well, fins-to-face). Again, not really great or sensitive indicators of femininity/alternative sexuality, but ones that people are conditioned to identify. He also reveals to Smithfish that he's a vegetarian while on a bed, which I think visually suggests that what he's discussing is relevant to him being in a bed. But maybe I'm crazy; this film is only sporadically competent. Piecing out who was actually doing their job well and when is incredibly difficult on massive team projects. Also, I think I may be a little too hard on exactly how well a metaphor has to work. I mean, at the end of the day, the only perfect metaphor is an identical repeat. I guess I see view it with this distinction: a metaphor might not have to work on all levels, but it can't not work on too many levels. Shark vegetarianism might have worked as a stand-in for being gay if the writers had sufficient finesse. They didn't. quote:Thinking more positively, I can think of one animated movie that deals with the predator-prey problem surprisingly well, in a way that really forces the viewer to rethink a lot of what had happened up until that point. I'm referring to the Korean animated film Leafie: A Hen Into The Wild (referenced earlier in this thread), which I can't describe in more detail without completely ruining the storyline development. I will state, though, that it's a very good case for why anthropomorphized animals really kind of stink compared to the kinds of storylines you can build with realistic animals instead.  Fatkraken posted:I would love to see more of your brave little toaster analysis, I really enjoyed it in the old animation thread. I basically agree with all of this. It's an incredibly thorny problem. But your last paragraph hits home as to why the presentation here was so broken. We never find out if other sharks can be vegetarian, by the way. So we don't know if that could have been a resolution. Thanks, movie clarity! Pick fucked around with this message at 17:59 on Apr 13, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
Oh my god! I think that's it! Pilot! 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2013 21:24
|
|
|
Thank y'all for your patience, while you wait, please try to absorb this: Biggg enough for a desktoooop! Pick fucked around with this message at 22:40 on Apr 16, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2013 20:55
|
|
|
What I Like About Shark Tale All laughs aside, this is going to be a long section and (again) multiple posts. I'm going to begin possibly where I did last time, although frankly I don't wholly remember. This section will also introduce some of my unpopular broader opinions about contemporary animated films. Okay, so let's begin with... story. No, I don't mean to imply that Shark Tale has a good story, only that it has a story with a few good aspects. This differentiation is essential. For one thing, the hokey "message of acceptance" moral is one I like. This was released in 2004, and therefore making a gay shark movie was riskier than it would be today. I do think the gay shark message was intentional, and even if that wasn't what they were necessarily going for, they can't possibly have believed the character would be read any other way. Among other things, I can't imagine how they could have instructed Jack Black to voice Lenny in such a way without the phrase "A little bit more, you know... y'know. ."And in case you're worried I'm making poo poo up, here are some quotes from ChristianAnswers.net: quote:Negative—Warning!! Be aware is what I would say to parents taking children to this movie. While it teaches some good concepts to hook the audience into thinking it’s A-okay,the bottom line is that the homosexual movement got more than their share of the clams in this film. Lenny is more than just a vegetarian who dresses different. The shove towards acceptance of homosexual lifestyles is subtle and one most kids may not pick up on, but the seeds will be planted in their innocent minds. And Lola is just another spin on sex that is not the way God intended. This is in no way a 3-star movie. I give it a 1½ at the most. And I won’t be taking my grandchildren to see it. quote:Negative—If you are truly seeking after God’s truths, you WON’T want to take you children to this movie. I regret having gone to the movie both because of the style of music (I’ve never gotten on board with the whole rap scene), and with the offensive portrayal of Lenny as a “vegetarian” shark (secret word for “homosexual” shark). The movie even has a “vegetarian” coming out scene. I was nonetheless excited about the story being wrapped around the mafia or the introduction of gambling. quote:Negative—Yep, I see this film as extremely well done, and yet I rate it extremely offensive. This is not a film for Christian families, period! Christians are being duped by the daily thought process of the world today…”it’s not hurting anybody so it’s okay”! Oh help us Lord Jesus to consider our instructions from the manual that YOU have provided on life…”be holy, set apart for His good works.” No sir, we want to be entertained regardless of the subtleties involved for after all, “that is not how I am living, and I would not condone the lifestyle of a homosexual.” Do not kid yourself, the planted seeds of “accept them for what they are” will be hard for your children to reject and frankly they won’t even know why except that we have allowed them to swallow junk like this film… hook, line and sinker. And the sinking is what will take this nation of ours down, right along with this generation! Sheeple! Wake up and take a stand for what is right! He said it, He mean’t it and there will be a price to pay for our foolishness! No wonder the phrase still fits today…”the harvest is plentiful but the workers are few.” We are too busy entertaining ourselves with whatever comes down the pike rather than to get out and get in the trenches and do the Lord’s work. Lord help us; give us wisdom and discernment. He said He would if we would just ask! After all, He gave us His life, we owe Him ours! All rated "Very Offensive". My offenses are tingling! They go on and on and on. Bah, who would give Shark Tale this degree of thought and attention? Only some kind of loony. Anyway, onto more analysis!!! At its core, this is a good message and one that I like. All the protagonists treat Lenny nicely (even Smithfish, who is using Lenny, is conspicuously nice to him compared to how he treats other characters). Lenny's brother isn't built up as a particularly nice shark (although we don't see him much and he's never particularly "mean" either), but he's still helpful to Lenny and basically supportive--just suggesting that Lenny do the minimum to make their dad happy. The only character who suggests anything negative about Lenny is pufferfish in his early-film incarnation, and he's severely punished for it by Don Lino. Who yeah, in turn, has to "accept" Lenny even when--ahh, we've gone over this. Anyone who gives Lenny poo poo is wrong, and those who are kind to him are right. Good. Lenny, as a character, might be a little "too" perfect in terms of not having any lovely traits that might "humanize" him (you know what I mean), as they were trying to do with Smithfish. However, he's pretty fey and cutesy and I think making him too lovey-cuddly was probably the right direction to veer in; the alternative would be disastrous, as proven by Smithfish problems. If you're worried about your audience disliking a character that the plot really requires you to favor.... Well. Better to have a Disney princess gay shark than that kid I want to smack around on Glee. At the end of the day, it's a solid, progressive message wrapped up in an awful film. It's right that people accept Lenny the way he is, and yeah, that includes his father, who is cast as a traditionalist. (Which actually works with the mafia iconography, I should add.) I also really appreciate that no one died during the end sequence, especially Don Lino, and not just because he's cool compared to the rest of the loving dorks in the movie. Really, the entire action sequence at the end only leads us to the climax, it doesn't supplant a climax. And I truly, deeply appreciate that. Here's one thing the movie did absolutely correct: the climax is the right climax. Here's where I am going to type some contentious words: I tend to get pissed at Pixar movies loving this up. I think WALL-e is my go-to example of a film that didn't need some dumb loving fight at the end distracting us from what the movie was supposed to be about. Auto added nothing, and in fact was a distraction to what the movie was trying to do, plus it made the creators of the ship more "stupid evil" than just greedy and shortsighted. Monsters, Inc. has a similar problem--why did Waternoose have to be evil? What did that add to the movie? What was wrong with it ending on what I thought was the actual point of the film--that laughter is a greater power than fear? I don't think either of those is a bad film, in fact they're very good films, but I think both endings were tailored to be "crowd pleasers" with no faith that crowds can like peaceful solutions. And they end up giving people the wrong take-home message from the movie ("hit evil in the face") as opposed to the more nuanced suggestions which I guarantee you are something children can digest and appreciate. This was something that bugged me about Toy Story 3, too: you have this great, great conflict (moving on and obsolescence and what-have-you) and instead of explore that space in the time allotted, there's an evil bear, and then the conflict is forced to frenetically resolve itself in a way that didn't require said bear in the first place. I mean, yes, sure, in Shark Tale, Don Lino shouts "You! I'm gonna get you!" and swims after Smithfish into a... well, carwash, but considering how he's cast the entire rest of the film, the chase scene is more like an angry dad chasing his daughter's girlfriend across the lawn. It lacks the oomph of a bear fight or straight-up murdering a mentally ill old man on foreign soil. And I don't get the impression it's supposed to make a particular impression based on what came after. But it's hard to tell because a lot of people working on Shark Tale had communication problems. Maybe this isn't making too much sense. I guess I'm just sick of violence and villains getting shoehorned in where it doesn't feel necessary. Shark Tale didn't need a shark Hitler and didn't get one: it had a dad who doesn't understand his son and an ambitious female fish who wants a mate appropriate to her status. Neither gets killed or... even injured, actually. The former ends the film in a better position than before (sans one son who was killed in a random way that nothing could have actively facilitated or prevented) and the latter ends the film exactly where she was before. Even pufferfish is doing better, as are his henchman, even though honestly, who lets a henchman-owner get away with trying to murder a dude? Shark Tale! But, god dammit, what's wrong with that? I mean, not attempted murder, but what's wrong with things working out without someone getting shanked? Which is a word that hilariously looks a lot like "sharked"? The violence in Shark Tale, what little there is, has nothing to do with how the issues are resolved. The issues get resolved because what needed to happen, happens. Don Lino talks things out with his son and Smithfish realizes that he had what he needed to be happy (like his late dad) and admits he was wrongly sacrificing his integrity and losing what he valued. The chase scene (where nobody gets hurt) only facilitates these discussions, it does not produce a solution in and of itself, and it isn't spuriously presented as one. If you're not following, I present these two outcomes: 1. Don Lino chases Smithfish into the carwash and gets stuck and has to talk to his son face-to-face 2. Don Lino chases Smithfish into the carwash and is torn apart by gears and killed In the former, the chase was only important in that it led us to a situation where the emotional conflict had to be addressed. The latter doesn't actually resolve the conflict, it invalidates the conflict. Of course, I'm also one of those people who has very stringent tastes on violence in media. People tend to assume that an aversion comes from lack of experience, but I can assure you it can derive from experience as well. One of the reasons I enjoy and tend to prefer family-friendly media is because I can get a good story and not watch a guy get stabbed in the eyeball with a screwdriver. I don't want to watch a film that will ruin my day. [To be continued...] Pick fucked around with this message at 07:03 on Apr 17, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2013 02:30
|
|
|
By the way, I had Shark Tale on in the background as I was working on something else, and I suddenly realized who this is: She's only visible for a few seconds in the entire film, but this is Lenny and Frankie's mother (who is briefly mentioned during the very introduction of the film). Where she is this whole drat time (other than at the funeral), I don't know, but here's Don Lino comforting his wife while this son's corpse floats to the surface of the ocean. I had a bug up my rear end about how they mishandled the villain of the film, making him genuinely more justified in his actions than the main protagonist (contrasted against something like Disney's Hercules, where Hades is by far the best and most interesting character--more than Hercules by a landslide--but no, you don't actually want him to win. A villain done well). However, I'm thinking I have to revise my appraisal, because he just doesn't fit that category. I'm trying to re-think that movie in this framework. It'll come up later when I focus on Don Lino and his role in the film. Some Guy TT posted:From an extremely unforgiving perspective, it's difficult to justify the roles these characters play. I think to a certain extent we do forgive these flaws- but I don't think it's because of a Pixar bias so much as a bias of narrative expectations that we all share. Which doesn't just make us rationalize all of Pixar as good, but even all of Shark Tale as bad. quote:Take all this together, and we have Don Lino, who is only a villain because we believe he's the villain, because we're just so used to seeing clearly telegraphed villains. The prospect of a shark-only cut of Shark Tale intrigues me more all the time. I can't help but wonder if, were we to cut out fish and possibly their sentience from the movie altogether, we'd be left with a story about a shark family trying to do what's best for each other. It wouldn't be easily marketable, but I'd watch it. I try to be fair to these broad-appeal films and think about what the average movie-goer wants. I don't believe it's wrong to tailor a product to an audience. It's one reason I don't dismiss Cars, as some folk do, although I have no interest in it personally. That said, I think audiences are more amenable to genuine originality than some people in these studios apparently think. I believe Kid's Fruity Shark Godfather could have been a great and popular film in the right hands. I really appreciate your comments; they're extremely well-reasoned and have helped me a lot in the development of my review  .
Pick fucked around with this message at 07:48 on Apr 17, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2013 07:32
|
|
|
Arts, Smarts, and Darts: three words that rhyme, one of which connects to what I'm talking about Talented artists were here. Okay, so I'm going to try to wrap this up in two more posts, both of which are about the sharks, because they're basically the only thing in the film that I liked (and even that "like" is qualified).  A rare piece of production artwork by Christophe Vacher. First I'm going to talk about them artistically. I think that the entire mafia looks pretty good, honestly (other than stupid joke octopus). Here's a shot of a bunch of background sharks.  I also love, love, love the composition of this shot. Who did this? Where were you the rest of the movie? Anyway.  A collection of various species involved. The marlins are difficult to see from here, but they look fine.  You can see different nose lengths, and there are some other shark species in here. Also, note that inspired little dash of gray on the chest near the collar, which does in fact suggest a collar and the associated suit. I'm actually extremely impressed by this little detail and think it is 100% effective and amazing, design-wise.  Here's Ira Feinberg, voiced by Peter Falk (aka Columbo). He's an spotty old leopard shark who is missing some teeth. He has a somewhat muddy texture, but generally he looks pretty good. You can get the impression of a small, wild-haired old man who is perhaps less wise than crafty. It works. I found a semi-dignified screenshot, i.e. a time when he is not farting. Ira in particular does not suffer the main design flaw of the great white sharks: a weird chin. This is probably because Ira is always in the 'upright' stance, whereas the great white sharks (Lenny, Don Lino, Frankie, and background sharks) vary between the upright stance and the traditional 'fish' stance, which I admit would be extremely difficult to work around effectively. Anyway, the questionable shark chins help with the upright-to-fish transition, since they allow the face and head to remain essentially static while the body shifts.   Here's Frankie. He has a rounder jaw than his father, suggesting heft. He is also generally more convex-curvy than Don Lino (who is more angular) or Lenny (who is noticeably thinner). His nose is also more distinctly set off, which I don't think looks particularly good, but is distinct. You can compare it to Lenny's and Don Lino's uninterrupted noses (interestingly, Don Lino has a build more like Frankie, but most of the details are shared with Lenny). His neck is also thick, so he always looks 'sharkier', even when he's in upright stance. So some thought went into this; despite having limited screentime, he does have a genuinely characteristic appearance. Also, notice the area around his eyes is darker than Lenny's or Don Lino's, so he automatically looks more sunken-eyed and churlish. He also has a black liner to his eyes that the other two don't, and a notch in his dorsal fin. Since he's the character who has to die for the plot to work, it's proper that the design trigger less sympathy. Pure front is by far the worst angle on the shark designs, so luckily they use it very sparingly. And Lenny looks the worst from the front for reasons I'll touch on if I feel so inclined (it depends on if I can find a good screencap to explain it).  This gives you some representative shots of Lenny, plus shows the upright-sharky transition. See? It works better than it should. He also gets a lot of exaggerated brow movements, like Smithfish does, but they never seem unnatural. It's often quick and cartoonish, but so is the aesthetic of the film. Lenny's also pretty expressive, and it never--literally never--looks as bad as Smithfish looks every single second of the god damned day. They also did a good job making sure his little bottom fins never look like stupid little legs. You can also see how the dumb shark chin works a lot better in 3/4 view than it does from the front. Oh, another reason they had to have fairly large chins on the great whites is that all three of them, at some point or another, open their mouths incredibly wide. This looks creepy as hell on real sharks, so again, I understand the chins even though I wouldn't have necessarily gone that route myself.  The teeth don't look great, and there are no multiple rows, but despite them being sharks, we don't tend to see much enamel. And it would have overcomplicated their otherwise sleek designs, especially during moments like this:  He has tired-looking eyes. I think that's a solid route for a character who is supposed to be emotionally languishing. His irises are green, by the way, whereas Don Lino's are light gray. Frankie's are too dark for me to make out; I think they're dark gray. (The lighting in the shack is really good, by the way. Some good folks on lighting during a lot of the film.) I don't think Lenny's design works as well as Frankie or Don Lino's, but for a cartoon shark, I kind of like it. I personally prefer it to the Finding Nemo sharks:  ... but they weren't trying to accomplish the same thing, so I'm not going to tout out "better" or "worse" here. So I do like the Shark Tale sharks, generally speaking, with only a few adjustments I'd personally have preferred. Lenny and Frankie look fine. Although I think Don Lino looks fuckin' bitching, so let's talk about that.  Awww yeah, he even looks good from the front!  He's quite sharky from some angles--his best angles, really.  Unlike Lenny and Frankie, who have a lower, rounder belly, Don Lino is topheavy. Even compared to the other sharks, he looks powerful. The neck forms a smooth slope with the back, and the flatter stomach leading up to a 'point' near the tip of the sternum, which is something we recognize and associate with strength and authority (even though champion heavyweight lifters look more like Frankie there). This is a tried-and-true design feature that can be witnessed elsewhere.  Here, he's sitting (as in the previous screencap), but his slumped posture costs him almost everything his structure normally lends. Though his shoulders are comparatively strong--in that he has them, and other characters don't--they were still able to exaggerate its downward slope when it would make him appear more sorrowful. Seriously, compare and contrast the two previous images. Night and day! ... And yet, just moments later, informed of the identity of his son's killer--  It's back! Oh my god, competence is like magic!  "I'm the Don--the boss of the great white sharks." Strength.  "You took Frankie away!" Weakness. A design that facilitates both, and the movement between both, is a design well-crafted.  Shark hugs! In sum, I think Don Lino's design is authentically good. The rest of them in this section are passable, but this one clicked for me. It was made well and it's used well. He looks old but powerful, alternately menacing and compassionate. If you wanted a cannibalistic shark mafia boss who could visually register as a villain or a loving father, this was a damned good effort. I mean, the movie doesn't really legitimize him as an "enemy", but that's the script's fault, not that of the artists. Every once in a while what could have been a much better movie shines through, and yeah, it's usually here. Or maybe I'm a sucker for this kind of thing, which is also a reasonable statement! [Okay, discussion of the character will take another post. But that's it.] Pick fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Apr 17, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2013 22:27
|
|
|
Oh poo poo, I have no idea, I just grabbed what showed up on Google Images, since I don't have a copy of the movie. Everything else was, like, a poster and I was lazy. Where is it from, then?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
This is the shark, right? That's what I remember it looking like?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2013 01:34
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I thought that shot was from the end of the movie. Is it from the trailer for Finding Nemo 3d? I remember sharks showing up in that. As I said, both have different designs because they serve different purposes, I just don't particularly like the combination of realistic shark + weird human smile on the Finding Nemo ones. It weird me out. The Shark Tale ones are pretty cartoonish from the get-go so it doesn't register as much. (Their chins really bother me, though. So close!! So close!!!) You can see that even Finding Nemo had to chin the sharks a little bit, though. I think it's just a human mouth thing. Pick fucked around with this message at 02:18 on Apr 18, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2013 02:01
|
|
|
Macaluso posted:For the record, I prefer the way the Finding Nemo sharks look, but I think Don Lino looks very good and so does Frankie. I think it's really, really funny--but like, "What are you doing?!" funny--that again, the worst-looking character in a class is the primary one. Smithfish is the worst-looking of the fish, and Lenny is the worst-looking of the sharks. Why the hell!? Why would that happen?! Why do nameless background sharks literally look better? TTBF posted:Did that studio that does the low budget rip-offs of Pixar movies have a Finding Nemo rip-off? Welcome to  Wikipedia posted:However, Troy (Donal Logue), the meanest, toughest shark in the ocean, is not only terrorizing everyone in the reef community, but also has his eye set on Cordelia to become his mate. Pi also learns about Nerissa (Rob Schneider), a wise old hermit turtle who lives in the Old Ship Wreck and practices martial arts, leading to rumours that he is a wizard. 
Pick fucked around with this message at 02:17 on Apr 18, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2013 02:09
|
|
|
Shindragon posted:I swear I know it has been probably been brought up but Rob Schneider is in everything isn't he? Sheesh. (e: Oh, Toys! I could review Toys! It's not an animated film though.) I was writing that BLT review in a weird place and I don't know if I'm presently in the right frame of mind to continue it. quote:And these two movies did turn me off from Dreamworks for a while because all I think was god same ol poo poo with this drat company. Luckily movies like How to Train your Dragon and Kung Fu Panda changed my perception on them. I saw it in theaters six times. Some Guy TT posted:Probably because they're nameless. I'm willing to bet the producers insisted that the main characters had to meet a certain threshold of "looks like Will Smith/Jack Black/Angelina Jolie", and this really ended up tying the designers' hands- especially in terms of the fish, since they have so little body and so much face to begin with. I don't know how it applies for Lenny though, who doesn't seem to share any similarities with Jack Black (including the voice. It'd never have guessed if it weren't listed). quote:By contrast, with characters like Colombo shark or De Niro shark, where no one actually cares whether they resemble the actors who are playing them and there's plenty of surface area, creative character design can flourish. In fact, in those cases seemingly pointless celebrity casting might actually be a boon. Neither of them resemble their actors, but they do resemble the character archetypes those actors are famous for playing. I'd definitely be willing to bet that cast and concept were designed before the actual animation storyboarding. One of the few awards Shark Tale won was for casting (Casting Society of America's award for best casting in an animated film). People talking about how insane it is that it got a Best Animated Feature nomination, but it's not that strange. That year was very weak and the award just had to get stocked with something. Meanwhile, in a stronger year, Tangled didn't even get a nomination, which I consider one of the world's most egregious movie crimes. And yeah, that's definitely the route the film took. But hey, De Niro is great in it, so I really can't fault him for his part. In fact, all the mafia voices were really well-chosen, they just have to say really stupid lines sometimes. Even Stupid Joke Octopus is voiced by Vincent Pastore, aka "Big Pussy" from the Sopranos. It's right for the part, the part just shouldn't be there! Pick fucked around with this message at 03:40 on Apr 18, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2013 03:21
|
|
|
well why not posted:Prepare to have your ears assaulted by Christina Aguilera's jellyfish avatar. I literally couldn't get through the end. It's unbearable. I should have mentioned this, instead of summing with "daaaance paaaaarty", but yeah, jesus effing christ it's not just a dance party, it's like the worst dance party. (Make no mistake, and I cannot reiterate this enough, this movie is really bad.)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2013 14:27
|
|
|
Krapintosh posted:So...I have a friend who handled the script for Bee Movie, through all its 120+ versions. This person basically said that every single day for almost 3 years was spent writing and rewriting and rewriting, based on Seinfeld's whims. He treated it like it was a comedy routine that had to constantly change, which of course is ridiculous to do on a movie that's still in production. The number of friends, and consultants, and script doctors that were commissioned was pretty insane. The artists were very frustrated, and there were many behind the scenes meetings where they urged the producers and directors to come up with a more cohesive story. FYI - Ray Liotta's Private Select was originally supposed to be Brian Dennehy, and there was a sorta funny scene of Dennehy watching and rewatching his scenes from Cocoon and saying, "drat, I nailed that scene." I'll buy your friend an account if he'll come in here and tell us some of his experiences. Really. I would absolutely love to hear it, and I promise him no grief for his part in these films. (At least, not from me.) The unique history of films-gone-wrong is always fascinating, and I'd love to know which of my suspicions were correct and which weren't. I mean, based just on what you've written here, these two films went wrong in very different ways, much as I believed. That also piques my interest tremendously. One was the result of one crazy rear end in a top hat careening a broken concept into the Madness Zone, the other is the result of a bunch of boring assholes who are afraid of risk trying to conjure up something marketable and failing completely.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2013 23:54
|
|
|
Well, I was hoping this thread to get to 14 pages before I wrote this, since I'm triskaidekaphobic, but I'll deal. What Shark Tale did The entire review, I've come down solidly on the side of Don Lino. Whether this is because he's a good character or because I Stockholm syndrome'd myself into liking something about this film is difficult to say. I will note that I tend to like poor films better than most people, and dislike great films more than most people. These categories rarely cross; it's more like a tendency to veer towards a middling opinion. If I had to guess why, it's probably because I like being right when I think everyone else is wrong, because it gives me that smug high characteristically enjoyed by middle-schoolers. But I don't want to be "Shark Tale is a good movie"-level wrong, because even I can't delude myself that far. Or maybe I'm being too hard on myself. Maybe I'm someone who likes to see the good in everything, but nevertheless believes that everything can be improved. It's hard to say. In a way, I am glad I can look at Shark Tale and see some beauty in it, and I'm glad I don't clap my hands like seal flippers just because a movie failed to insult my intelligence. Believe what you will, as I don't know myself. But anyway, Don Lino, the maybe-adequate thing about this film!  Disclaimer: I'm a huge sucker for these kinds of characters. What kind of characters, you say? Afflicted parents. Especially dads.   This is the king from Tangled. If you haven't seen Tangled, what the gently caress is wrong with you!? Go do it right now! God! What? God! Go watch it, idiot! Jesus christ! It would have been my choice for Best Animated Feature just about any year. It wasn't nominated because the world is a bad place, and the Best Animated Feature category is historically bullshit as gently caress. I rarely agree with the selection, ever. But at least Rango won in 2011, so there's some justice in the world, however meager. Okay. The King in Tangled is suffering, genuinely suffering, since the abduction of his daughter. The scene where he's about to commemorate her birthday (despite not knowing whether she's even alive) gets literal tears from me every time. He misses his daughter! He loves her!  Now, Don Lino doesn't get that kind of reaction. I didn't cry at Shark Tale. I did want to kill myself sometimes but that's different. However, the same principles are at work. You have a parent that loves his children, and basically only exists in the film in the context of caring about and his children and grieving their misfortunes. I think the power of this kind of character depends on the person, but for me, it's super effective. I just feel bad for this guy, you know? Right on the eve of turning his empire over to his sons, one of them is apparently murdered, and the other is missing. He mourns some of the things he said to Lenny while he receives condolences at Frankie's funeral. He feels he's lost both of his sons, and that it's his fault, even though everything he did was for them. That's a good character conflict: it resonates and feels real. (Unlike everything else in the film.) It makes me think about my father, and how he'd feel if he were in that kind of situation. At the end, he's further pained when he realizes how much he's been hurting his son, something he clearly never intended (though he begins this realization on his own terms at the funeral). Oh, and he's shamed for being an unloving, callous father at the same time, in public, on film. (This movie.)  He also puts up with lovely jokes, and in a way that makes it appear that he knows how lovely and miserable they are. This is hard to explain, but in a way, the other characters feel like they exist in this superficial, bad-joke-riddled, garish, asinine universe and they belong there. Sure, Smithfish breaks into "Can't touch this" at the drop of a hat, but to most of the other characters, that just doesn't seem like a weird thing to do. They exist in this horrible, maddening, hellscape where that's a thing people do. But Don Lino's reactions to these jokes make it appear that he's somehow self-aware of how miserable these dumb loving jokes are. And that is also really really really really REALLY SAD.  I mean, I just feel sorry for him. I feel sorry for him the whole goddamn film! Is that why I can't hate him? Is it because I feel so loving bad for him?  "I'm in this movie!" (Note: the tea is a visual joke where it just diffuses off and doesn't pour. It's slightly funny.) I guess it helps that his two children are, like, the next-best characters in the film. Again, that's not saying much, but... Frankie is one-dimensional, but fine (I mean, he doesn't have much time to be more) and Lenny is... ehh, I feel too sorry for him to hate him particularly, either. And I get his angle. He'd frightened, he's doubtful, he's unsure, he's intimidated. He wants to get away because he doesn't feel strong enough for his surroundings.  When you see this, your brain screams "Noooo, make this movie stop!" but since you're having that the entire time, the secondary thought, "I hope these he and his son work things out" actually has some leverage on your beep boop emotions. But of course Smithfish is there. ugh why I guess it's worth pointing out that, like Frankie, Don Lino doesn't actually have much screentime. It's just that, Lector-like, he's memorable. Or at least more memorable than the rest of the tripe we're inundated with here. Oh poo poo, speakin' of, he has the automatic bonus of being the enemy of the characters we despise.  He hates Smithfish! He threatens pufferfish! Hell, he's apparently threatening the whole loving reef, which in a sense is this entire film! Thank christ!  ... But even this he is denied. Our tragic hero. He also gets most of the cool scenes.  There, like that. Prrreeetty cool! And he features in the more dilapidated settings, which oddly are the ones that seem like they got vastly more attention from the filmmakers. The irony runs deep here. I feel like I've said most of what there is to be said about this character earlier. And poo poo, I've screencapped like... every scene he's in at least five times or something. In sum, I like this character because he feels genuine, or at least compared to his surroundings. He's a caring father who has made some mistakes, he's made to suffer for them, but in the end his love is rewarded with an improved relationship with his son. Aww. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
Tartarus Sauce posted:Aside from the fish designs being flat-out ugly (and thanks to Pick for detailing HOW and WHY they are ugly), I've always found Shark Tale cringeworthy and intolerable because it's awkward, totally-unsubtle, shoehorned-in racial humor. Oh god yes, the racial humor is abominable. And it reaches a peak at the very end of the film, leaving a horrible film in your mouth afterwards. (e:... the other kind of film. ... whatever.)  GOD DAMMIT SCORSESE, YOU'RE ONE OF THE FINEST LIVING FILMMAKERS, WHAT THE gently caress IS WRONG WITH YOU!?! YOU DIRECTED "GOODFELLAS"!! I didn't cap most of these scenes in part because I don't even like having these images existing on my computer. Having existed on my computer. Pick fucked around with this message at 04:44 on Apr 20, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2013 03:16
|
|
|
~SHARK TALE LEGACY~ To start, a tale from these very forums! Robert Denby posted:Story time… Beautiful. Now let me tell y'all mine. Do you have one of those friends that you can talk to about anything? About the wildest, weirdest bullshit on the planet? If not, you should acquire one. They add a magic that everyday living can't provide. Our world was meant to be explored, discussed, and occasionally loving condemned. Anyway, one day I was chatting with such a friend, and more particularly, a friend familiar with webcomics. I mean, it stands to reason that we would be, since we both make comics as a hobby--and this thread is well aware . On this particular day, I had been surfing the "Most Popular" section of SmackJeeves, a free webcomic hosting site. You know, keeping tabs of what's currently resonating with readers. Just good sense--and often a good laugh. What, pray tell, do I find?"SharkTeeth" Gay sharks. Yaoi sharks, more specifically. Weepy, underage yaoi sharks?! Weepy, underage yaoi mafia sharks?! And one of the most popular comics on the entire site?! ... More official SmackJeeves fans than Oregon's Sherman and Gilliam counties... combined? I had to tell her. ... But she already knew. And how we laughed! We laughed and laughed at... gay shark fighting rings? Wait, no, royal shark betrothal. Fake Japanese names? Uh, no, "Pepper". Wait, what? No, mafia sharks. What are you talking about? Well, what are you talking about? We were talking about two different gay shark comics. Which is probably one of those life-defining moments that will flash before my eyes as I die. She was talking about Bride of the Shar . Which was also an incredibly popular comic. Both of these comics are now over. Bride of the Shark wrapped up and moved onto some sort of sequel, or side-story, or something. (I don't know, I never read it.) So gay sharks gay on, gaying up the ocean. SharkTeeth, however, is defunct; its creator gave up on it, as happens ridiculously often with webcomics. This was in part due to its move to Tumblr from SmackJeeves (where it was "sharkyteefs.tumblr.com". baaarf). Why would she do that, you ask? I mean, Tumblr is a horrific platform for comics, after all. She must have known that. ... Well, SmackJeeves had a crackdown on underage (drawn) porn, and it was really, really important that the blonde weepy waif was, like, 13 or something. I don't know, I never read the whole thing, and what I did read was filtered through tears of laughter. I mean really.  I am absolutely not kidding about this being about a gay shark mafia. quote:Adam Blacktip led the group well, and even expanded their influence greatly; soon there were reef shark mafia members in every major coastal city in the Pacific. He settled back on home turf, Blackshell Island, and happily collected the sharks there, employing or exploiting them. But it became apparent that he was no longer the most feared man in the city, as that position had been taken by a tiger shark while he was away.... There, FACT. Literal, literal fact. Now, don't take this as me maligning yaoi comics as a genre. I can't, in good conscience, do that, since I'm responsible for one myself. So there's, like, that. And frankly, if men get to enjoy dumbshit pornography then women get to enjoy dumbshit pornography too. Let each of us have the dumbshit pornography more appropriate to our dumbshit sensibilities, you know? But gay sharks! That's loving hilarious! Seriously, try to read this without laughing:  Hahaha, ... jesus. Anyway. The extent to which this relates to Shark Tale is unclear. I like to think it's substantial, but granted I have no proof. But you have to imagine that Shark Tale helped put this concept in the public consciousness. ... Because, as horrible as this revelation may be to you, Shark Tale made a good chunk of change--$370 million. I like to think there was someone out there who, as a young girl, was dragged to Shark Tale, and her response was to take what was there and try to salvage it, to make it better. And then I love the idea that this ended up being an underage gay porno. I love this planet sometimes, and often for all the wrong reasons. I find amazing to think that this is a universe governed by logic and firm physical concepts. Aww hell y'all, let's go to DeviantArt!   Someone liked stupid joke octopus!  Original character, do not steal!  So I guess some people did like this film. Other people... LOVED IT!!  ... Oh, but back to webcomics. My friend and I have, of course, considered what this means for us. Well, for one thing, it meant me commissioning Partydog (of LAMEZINE semi-fame) to create a 2-page "gay shark" comic for my friend's birthday, because that's the kind of thing we do to express how much we love and understand each other. Partydog, for his part, received no other instructions. He knocked it out of the motherfucking park. Slightly .  This man is a genius. And, of course, one thing led to another, and now the two of us are planning a short comic of our own to commemorate this phenomenon. Something that will bring the number of gay shark comics up to a minimum of at least five. Why would we do this? It's very possible that both of us are really, really crazy. But perhaps it's not our fault. Perhaps Shark Tale made us this way.  Awww yeah. Brace yourselves! 
Pick fucked around with this message at 04:52 on Apr 20, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2013 04:41
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:Something I find interesting about Don Lino that I've noticed just from the various clips posted is that Robert de Niro is actually acting. While most of the other actors seem to be in a competition to see who can be the most loud and obnoxious, de Niro genuinely sounds really sad and pained. I don't think it's just your own affinity for father figures- I had no special affection for the King in Tangled, but I immediately started feeling pity for Don Lino after only hearing a few words out of him. quote:I'm a little morbidly curious how other dubs handled the character and the movie writ large. It's hard to imagine that international voice actors would want to replicate that very strange dynamic. Would they make the main cast more likable? Don Lino less likable? Or would they seriously try to emulate the design-by-committee style that most likely gave us the original movie? That's a very good question, actually. Sometimes different dubs give an entirely different feel. On that note, I went to great efforts to track down the Fox dub of My Neighbor Totoro. Disney now own the rights and made their own version--one that is vastly, vastly inferior. Same movie, same language, different translation--all of a sudden, it's a different film. Well, almost. But seriously, they had the audacity to call totoros "trolls". The Fox one refers to them as spirits of the forest. And they're goddamn spirits of the forest!  Haha, also that's the dub I grew up with. Pick's first Ghibli film.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2013 05:04
|
|
|
Tartarus Sauce posted:I always feel especially indebted to an actor or actress who saves a terrible movie, or at least provides a momentary or small cocoon of enjoyment within the larger sea of filth.  quote:I feel indebted to Christopher Walken a lot, incidentally. quote:Your review got me to thinking, Pick. Fans of the Thief and the Cobbler of course created the "Re-Cobbled Cut," and it'd be neat if someone were to create a cut of this film that excises the fish, and focuses on the sharks. It'd be more difficult, because you'd have to create dozens of scenes to fill in the spaces, but it'd be a better film for it. I, too, would like to see a film about a family of Mafia sharks who are just trying to live their lives. I'd love to see it too, but I'm no filmmaker, and frankly I think I've dedicated too much thought to this film as-is. But if anyone else wants to step in, be my guest--and post it here! The Saddest Rhino posted:I just found this thread about a couple of hours ago and need to read the whole thing. I expect it to be nothing short of amazing but I want to just mention something first: This is actually a really good contender for my attention  .
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2013 00:21
|
|
|
Tartarus Sauce posted:Has anyone acknowledged that Shark Tale is also basically a rip-off of the Reluctant Dragon? That's gay dragons, not gay sharks. Completely different  .
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2013 01:33
|
|
|
Krapintosh posted:I think the problem also (again, from my insider friend who was a fly on the wall for BOTH of these productions), is that there is too much time to gently caress with the script on these animated movies. They are in production for literally years, and in that time the script is rewritten dozens of times...often from the ground up. These are also VERY expensive productions, and ol' Katzenberg isn't interested in taking creative risks on something unique (especially at that time in DWA history). Why did you go and get banned, you dick? This was really interesting!  Anyway, to make this post slightly more valid, I had drawn this to punctuate an earlier post. Then I realized it was fanart and I was like, "nooooo!" But since I did it, I might as well post it.  The idea was that you can get at least some concept of how Don Lino is supposed to be realized as a person. I have no idea what Lenny is "supposed" to look like, or Angie, for that matter.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
I mean to respond to this more, I just never have anything particularly funny to say. I am very glad it saves me from actually having to watch this thing, though!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2013 04:26
|
|
|
I'm so grateful I didn't try to do Seefood because it would have taken me yeaaaaars. How'd they pack in so much!?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2013 18:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 20, 2024 04:40 |
|
|
I'd probably rate Seefood as between Bee Movie and Shark Tale in quality. Shark Tale had a coherent narrative, just a poor one. Seefood is just confusing as hell, though it does look better than Shark Tale. Neither is as horrible-looking or incomprehensible as Bee Movie though, sorry.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2013 01:55
|
|