|Cast: Woody Allen,
Director(s): Eric Darnell
Genre: Fantasy / Animated
Website: Click Here
Let me start off by saying: THIS IS NOT A CHILDREN'S FILM.
Compared to the vastly superior "A Bug's Life" which worked on EVERY level, this film crashed due to its lack of appeal to its primary audience: kids.
It was a two-stroke death in that Adults WILL NOT go see the film if their accompanying kids don't like it.
THIS IS WHY Shrek worked, this is why Incredibles worked (and most Pixar films, for that matter): they worked for BOTH KIDS AND THEIR PARENTS.
Very gritty message about conformaty, anti-war, grisly images of death and decapitation. All that and Woody Allen? Pass.
Hmmm, maybe I'm trashing it TOO much because it wasn't HIDEOUSLY bad, I did watch the whole thing (though after the battle with the termites, the son was asking too many questions so he was sent away).
Now I hear they're making a possible sequel? Why?
C'mon, it wasn't that bad? Ok, you should be a fan of Woody Allen to like it, but it was well done overall. Don't be a jerk.
I call'em as I see'em...
Plus I don't like Sharon Stone and Sylvester Stallone so this one was basically Strike 1, 2 AND 3...
I agree with everything Mikey wrote - except for his rating . Derek is right it wasn't THAT bad.
Again with the explanations already!
RELATIVE RATING SYSTEM is what I use, not ABSOLUTE. I don't judge this film relative to ALL other films just those of the same ilk, in the same genre: CGI Animated films.
In this group we have: Shrek (1/2), The Incredibles, Toy Story (1/2), Bug's Life, Finding Nemo, Madagascar (unseen by me), Shark Tale, Ice Age (and forthcoming Ice Age 2)...I've seen many of these movies AD NAUSEUM so I can humbly call myself an "expert" on the topic.
RELATIVE to these other films, a paltry entry like Antz warrants only a star (and that's being GENEROUS). The only other movie that blew chunks like this was Shark Tale and I think I rated that one accordingly.
Your theory of relativity sucks because the basis of comparison is based solely on your own perception of how the movie should be categorized.
Basing your opinion on top of your opinion = pretty worthless and crappy ratings overall!
Down with subjectivity! Long live objectivity!
Woohoo! (runs off and gets another beer!)
I realize this isn't the best flick for kids, but I DO like Woody Allen (though it was a bizarre choice) and didn't hate this film. But yes, it will forever live in the shadows of "A Bug's Life".
Mikey, you forgot strike 4.....Christopher Walken. I admit he used to be a good actor, though he was a jerk in person. Now, he's a walking parody of himself. Other people (Kevin Pollack, Jay Mohr, my brother's friend Mike Gilbert) do better impressions of him than he does of himself. If Tarantino hadn't given him a 3 minute role in Pulp Fiction, he'd still be making movies like "McBain" (with Michael Ironside!). What was his last good role since 'Deer Hunter' and 'Annie Hall'?
I liked his role in Pulp fiction
-"He wore that hunk of metal up his ass for 3 years...."
That 3 minutes of screen time didn't make or break Pulp Fiction. As I stated, it probably gave him more work, but nothing poignant.
About the "Reviews being my subjective opinion" lame-ass argument: yes, yes they are.
That's why they're my reviews.
Dumb honkey mo-fo.
he also played the bad guy in that movie starring The Rock.....can't quite remember the title but I really liked the movie (The Rundown I think)
Ooooh, The Rock!
Ooooh, The Rundown!
Call the Academy!
(Sarcasm mode turned off)
What a bunch of intellectual jag-offs!! It's a goddamn animated movie, for crissake!! You like, or you don't - it's that simple!!!
That being said, I liked it!! No, it's not Shakespeare, but it's a pretty good 90 minutes of entertainment - turn off your mind, relax and float downstream - y'all get it now???
|What's your rating of this movie?|