Chicken Little
Chicken Little (Director: Mark Dindal)
Dindal directed the little-seen animated Cats Don't Dance, then went on to do the much-seen The Emperor's New Groove. Written by the Brother Bear team of Steve Bencich and Ron J. Friedman, with "additional material" from the team of Robert L. Baird and Dan Gerson (Monsters, Inc.). It comes from the classic fable.
So, Disney has decided to go with their computer animation without Pixar, and if they and Pixar can't get along on their contract, exactly how can you blame them? Every major digitally-animated release since Toy Story has made huge bank--not only from Disney/Pixar but from Dreamworks and recently, Fox. With Sony and Warner Brothers getting into the game next year (now, we're talking animation, so these movies have been in production for years), Disney probably felt like, "Hey, we can do this without Pixar." Chicken Little was to be their tentpole summer release this year, and the last Disney/Pixar film Cars was supposed to be this weekend. Now Cars is a summer release next year.
Chicken Little (Zach Braff) alerts the town that the sky is falling, that he got hit in the head with a piece of sky that looks like a stop sign, but when everything calms down, no one believes him, his father (Garry Marshall) regrettably among them. His friends, Abby Mallard, aka The Ugly Duckling (Joan Cusack), Runt of the Litter (Steve Zahn), and the expressive Fish Out of Water (when voiced, it's Dan Molina) are the only ones in town who still like him. Everyone else has made him the town punching bag, and his diminutive frame (by which he has to use clever everyday items to get around) doesn't help. So, the movie really becomes about winning the respect of his father.
Here's where I thought the movie may have been "rushed" as far as an animated film can be "rushed." It goes to great lengths to have Chicken Little join the baseball team and win the respect of his father, only to have him get in the head again and cause the town more alarm and of course, the proof is gone before anyone can get there. The main characters discover a UFO and climb aboard, and a baby, furry, three-eyed alien decides to jump ship. When ma and pa alien want their kid back, this is when the movie starts to build some steam, but it's already at the end.
With an obvious liking of Spielberg, where the movie does a Raiders of the Lost Ark homage (which the movie is so kind to tell you) and a UFO invasion that's like War of the Worlds (which the movie is so kind to tell you), the movie they should have emulated more was E.T. Or hey, go with a legendary animation god Brad Bird's The Iron Giant for inspiration. The cuddly three-eyed alien could have made for a more interesting movie. Just wipe out that baseball scene and let the instant advertisement for plush three-eyed furry alien dolls do the work. That's what Pixar would have done--made a human story with a cute critter who gets in trouble and jeopardizes Chicken Little's bond with his father. This movie could have been so good!
And the reason why I make these suggestions is that this movie isn't really that good in the first place. This isn't a movie I thought, "Wow, that was good...could have been better." No, there's not much funny to be had, almost all of the gags are visual, meaning it's a waste of Braff's made-for-cartoon voice. But it does show a glimpse of brilliance once the alien gets lost--it was too late, though.
5 Comments:
Dude...the pictures add so much to the movie reviews, don't you think? That extra touch of class, you know? (not that your reviews aren't written with class...shut up, you know what I meant).
I thought so, too. I hope there's not a legal issue. I'm not making any profit off of this, and I don't think anyone else's livelihood depends on it, so I don't know why there should be.
No, I don't see a legal issue. If you were releasing photos of the film prior to the company releasing them...then maybe (like when a fan site posted a King Kong trailer today several hours prior to that trailer's official launch, and the studio shut them down).
If anything, you're only providing free advertising for them and their film.
1. I see bloggers post movie pictures often - I don't think there's any problem with it. I think it adds a lot to the movie review! But, we are making a profit. The Google ads have rakes in about eight bucks or so.
2. I guess making a good movie isn't the first priority of Disney, profits are. And I'm okay with that; Disney exists to make a profit. But, if Disney wants to create a movie that will be seen as a classic, and will continue to make mone years from now, why don't they understand that you have to make movies with heart? Toy Story had one, and I think it's still making money. I think. Do movies that are good, like Toy Story, do much better financially than movies that aren't?
Indeed the classics continue to make money well after they are done. This would seem to be an idea that studios will embrace, but of course, I don't think they have any idea what's going to hit and what isn't. That's why they need to hire me.
But a movie like TOY STORY made its millions at the theatres, made even more millions on video, and don't forget that television networks pay a premium to show the edited versions, and then there's merchandise. The better the movie's staying power, the longer lasting the profits.
Post a Comment
<< Home