#dreamworks really has it against Disney

[kookies2000]

Just saying. 😂

[faelapis]

despite some concerns raised by the trailer/marketing, i am still excited for the wish movie. a lot of that has to do with king magnifico.

that being said, i approach it from a different direction than a lot of other people excited for a “classic disney villain.”

first of all, yes. i, too, love the camp and melodrama of classic disney villains. i love that they express their wishes through big bombastic musical numbers, and said musical numbers are often the best in their movies. i like how queer-coded and fun they often are. i like the sass, the drama, the energy.

where i disagree with a lot of people is with this notion that disney movies “don’t have villains” anymore. i don’t think the likes of hans (frozen) and tamatoa (moana) are less evil than "classic" villains - they’re plenty willing to kill with a smile on their face.

i think what people ACTUALLY miss is the big performance around it all. the aesthetic. someone who does these things while being a major character (so not tamatoa) and deliciously, obviously evil while having fun with it the whole time (so not hans). i think it’s that specific combination people are missing. we still have villains, they’re just either not as “fun” or not as “important.”

of course, that take is less punchy than saying disney doesn’t have villains because "steven cringeyverse destroyed western animation and now companies are too scared to make real villains >:( !1!!!"

yeah i never understood where that came from. if anything, redeeming villains is more controversial than killing them. especially in america, being punitive is the norm. forgiveness is cringe. yet so many act as if there was some big consumer and/or corporate pushback against the idea of villains…? at some point?? i guess????

someone must've forgotten to tell that to disney tv animation, where you’ll find everything from bill cipher to belos in the modern era. (also, other companies exist? dreamworks is not some indie studio, they’re fully willing to have big, campy villains.)

but yknow, people like to feel like underdogs. they like to feel like they're somehow oppressed because some animated media don't have classic villains anymore... despite there still being plenty around. you can’t just like villains, you have to make it everyone else’s problem. like disney is obliged to do the same character tropes in every movie. or villains are "dead."

what actually happened is just… some writers at disney decided they wanted to do different things. that’s it. so you now have a handful of movies where the villain is either a minor character, or nonexistent.

it’s not a conspiracy, it’s not a concerted effort to destroy villains. it’s, at most, a trend. because some writers wanted to push against the previous status quo. and now other writers who grew up with that want to have more classic villains, because that’s what they see as exciting and new. it’s just a cycle of trends and countertrends.

anyway. long tangent aside, i’m actually very excited for king magnifico. in part for a classic villain performance (he gets a song!!) - but also, it sounds like he might scratch a particular itch of mine.

which is to have a big, dramatic, irredeemable villain… who is still a human and has an understandable pov.

yes, you can combine these things. it’s not common for disney, but a lot of what we consider “great movie villains” throughout history have been this exact combination. they have to be defeated, they refuse redemption, they are 100% committed to their goals and will not budge - but they also GENUINELY BELIEVE in those goals.

what i’m really asking for here is a sincerely motivated character. someone who is a villain, but doesn’t SEE himself as a villain. someone who isn’t lying when they try to endear themselves to the hero or promise to make the world better if they join forces. it’s just that they are completely misguided about what would be good for the world, and nothing will persuade them.

whether someone is a villain, a hero, or anywhere in between, i think asking a character’s motivation - and playing those motivations straight, rather than just as a mask for plain selfishness - is key.

as i’m saying this, you might notice that it’s not actually too far off from what i like in other characters. jasper in SU is basically this in her "main arc” in season three. she refuses help, she’s a huge dick to everyone… but she also 100% believes in homeworld as an institution and is actually, genuinely selfless. even if it means her own corruption, she refuses help, because that would betray her cause. which she values above her own life. and by rebecca sugar’s own words, jasper doesn’t even believe she deserves help.

the common thread here is really tragedy. someone you can root for and against at the same time.

so how does this relate to king magnifico? well, jennifer lee (writer for this movie & also the frozen movies) just had an interview where she talked a lot about wish, and in specific, having a classic disney villain in magnifico.

she illustrates a lot of what i’ve been talking about - that there is no grand conspiracy at disney against villains. they just had different stories they wanted to tell. there was no mandate either for or against villains, not in this movie or any other. they just did what they wanted to do with those stories. (btw, that’s not me saying there isn’t pressure at disney to tell certain stories and not others. it’s just that the concept of a villain isn’t as important to the corporate side as, say, not making elsa gay.)

anyway. what makes the king magnifico portion interesting is how lee talks about exactly what i’ve been saying. they knew they wanted a classic disney villain, but it sounds like they still want him to be different from other such characters. namely, they wanted to find the benevolent side of him, how he genuinely believes what he believes and DOES want what he thinks is best for the city of rosas.

and the plot totally checks out - basically, he decides whose wishes come true. and that’s really interesting, because a wish can be anything, good or bad. it sounds like he really wants to prevent what he sees as bad wishes from coming true, and is too conservative in what he allows or not. and his way of being kind about rejection is to remove those wishes from people’s hearts if he cannot fulfill them.

that’s SUCH a great concept for a villain. it speaks to issues of control, of agency, of being in the paternalistic position of deciding what is “best” for everyone else. it gives me a little bit the wizard of oz (as in the wizard himself, who is a charlatan trying to maintain a pleasant status quo, even if it’s a lie), and a little bit white diamond (controlling the lives of others, but genuinely believing you are being selfless and heroic about it / steering people on the “right” path).

reading that interview, my excitement for this movie went from like a 2/10 to a 8/10. jennifer lee seems to have a real interest in creating characters, not just stock tropes. elsa is one of the best disney princesses (fight me) for exactly the same reason.

another great concept talked about here (which you also see in lee’s frozen, with anna and elsa as opposites) is that of duality. there’s a lot of talk about magnifico and asha being two sides of the same coin, both initially believing in this system and wanting what’s best for the city. and from there, they divert to their opposite paths in what specifically they think is right. the interview talks about them as if they were this thesis and antithesis about what’s right for the city, needing to reach a synthesis. in talking about this concept, they included this illustration:

notice the similar poses. both have their hands behind their back (commonly used to convey a character is hiding something), their feet pointed out, and give the world a pleasant smile. asha has a darker color palette in a world of light, magnifico is a ray of light in a dark space. it's interesting for its duality.

so yeah. all in all, i’m still excited for wish. i want to take alan tudyk goat out back and shoot it for a quick, humane death… but failing that, i’ll just pray his role was hammed up for the trailer. please tell me it’s not that insufferable. please.

because i do really like everything else i’ve heard about this movie!! i like that asha is described as this idealist with “dumb courage”, like maybe she’ll actually have some character flaws and need to learn?? (maybe? hopefully?) i like everything i just said about king magnifico. i like that we have this blend of 2d and 3d animation, that’s such a clever concept for a “100 years of disney” celebration.

so yeah. i will be watching. never have i ever prayed for chris pine to save a movie, but today might just be the day!

[kylesvariouslistsandstuff]

Having now seen THE WILD ROBOT, and also seeing how it's on track to be another success for DreamWorks, I think the takeaway is... If you're gonna make a big sci-fi animated movie (read: something that cost about $60m to make) that'll make its money back, you gotta have appealing robots and some kind of cuddliness, lol. This movie and WALL-E are among the only big studio science-fiction animated movies that aren't infamous box office bombs. LILO & STITCH - also from WILD ROBOT director Chris Sanders, whose sci-fi elements I consider dressing, could count too.

Not like TITAN A.E., ATLANTIS, TREASURE PLANET, LIGHTYEAR, STRANGE WORLD, and possibly - sadly - TRANSFORMERS ONE. Where it's a lot of heavy metal, action, explosions, etc. that seems to - at first glance - overpower what's really there to someone who hasn't seen those movies. At least, from a marketing standpoint. LILO & STITCH's marketing campaign was legendary for emphasizing just how weird and different Stitch the blue alien was in comparison to previous Disney lead characters, WALL-E's campaign focused on the robot romance and pantomime storytelling, THE WILD ROBOT on nature, motherhood, connection, and survival.

In fact, having both TRANSFORMERS ONE and WILD ROBOT open opposite each other illustrates that dichotomy quite nicely. One movie is perceived as "boy-centric", recalling those similar sci-fi action animated movies of the aughts, the other not so much.

ELIO, next summer, has the sorta "kid on a big adventure" story, who happens to be a boy. What the story does with the aunt character remains to be seen, though. Given that that's a Pixar production, it's gonna have to double the opening weekend gross of WILD ROBOT in order to have some shot at not being deemed a flop... Absurd, huh? No original animated movie, post-COVID outbreak, should be expected to achieve that.

Walt Disney, by around the late 1950s, had surmised that *mom* was the person you had to appeal to when making a big budget animated movie of that caliber. Because she takes the whole family with her, and then tells her friends (some of them moms, too), and her friends tell all their friends, etc. The whole family, the wide net... THE WILD ROBOT and its Mama Robot story got the moms, TRANSFORMERS ONE seemingly didn't. That may or may not be a full explanation, but it's what this all reminded me of...

Chris Sanders has already spoken of a WILD ROBOT sequel in interviews, and there are two book sequels to WILD ROBOT. Given how the movie ends, and given that those two books exist? Absolutely. I really do think it's a matter of "when". Barely any successful DreamWorks movies didn't get sequels. SHARK TALE is a rare example of this. The movie was a hit in 2004, made $370m+ worldwide against its $75m budget, but never got a two for whatever reason. MONSTERS VS. ALIENS, sci-fi flavored, barely eked out, didn't get a sequel either. HOME, another alien/sci-fi type, also didn't get a two. But most of the time, their profitable movies get at least one sequel. So, I expect THE WILD ROBOT ESCAPES to be a priority.

On the prospect of Chris directing... Chris didn't direct the HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON sequels. Dean DeBlois, who directed the first one w/ Chris and also LILO & STITCH, took over and - interestingly - is directing next year's live-action take on the original source material. Chris was to direct the sequel to his THE CROODS, but didn't. He and Kirk DeMicco did the original, Kirk didn't return either. DreamWorks, upon being acquired by Comcast in 2016, put their version of the movie on ice after some complications with the story. Chris went off to 20th Century to direct THE CALL OF THE WILD, Kirk landed at Sony Animation and took on VIVO... DreamWorks decided to revive THE CROODS 2, and gave it to Joel Crawford to direct, though Chris and Kirk still contributed story material and it appears that the movie is based on their original version that got canned in 2016.

Which leads me to ask... Does Chris return for WILD ROBOT ESCAPES? Or takes on a new project at DreamWorks? Possibly an adaptation of his comic KISKALOO? He's been making features there for so long now, but it would be really cool if... Now that they're under new and possibly leadership, he makes a grand return to Walt Disney Animation Studios and gets at least one more movie out there? To make up for how his AMERICAN DOG got John Lasseter-ized into BOLT? One can dream, lol. Either way, I'm excited for what he'll do next.

[thecoolerliauditore]

see I have mixed feelings cus I do love arcane and thinks it 100% deserves its own hype but it also has that Pokemon Go effect where something that was originally really popular but still had niche subsects of fandom has gotten ridiculously popular to the point where the new fandom almost feels entirely detached to what it was before.

There's also a good chunk of people who watched Arcane as their first nerd thing or animated thing that isn't Disney/DreamWorks/Pixar and absolutely glazing the shit out of it for doing what media like it has done for ages, but because they're biased against the medium as a whole they uphold Arcane as revolutionary or superior when it's like. No man Arcane IS revolutionary in its cultural impact for what it did for animations reputation in the west but it owes EVERYTHING to not only League lore but also years worth of League animations that informed its aesthetic as well as a long history of storydriven animation that came before it!!

Reminds me alot of the peak of Dunmeshis popularity how people would parade it around as one of the rare Good Anime without those yucky anime tropes that make every other anime suck. Insert fanservice rant here.

Like idk Arcane IS good but some people seem to only think it's good because they've never touched animation or video games in their lives and refuse to engage with anything that paved the way for shows like Arcane.

[minijenn]

Jen Tortures Herself With Every Dreamworks Animated Movie Ever: Over the Hedge

Yeah so I think I just entered Dreamworks' first Exceptionally Mid Era, because by god this movie just... well it simply just is.

So Over the Hedge. I've never seen it before and yeah... I feel like my life would have been completely unchanged if I'd never seen it. It strangely almost doesn't feel like a Dreamworks movie, it feels like something made by a c-tier studio that makes ripoff versions of Disney movies. Idk man, it's just... the vibes in this are so weird.

So the story. We follow RJ, an opportunist raccon indebted to a bear who has to collect a mountain of human food or be killed by said bear. To do this, he tricks a family of various other small animals, led by the cautious turtle Verne into going... well, over the hedge into the newly built nearby suburbs to steal as much human food as possible. Pretty simple plot, littered with enough cliches to kill literally any one of these creatures, really.

I think one of the problems this movie suffers from is its main cast is... simply too big? Like yeah, we focus mostly on RJ and Verne, but then there's the rest of the animals tagging along. Most of them are agressively unimportant and I wouldn't be able to tell you any of their names from memory because they're all just that forgettable (aside from Hammy, the crack-addicted squirrel, I guess). As for the humans, our antagonists are some crazy Karen lady who is trying so hard to channel Mrs. Tweedy (bitch wishes she had that level of Unhinged) and Dwayne, the exterminator, who is probably a Redditor tbh.

The animation is agressively bland, and honestly falls short of even the past several Dreamworks movies. There's just... not a lot of style to it? And what little style that's there is just so saturated and uninteresting to look at. The music is just as forgettable, a few whatever pop songs against an average score. I honestly kinda zoned out a few times while watching this because... idk it just didn't do a very good job at keeping my interest.

I feel like, tone-wise, this was the first Dreamworks movie very much made with young kids in mind. Coincadentally, I think it's also the first Dreamworks movie to not feature any swears or adult jokes? (aside from Prince of Egypt? I suppose, but that's a different case entirely). It's very focused on its slapstick, its "family is everything" messaging, its cutesy, silly animal antics, and so on and so forth, coming together to make what's, in my opinion, a pretty boring package overall.

So yeah. Over the Hedge. It certainly... exists. It's not insanely terrible or anything, but I think its definately one of the most... forgettable things Dreamworks has put out so far. Kinda understandable why this one never caught traction or became one of their reoccuring series. It's just sorta lame (shrugs).

Overall Rating: 4/10

Verdict: Call pest ontrol on these uggo animals

Previous Review (Wallace & Gromit: Curse of the Were-Rabbit)

Next Review (Flushed Away)

[ticklish-touch]

OK, random question, what would be your OCs favourite anime/TV show/movie/etc?

I've...honestly been mulling over how to answer this bc I have so many OCs with many different tastes, meanwhile I myself haven't actually seen a lot of anime or series (at least compared to a lot of ppl I know).

So at the very least I decided I'm just going to list favorite genres, and the first OCs that come to mind 👍

Balthazar: Anything animated that isn't too dark or gruesome. Especially any and all animated Disney classics. He especially has a fondness for Mary Poppins. He does enjoy and appreciate modern-day CGI animated movies as long as they still have heart & soul behind them (Tangled, Moana, Encanto).

Inzi: He loves romances of all kinds. Probably still unironically loves The Notebook.

Nate, Jamie and Kent would all love the recent DnD movie. Nate is the weeb of the group, he eats up shounens and isekais.

Kenni: He likes slice-of-life or romance series with bittersweet elements. He loves Miyazaki movies.

Rags and Roscoe: Any and all horror as long as it doesn't involve children getting seriously hurt. They don't watch horror to take it seriously, they watch it to riff on it. Roscoe also enjoys any movies or series that paint robots and AI in a positive light, or has them win against their human oppressors. Which are few and far between.

Terry: Murder mysteries. Murder on the Orient Express would probably be a fave. Also he'd love Mob Psycho 100, he'd see a lot of himself in Mob. Paranorman is another huge fave (again, he sees himself in Norman).

Laurence: He really likes sitcoms. Community, Seinfeld, probably grew up loving iCarly lmao. He also likes animation of any kind that has a bit more of an adult element but doesn't go too overboard with it (Futurama, Bob's Burgers, some older 2D Dreamworks movies).

Might add more to this later but this is all my brain has been able to produce after like 2 months, I'm so sorry

[il3x]

Tagged by @vikugnavikugna!

coke or pepsi? beverage BITE miette?? beverage STING her tongue like the insect??? jail!!! jail for beverage for One Thousand Years!!!

disney or dreamworks? dreamworks did HTTYD, right? them.

coffee or tea? tea

books or movies? books hehe

windows or mac? never used mac so windows it is

dc or marvel? ok, exposing myself here, worm was like my 2nd superhero media ever. i haven't read either 🙈 i have seen a few marvel movies but i'm not sure whether that should count for or against them

x-box or playstation? mine crafdt on my laptop

dragon age or mass effect? mass effect bc incuriouscat on youtube makes sick ass fan PMVs

night owl or early riser? night owl

cards or chess? chess, you can narrate stories about the pieces and thoroughly annoy your opponent (sibling) even as you lose >:3

chocolate or vanilla? chocolate all the way!!

vans or converse? wgat

Lavellan, Trevelyan, Cadash, or Adaar? I can't tell if these are fantasy names or antidepressants

fluff or angst? uhhhhdfcgvhbjnk gonna have to say fluff

beach or forest? beach

dogs or cats? cats 100%! (or secret third option: fish...)

clear skies or rain? clear. god. please... 🙏🙏

cooking or eating out? cooking :P

spicy food or mild food? Mild by any sane standards, but spicy according to my family and/or BBC Food haha

halloween/samhain or solstice/yule/christmas? chris mas :))

would you rather forever be a little too cold or a little too hot? uuuhhhh .. hh. hard one here. gonna have to also go cold

if you could have a superpower, what would it be? SUPERSPEED!! Or time powers. My irl friend has convinced me of their usefulness.

animation or live action? animation

paragon or renegade? renegade, it's the name of my serial killer dark forest!hollyleaf fanfic (only half kidding...)

baths or showers? shower

team cap or team ironman? hm. remember when I said I watched a few marvel movies? yeah none of them were this one :(

fantasy or sci-fi? fantasy baybey!!! but I adore both

do you have three or four favourite quotes, if so what are they? oh god okay. hm... "Where did we learn it, this talent for insatiability?" from The Handmaid's Tale still Lives In My Head from high school english. If song lyrics count, then, "You don't know me / don't you question my love" from Berlin, Without Return. "Sometimes a hypocrite is just a man in the process of changing" (I don't recall the exact wording) from... Oathbringer? is my fav cliche cosmere pick. Oh! And I forget the episode or even who said it, but at some point during the s3 All Might/AFO fight in MHA, one of the side characters stuck on guard duty said "You're confusing difficulty with importance", and that changed my life.

youtube or netflix? youtube :) it has fun little AMVs

[REDACTED] [Clearance Level 9]

when do you feel accomplished? when I bake something! making concrete stuff is really fulfilling, especially if I'm baking for other people.

star wars or star trek? spaceballs (jk, star wars, but I haven't seen star trek so sw wins by default)

paperback books or hardcover books? paperback

to live in a world without literature or without music? [sad character song assigner noises]... without music.

who was the last person to make you laugh? that would be @ty-bayonet-betteridge with several lines in their riley fic hehe

city or countryside? city! much as I complain about missing nature :') ideally a city that's near the sea

favorite chips? anything plain sea salt and properly crunchy 🤌

pants or dresses? pants, though dresses are fun for fancy occasions!

libraries or museums? is it a natural history museum? pleamse?? if so museum! otherwise library all the way.

character driven stories or plot driven stories? I don't really have a preference ngl

bookmarks or folding pages? i was one of those heretical kids who just plonked their books face down open 🙈😭 and now I mostly read online so... idk? Probably bookmarks.

Dream job? honestly would love to be on the management council for a small nature conservancy. second choice would be ecological research, but data-based, not fieldwork (animals scare me >.<)

What gives you comfort? thinking about The Characters...

what are some of your favorite song lyrics? literally ANY pun or double meaning lyric by idkhow!! gonna go with "lose yourself inside the city / lose your mind inside a week".

favorite ice cream flavor ever? chocolate my beloved...

first fandom? warrior cats......

deep ocean or deep space? (personally, i gotta pick ocean, because theres fish in there 👍😊)

Your desert island band?

@thesternest @seroquelfan @chaoticrushu, but no pressure to answer, and anyone is welcome to join! add your own question at the end if you answer :]

[moviemunchies]

WHAT

There is absolutely NO REASON that a sequel to a movie from over a decade ago, which itself was a spin-off of the Shrek movies, should be THIS GOOD, and yet…???

Puss in Boots: The Last Wish goes like this: Puss in Boots, the outlaw hero, is happy to celebrate his skillz and invincibility after once again winning. However, he gets killed in the ensuing revelry. Not a problem! He’s a cat, after all, and he’s got nine lives. Except it turns out that right now he’s on his last life after blowing through his previous eight, and after a close brush with a seemingly invincible enemy, he decides to lay low and give up the life of an adventurer. Until he hears about a quest for the Wishing Star, which will grant a wish to whoever claims it. Puss plans to use the Star to get his lives back. But he’s far from the only one who is after the Wishing Star: along with his old flame Kitty Softpaws, Big Jack Horner, and Goldilocks and the Three Bears are after it for their own reasons.

Also, he’s joined by a therapy dog.

Like many others, I had absolutely no intention of seeing this film when the trailer was released online. I have seen only the first Shrek all the way through (though I have seen lots of the second and third one on TV), and never seen the first Puss in Boots. Dreamworks also hasn’t been at the top of its game in the past few years. Look, How to Train Your Dragon 3 wasn’t *bad* but it was also lacking in that spark, in part because the whole ‘The thing you liked about this series has to go away now’ was a running theme in animated movies for a couple of years and it was old. I didn’t bother with The Boss Baby. I hadn’t seen The Bad Guys but it didn’t particularly interest me, though it seemed like it did fine enough. I saw this one getting good reviews and was confused, but moved on. It wasn’t until I kept seeing rave reviews, and people I knew telling me it was fantastic, that I said, “Okay, let me look into this.”

What. The actual fudge.

This is one of the best things I’ve seen from Dreamworks. This movie is an absolute triumph. This is, in fact, astonishing in its storybook imagery animation, its thrilling action sequences, its complex character development, and dark themes. It’s amazing.

The Shrek spin-off did a story about a hero coming to terms with his own mortality.

[throws up hands in confused but impressed gestures]

HOW???

Aiding this movie is its amazing animation. In the days when Disney has sort of settled on an animation style in their CGI films, and yet is still dominating the market, it’s really cool to see a movie that is playing with how animation. The style of this movie is meant to look much more like the art you’d find in a storybook. It reminds me (and I’m far from the only one to remark this) of Into the Spider-Verse in that it’s trying to copy a specific type of artwork, and there are interesting little tidbits that are really cool if you pay close attention. Puss’s sword has a little impact mark when it hits against other blades, for instance. It feels as if someone has taken colorful pieces of concept art and brought them to life, and given how much I love concept art, I very much enjoyed this animation style.

Building on that animation point: the action scenes in this film are top-notch? The final duel between Puss and the Wolf is one of the best sword fight scenes I’ve seen in years, especially out of a new movie. Many movies don’t seem to know or care how to do a great, fast-paced sword fight, and it’s rare to see it in an animated movie either. This movie somehow managed it. In fact just about ALL the fight scenes are fantastic to watch, with the sheer amount of energy they have in them.

The performances in the film are pretty great? Antonio Banderas is playing a cartoon cat, and yet he still manages to imbue him with a lot of character? Not only is Puss in Boots an arrogant braggart at the beginning of the story, but he’s forcibly humbled, and he goes through the wringer, and Banderas’s performance reflects that pretty well. When Puss is having panic attacks at the sound of the Wolf’s creepy whistle, it’s surprisingly effective how much you feel his terror.

I also don’t think that a couple of the other performers sounded like themselves? That sounds like a dumb thing to say, but with celebrity voice actors, they’re sometimes directed to just talk into the microphone without doing anything with their voices. But I didn’t find that Kitty Softpaws sounded too much like normal Salma Hayek or that Goldilocks sounded much like Florence Pugh. Then again, I’m not overly familiar with their voices so maybe I’m wrong on that count.

That being said, I ‘ve see quite a lot of people claiming that John Mulaney’s turn as the villain Big Jack Horner was especially amazing, and while he does well, and he makes an entertaining villain, I didn’t find his work to be something particularly incredible. I wasn’t blown out of the water by his performance, is all I’m saying.

Also this movie’s hilarious. I haven’t emphasized that enough, but it is a really funny movie. Some of the humor in the film was surprisingly dark? I know that animated films sometimes can have dark humor, but there’s a lot of it here, and most of it lands. The humor fits the tone of the movie, I suppose, but it threw me off how many of the gags in the film involved things like murder and casual violence.

I fully expected Dreamworks to crank out a cookie-cutter sequel, and I should have known better. When Dreamworks is trying, really trying, they knock it out of the park. They probably knew they had to if they wanted to release a sequel to a movie from over a decade ago and make it land with audiences. It would probably have been better had I seen the previous Shrek and Puss in Boots movies, but it’s not strictly necessary, as this entry has enough explanation of past events that you won’t need it.

[fatefulfaerie]

It was years ago that you said this, buuuuut...can I ask you to continue on why Dreamworks is better than Disney?

Sure!

I have no memory of what I said before but it basically comes down to the matter of adaptation.

They both definitely have their values. Walt Disney and the company he created turned dark, unapproachable fairytales of caution into lighthearted narratives with hope and wonder. There is a lot of value in that and Walt Disney himself had a childlike perspective that, in tow with his team's inventive newness in creating animated sequences, really turned the tide for storytelling through cinema. No child was too old to feel like they could take part in it.

To me, the 1990s and early 2000s were a time of Disney creating and perpetuating the fairytale conventions that Dreamworks in its foundation seemed to actively try to dismantle. Again, both have their value, but at a certain point Disney became a studio that was churning out existing fairytales and Dreamworks flourished as a studio that took a different approach.

Yes, the Prince of Egypt was based on the Bible and How To Train Your Dragon was based on a series of books by Cressida Cowell but they made it their own in a refreshing way. There's also original concepts like Megamind and Kung Fu Panda that are just absolutely fantastic stories.

I can't speak for Dreamworks now since I stopped watching their movies after my dad left the company but specifically in their first 20 years, you had this company that wasn't afraid to go out of the box, make fun of the box, or even absolutely demolish the box. Sequels like Kung Fu Panda 2 and How To Train Your Dragon 2 are deep and soulful. They bring out a conflict in the existing protagonist that has to do with their past, which Disney didn't do justice until Frozen 2 (so good!)

I think Disney not only created this box for themselves but after their boom in the 90s they just became this money making machine. It was no longer about art-making. What fairytale can we do next? Here's this direct-to-dvd sequel. And now with the live-action. Do you see Dreamworks doing that? Not yet at least. They respect the the original animators and storytellers.

I'm not against adaptation. I get it. The old version is problematic? Fine okay. But if you're making it just to make it, what are you even doing? There's a huge difference between making a live-action version of a movie that's basically the same thing and creating something like Once Upon A Time (tv show, 2011, technically ABC so Disney but not really in their control as far as storytelling) where there are twists to the fairytales and something that is unexpected or has shifted. Something is added or detracted in an interesting way.

So yeah I guess when I say Dreamworks is better I'm referring to the fact that they have more quantity as far as substantive work that isn't an adaptation, and that even the work that is has something very human and special and unapologetically adult. A lot of animated movies these days treat kids like babies, and I was grown up treated by Dreamworks like an adult.

Of course there are exceptions to this and I hate when people generalize. Tarzan, for one, is something very different to the box and Madagascar 3 is pretty ridiculous. It's just in general, I really value Dreamworks setting out and honestly saying "okay so Disney is making money this way, but fuck that, we're gonna do it this way". We're gonna animate one of the darkest stories in the Bible, showing slavery and death and abuse without romanticizing it and add a tragic brotherly bond that was never meant to be. We're gonna have a protagonist in a fairytale that's a belching ogre who doesn't know he's in a fairytale and show a version of love that is the least superficial it's ever been in a fairytale (I think Shrek is also based on something now that I think of it but still). We're gonna make a cushy, cuddly panda this kung fu hero with a heart of gold who doesn't really question that a goose is his dad because found family. We're gonna create a protagonist with a lot of flaws according to his Viking island, but compassion when it counts, when he faces a dragon tied up and fearing for his life and, seeing himself, chooses mercy. We're gonna create a movie that makes fun of the archetypes of heroes and villains but turns out to accidentally be one of the best movies of all time (I'm not biased towards Megamind). You get the idea. I say Dreamworks is better because I can respect them. I can't say the same for Disney anymore. If Dreamworks starts doing live-action, this will change.

I hope that answers your question. Thank you so much for asking and sorry about the chaos!

Disney movies that are must-sees:

Cinderella (1950), Sleeping Beauty (1959), Mulan (1998), Tarzan (1999), The Princess and the Frog (2009), Tangled (2010), Frozen (2013), Frozen 2 (2019)

Dreamworks movies that are must-sees:

The Prince of Egypt (1998), The Road to El Dorado (2000), Shrek (2001), Kung Fu Panda (2008), How to Train Your Dragon (2010), Shrek Forever After (2010), Megamind (2010), Kung Fu Panda 2 (2011), Puss In Boots (2011), How To Train Your Dragon 2 (2014), Puss In Boots: The Last Wish (2022)

I don't know what the heck was happening on Flower Street in 2010 and 2011 but something about that year was REALLY GOOD. Yes let's make five movies in a row that a random character effects animator's daughter will absolutely love.

[hojiteaversion]

Head Fast Toward The Light (Please)

(leo x laia | 669 words | domestic fluff, pregnancy | on ao3)

"Sweetheart," Laia gently tells her very, very big belly, "It's okay to come out, you know? There are so many cool things out there. Remember the book we read you yesterday? Wasn't it neat? There are many other books here waiting for you. Doesn't that sound great?"

Her baby is unmoved. Laia squirms on the bed, reaching behind her to try to fluff her pillow a bit. Her back, which has been aching for God knows how long, flares up in protest, and she groans a bit.

"I'll take you to Disneyland," she pleads. "We'll get a 3-day pass. I'll personally introduce you to all the cool princes and princesses. How does that sound?"

Her child doesn't even kick in excitement. It figures her baby is a DreamWorks kid — of course they would have taken after their dad.

"I know it's nice and warm in there, but imagine being nice and warm here and allowing your dear mommy to sleep a full, painless night? Doesn't that sound great?"

It's a gamble, of course. Laia had done her reading, and so she knows the discomfort at 37 weeks is practice for the amount of sleep she would not be getting for the foreseeable future. But maybe, if she plants the idea in her baby's head, her kid will miraculously sleep full nights at one month old.

"Darling?" Leo calls. Laia's head snaps up.

Her husband is leaning against the doorway of their room, arms crossed and smile delighted as he catches her in the act. His shirt has a few wet splotches from the dishes he just washed, and he should just take it off entirely, in Laia's honest opinion.

"Are you, by any chance, bribing our unborn child?"

"Me? No. No, I was just, you know..." She absentmindedly caresses her bump. "Telling them about all the amazing things the outside world has to offer. And that we could incidentally take them to ASAP if they would just... come out. Whenever it happens, I'm not in a hurry."

Leo nods, all knowing. Then he steps into the room and falls beside her on the bed with a smile. They quickly find the position that has worked best these past few days, with his head on her shoulder, one arm around her back, and his free hand on hers, over her bump.

"Because," Leo says, "If you were to bribe our child, Disney World is ten times better. And I would even add Legoland to the mix," he tells their baby, melodically. It never fails to move her how great he's gonna be with their children. "Cause you're a super cool baby and Legoland is the coolest place."

"It is," Laia adds, pretending she knows what Legoland is. "And, uh... Oh! We can also take you to The Nutcracker. Trust me, sweetheart, you haven't lived until you see your Uncle Vlad cry over The Waltz of the Flowers."

Leo laughs, draws something on her bump. Laia has the impression it's a sun and a swallow, and she smiles, warm. "Not that he won't cry every time he holds you."

"Remember Uncle Vlad, sweetheart?" Laia asks their baby. "He's the one with all those pretty Romanian poems. He can't wait to meet you. He waited, like, 600 years for this."

"And your Aunt Sandra has bought so many clothes for you," Leo complements. "She's really excited too. Aunt Millie and Aunt Cathy have your next ten birthday parties planned. Your Uncle Noe has made your crib... We just can't wait to meet you."

Laia sighs. "But it's okay if you need some time." She caresses her bump in what she hopes is a soothing manner. Ignores the pain on her back. "I know Breaking Dawn Part I scared you."

Leo snorts. It's been an old joke between them ever since they rewatched that series months ago, when her bump was just starting to show. She can't wait to let their kid in on the joke, once they're grown. Laia thinks they might laugh too.

Or they might find her, what was the word? Cringe? Oh God, would she be an uncool parent?

Well, that was for their kid to decide.

Hopefully soon.

[cartoonyfangirl]

This is just something that I've been thinking about that is a part of @thepixarau AU world, and that is the outside studios besides Disney and Dreamworks that are included in their AU

So I decided to do my rankings of how each side would be on, We have Allies, Neutrals, and Enemies (Might not be any, but still)

Here's what I got so far!

(The Muppets) - Allies!

Yeah, this was a no-brainer! The reason is actually very sweet, in RL, Pixar actually helped the branch with giving some ideas, and even doing some technical stuff for the 2011 film, which I never knew, but I thought was very nice and kind!

As for the group in the AU, The Pixars would probably get along with The Muppets even more so than the Disney's, why? Two reasons

1. Both are just a chaotic group of characters that while can get on each others nerves they still love each other, to the point of being a family in whole

2. Both leaders always try to keep the group as steady as possible, but even they know that can't be achieved very well

It's just something that I feel like it could work, especially with a chaotic yet colorful group like The Muppets

(Universal) - Neutral

Okay! This one is going to be split for some characters, as some do see The Pixars as good people, while others, not so much, Woody Woodpecker is definitely one of them, in my version, he does see them as interesting, but when he has his limits, he won't hesitate to go "screwy" on them, since while he is more tame and zany, he still has his early 1940-1943 insanity with him

Winnie Woodpecker is the opposite, she enjoys seeing the chaos that The Pixars have, and sometimes has the urge to want to get to know them better, but even she knows that she doesn't want to get in trouble with anyone that's against them in The Universal Lot

Woody.W's other counterparts (Wally Walrus, Buzz Buzzard, Andy Panda) are just as neutral towards the group as they could be, despite Wally and Buzz being enemies themselves

(Illumination) - Neutral

Like Universal, I think the Illumination characters would be on neutral standings with them as well

For me, I feel like The Mario characters and Gru and his minions would get along with The Pixars fine, but for the rest, they either back off, or won't hesitate to fight back, if messed with

(Warner Bros) - Slightly Allies

Yeah, this one is just a me thing, I don't understand why everyone would think Disney and WB would be against each other, quite honestly, I feel like they would work something out (The Pixar and Dreamworks feud works more than that)

For me, The Looney Tunes, as well as the Warner Siblings would be kind of interested with The Pixars shenanigans, but they usually keep it to themselves, as they want to stay focused on what's been happening with their home (Since WB has been kind of been sinking recently)

Otherwise, I don't see why they wouldn't be allies by the slightest

(Etc)

Rocky and Bullwinkle (Allies secretly)

These two are apart of the DreamWorks team, and while they pretend to hate The Pixars, they secretly don't, they feel like they're forced to hate on a group that like their antics, but they know that one wrong move, and William (Or Tigress) won't hesitate to get rid of them (Despite those two being close to Mr. Peabody and Sherman)

Felix The Cat (Neutral)

He is the oldest toon around, and being a crazy toon himself, he does take interest in The Pixars by a bit, but he doesn't really go near them, as he tries to keep his distance away from the toons young and old

[thevegetablewhichnoonedaresname]

anyway so i'm doing a literature class right now that i'm really enjoying, and i love the professor for the most part, but he is dead set against bringing up disney movies in class. and by disney movies he means any animated movie ever. (given that disney owns a whole host of live action stuff now and he did not ever shut anyone down when they brought something up... as far as i remember? i don't think he has beef with live action movies. which. okay.)

i was trying to give him the benefit of the doubt that maybe he just wanted to steer the class away from overly common comparisons or examples in media, but honestly? i felt like people were bringing up obscure stuff, popular stuff, other novels from the 19th century, TV shows from the '60s, modern movies: he didn't even have to enforce his rule more than once because nobody was even reaching for animated movies.

but then this one kid brought up puss in boots: the last wish (i forget why, but it was relevant enough) and the professor's like, "nope, no disney movies"

and i'm sitting there like oh. okay. first of all, that's dreamworks, and second of all, so you did actually just mean no animated movies point blank period. I kicked around the idea of "um, actually"ing him, but I didn't want to derail the class or be obnoxious. because the point wasn't so much that he wasn't distinguishing between animation studios, it was that why in the everloving heck would you just put a blanket ban on animated films. especially when the question is just something simple like "what other stories can you think of that have this trope?" and that is a whole 'nother discussion.

but then the kid. the kid who brought up puss in boots. he jokingly literally pushed his glasses up the bridge of his nose and was like, "um, actually, first of all it's dreamworks, not disney-"

and the professor kinda laughed and was like "okay, you know what i meant" (then why did you SAY disney movies. my guy)

and the kid laughed too and he was like "-i promise it's relevant though. can i just say it quickly?"

and the professor let him. so that was a win i guess. i wish i'd gotten the chance to tell that guy he was my hero though. he managed to do the obnoxious thing in a friendly way and kept me from combusting in my seat

[chaoticspeedrun]

Hear me out.... Tangled au 👀👀👀👀

These two asks, aaahhh!! There's so many Disney AU possibilities but the Anastasia, Little Mermaid and Tangled AU's are the ones I think fit the turtles the best (Not saying Megamind just because it's Dreamworks)

We have:

Curious little mermaid Donnie who has a craving for learning

Con artist Leo as Dimitri who is so smooth and tricky

Once again, smooth, confident Leo trapped having to take a girl to see a festival of lights to get the crown he stole back

Cold, mean Donnie as Meg slowly falls in love for a heroine against his better judgement

They just make sense!!

(Also, if you've never watched Anastasia I really can't recommend it enough, I love it)

Tagging @startheimpactfangirl for the addition

[kylesvariouslistsandstuff]

Projections have THE GARFIELD MOVIE opening somewhere in the $20-30m range for the three-day, and somewhere over $30m for the 4-day.

In other words, it's opening like a typical post-COVID breakout animated movie. Unless you were the Mario movie, MINIONS 2, or few other films, you stayed below $30-35m for the three-day opening. For context:

$146m - THE SUPER MARIO BROS. MOVIE

$120m - SPIDER-MAN: ACROSS THE SPIDER-VERSE

$107m - MINIONS: THE RISE OF GRU

$57m - KUNG FU PANDA 4

$50m - LIGHTYEAR

The five half-hundred openers. And then... Other big studio Western animated movie (and in some cases, hybrid)... Squarely below $35m:

$33m - IF

$31m - SPACE JAM: A NEW LEGACY

$30m - TROLLS BAND TOGETHER

$29m - ELEMENTAL

$28m - MUTANT MAYHEM

$27m - ENCANTO

$23m - THE BAD GUYS

$23m - DC LEAGUE OF SUPER-PETS

$22m - PAW PATROL: THE MIGHTY MOVIE

$22m - SING 2

$19m - WISH

$17m - THE ADDAMS FAMILY 2

$16m - THE BOSS BABY: FAMILY BUSINESS

$14m - TOM & JERRY

$13m - PAW PATROL: THE MOVIE

$12m - MIGRATION

$12m - PUSS IN BOOTS: THE LAST WISH

$12m - STRANGE WORLD

So, yeah, THE GARFIELD MOVIE is performing as usual. It curiously has a B+ CinemaScore, when usually, an animated picture - no matter the reviews - gets an A- minimum. I still expect it to leg up until INSIDE OUT 2 is released, and make back its fair $60m budget.

Director Mark Dindal deserves a big hit after three movies that didn't quite cut it at the box office. CATS DON'T DANCE was dumped by Warner Bros. and made soooo little in 1997, THE EMPEROR'S NEW GROOVE was similarly dumped by Disney but had the fortune of garnering excellent legs that might not have covered its budget, but it showed that Disney had a sleeper hit on their hands... and then there were the subsequent great video sales that probably un-flopped it a year later. CHICKEN LITTLE barely made the grade. Dindal hadn't directed since, the closest he got was with DreamWorks' unmade ME AND MY SHADOW. Dindal would be replaced by Alessandro Carloni on that film, and then DreamWorks nerfed it altogether. (Though they did briefly revive it as SHADOWS, courting Edgar Wright to direct at one point!)

So, yeah, I'm rooting for Garfield! For Dindal! I'll be seeing the movie in about a week or so.

As for the other side of this weekend's box office coin... FURIOSA:

I want to point out... A lot of people are seemingly confused as to why FURIOSA isn't breaking out... Thus making for a pretty small Memorial Day box office long-weekend...

When were the MAD MAX movies ever these massive blockbusters here in America?

The first film was barely released theatrically in North America, lost in the midst of its domestic distributor - American International Pictures - being acquired. The film's breakout success in its home country, Australia, was really what lead to sequels. MAD MAX 2, released as THE ROAD WARRIOR stateside, did fairly well but wasn't among 1982's biggest movies. MAD MAX: BEYOND THUNDERDOME, thought to be the most Hollywoodized of the movies, also did okay enough. Again, nowhere near the edge of the Top 10. I reckon for most people my age, FURY ROAD was their first MAD MAX movie. It certainly was mine, and then I went and blind-bought the other three movies thereafter.

MAD MAX: FURY ROAD opened with a fair $45m back in 2015, and went on to gross $380m worldwide against a $150-180m budget. Barely 2 1/2x that price tag if it was $150m, so I guess it just made it. Enough for more movies to be made at least, as Tom Hardy was signed on to reprise his role as Max Rockatansky for at least a few more films. A fifth movie proper is in development, apparently... But, yeah... $380m. Good gross, but not... Let's see, STAR WARS or MCU-sized. Not DUNE: PART TWO nor RISE/DAWN/WAR OF THE PLANET OF THE APES, for fellow sci-fi comparisons...

And nor did it need to be... There's more a gnarly, punk-like edge to these movies anyways.

Which is why I did not expect FURIOSA to make that much more than FURY ROAD, especially since it's about a younger Furiosa and it's a prequel. Having not seen the movie due to circumstances (I'm gonna aim for it this coming Friday), I've also heard that it's way different from FURY ROAD, which was more or less a two-hour car chase that barely lets up. This apparently, at 2 1/2 hours long, is more in line with the classic MAD MAX movies. There's some vehicular action that really delivers, but the bulk of it is a lot of atmosphere and long stretches that really souses us into the wasteland world of the series.

One of my pals actually compared it to director George Miller's previous film, THREE THOUSAND YEARS OF LONGING... And... Uh, if it's really anything like that film, it's going to be interesting to see how it holds up in the coming weeks. THREE THOUSAND YEARS OF LONGING is a curious film that I didn't particularly enjoy much, but it's very cool that a $60m movie that appears to be Miller - in his 70s - pondering and reflecting on the art of storytelling and the big mosaic of it all even exists. Now to see that applied to a massive budget action movie in an iconic sci-fi franchise? Even cooler. That's what you call taking a BIG SWING. If MAD MAX 5 happening hinges on this movie's success, I really hope it defies the odds.

So THE GARFIELD MOVIE doesn't have a massive bar to clear, and it's already over $50m worldwide thanks to opening in a few territories beforehand. Should make back the budget easily. Only needs to clear $150m to do that. Legs would really have to be bad in order for it to not do so. FURIOSA is the one I'm concerned about, as that cost $168m to make. If that closes the door on future Wasteland movies, then that will suck big time. Fingers crossed for both.

[bridoesotherjunk]

welp the new ninja turtles movie is causing a huge uproar because they race swapped april o neil and made her black :/

as a black person myself i kinda feel this rubs me the wrong way? like the whole velma/little mermaid/tinkerbell fiasco was bad enough but this... this just feels like "we care so little about representation that we reduced your ethnicity to a palette swap!"

like...just create a new character and give them their own identity. their black spider man wasn't just racebent peter parker, he's miles morales who is someone similar but also distinct and with his own identity. making "april o neil, but black!" is honestly just fucking lazy. and borderline insulting.

well.... it's ironic you bring up Miles Morales because he's one of the biggest examples of people being angry that he's black in spite of him being an original character. people HATED Miles when he was first introduced. the racist, disgusting, horrid posts and videos I remember seeing were everywhere. white people were so fucking mad that he existed. He's finally gotten the respect and adoration he deserved from the start, but at the beginning it was vile. but he was still an original character! He wasn't just black Peter Parker-- but that's what everyone said about him when he was first introduced! Either way you can't win against the racist assholes- they're going to throw a fucking fit no matter what you do.

on to the rest of the topic under a read more cuz it's kind of long

April has had people arguing about whether she was originally intended to be black or not, especially now with this movie coming out. Some of the things I've read make it seem like she might have been intended to be half black? It's a little weird, one source I found said she was supposed to be half-Asian and another said she was meant to be 100% Irish, so I dunno.

I can definitely understand why it would be upsetting though. I'm hoping that 'we care so little so we're just swapping the palette' is not what the team behind the new TMNT movie was going for when they designed April, but I can't say for sure. Disney? Yeah, I would bet money on their decisions being made by executives who have no fucking clue what the world is like and are just saying "Do this because it's trending" - like what they did with the Mulan 'me too' movement that made no sense at all. They're completely out of touch, so even trying to bring in a current topic, they fumble it.

As someone who is white, I really am glad Disney, and other studios like Sony, Dreamworks, etc. are finally trying to add representation to their films. Disney especially is doing it in a horrible way, for sure, by putting people into terrible remakes that audiences already don't like - creating an association in people's minds that can turn into racist thoughts later. (The whole "this version is bad BECAUSE of the diversity" type bullshit that you already see from people.) If they would actually do a better fucking job and tried harder, there would be no problem.

[minijenn]

Jen Tortures Herself With Every Dreamworks Animated Movie Ever: Shrek

The Man. The Myth. The Legend himself. Shrek is love. Shrek is Life.

Aside from being an Endless Meme Factory though, Shrek is a pretty great movie in its own right! There's this certain charm to the first Shrek, a certain sort of innocence to it (despite being so blatantly made to make fun of Disney). This really was Shrek before it became everything it originally stood against, its Shrek in its most Pure Form.

As a result, we get a really great introduction to this world and these characters. Shrek himself is wonderfully written here, we really get to peel back the layers (pun intended) of this curmudgonly loner as he interacts with Donkey and Fiona and eventually see him come to genuninely care about them both and its really sweet. He's also just hilarious, but we all already knew that.

Donkey is always fun, though I think maybe he rambles on a bit too much at points? Like I think they just put Eddy Murphy in the recording booth and let him do whatever he wanted and sometimes it works, other times, I'm with Shrek in wanting him to just shut the fuck up. Fiona is cool, weird and sassy in all the right ways and serves as a great foil to Shrek, while Farquaad is a little ass man who is so much fun to hate.

The plot is really well put together, and while there are a few holes in it here and there (that breakdown of communication between Shrek and Fiona going into the final act), for the most part, its a really solid story that's a lot of fun to follow along, with some great jokes and action along the way.

The animation has... aged, I won't deny that. But for 2001, it is still very impressive, especially when you look at some of the texture work. I definately think our main cast gets a glow up in Shrek 2, but for their first outing, they look fine enough. The music is also solid! Not many animated movies pull off a pop soundtrack, but this one really does (All Star is iconic for a reason, folks) and the score is also very beautiful at times (the castle escape music is so intense and perfect).

At the end of the day, I think its easy to see why Shrek became the cultural juggernaut that it is today. It's a very memorable movie, one that was so unique and unlike anything else most had seen at the time of its release. It's also just... so damn funny, like seriously, there are some jokes that still get me laughing out loud. It follows a trend I've noticed with early Dreamworks movies where it's not really made for kids, but its not quite for adults either. In that sense, its made for well... everyone to enjoy. As animated movies should be. Early Dreamworks understood that so well. (idk what the fuck happened bc now they seem to have mostly forgotten that philosophy)

But yeah, Shrek is good. If you haven't seen it in a while, give it a watch cause its a genuinely good time.

Overall Rating: 8/10

Verdict: WHAT ARE YE DOIN IN ME SWAMP

Previous Review (Chicken Run)

Next Review (Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron)