Welcome! I review things of the visual motion caputred/animated variety. You can suggest titles for me to watch and review, or I'll just post something random each day/week/whateva. Enjoy!
I though I'd start with a television show I recently started watching again.
Teen Titans
Teen Titans has a special place in my heart as it carved what would be come my deep love for the tragic hero with season 2 and Terra's story.
One problem many people have with Teen Titan's is it's psuedo-anime animation style. While many times, it gets taken too far and becomes fairly campy, much of the time it helps support TT's style of humor. I also just find the style over-all appealing, and for the I find the style to be much more of a pro that a con.
I simply adore this show because it's one of the few that wasn't afraid to put mature themes into a childrens show. Not like language or sexual stuff, I mean themes that are actually MATURE. Like betrayal, death, and oh yeah THE END OF HUMANITY. Really, what other children's show would go so far as to have an all out apocalypse, complete with people turned to stone and a giant four-eyed demon?
I also adore the fact that Scott Menville was cast to play Robin as he also plays the voice of the main character in my all-time favorite video game DARK CLOUD 2.
And the fact that all five of the Titans are thoroughly complex character with very unique and awesome personalities I find amazing since you don't see that in many tv shows in general anymore, let alone a kid's show.
Cyborg is a beast in every way imaginable. The dude eats, like, half the city in one episode. I mean, come on. How do you top that?
Possibly the only aspect of the show I didn't enjoy was the fact that, though Robin is the only Titan without super powers, he kicks, by far, the most ass. I mean, it's extremely enjoyable and satisfying watching him kick so much ass in such an amazing fashion, but really, you would think that the other Titans would be a bit more successful. They others do bear, well, let's see: black magic, robotically enhanced strength and a sonic cannon, alien super strength and laser eyes, and the ability to change into any animal in the universe. You'd think they could manage better than a guy with some kung-fu, dick bombs, and a retractable metal pole, but I digress.
Teen Titans has remained one of my favorite cartoons and one of my favorite tv shows in general ever since I discovered it way back when in ummmm 2003, I think? It's an irreplaceable part of my childhood and I have a feeling I will be watching reruns of it for a long time to come.
9.5/10
Ponyo
I would have done Spirited Away but I believe I must watch it at least once more before I can properly review it. SO instead, it's Ponyo, Ponyo. Tiny little fish. Tiny little fish in the deep blue sea!(That's a reference to the tacky End Credits song)
Now then, to get things started off Ponyo is the story of a brave little boy(Sasuke) who finds a magical little fish girl. The fish girl escaped her father and wants to become a human. Fish girl(Ponyo) and the little boy become best friends and the world goes out of balance and floods and prehistoric fish come back and a whole bunch of other crazy stuff happens.
So first off, Ponyo is not revered as Studio Ghibli's best work and there are some very obvious flaws.
First off, the dialog, at many points, is rather campy and tacky, as seen in many English dubs of anime. But this mainly is a fault of Sasuke's voice actor, who just isn't very good. And unfortunately, he contributes quite a bit of the dialog of the film. But the cast does include a few all-stars such as Tina Fey and Betty White. Unfortunately, these actors don't get very major roles(and I would have loved for Betty White to have more dialog).
Now aside from that, the plot isn't extremely great and though it has some very high points of action(Ponyo running on the waves), the story itself seems very anti-climatic. The whole thing kind of just, well, ends . Sasuke talks to a big fish lady and the world goes back to normal. The End and queue the annoying credits song.
But their are quite a few strong points in the movie as well. For starters the animation is spectacular, as you would expect from Studio Ghibli. The amount of imagination that is poured into every little detail is amazing.(One of my favorite things being how the waves are fishies) Also, just a the overall charming quality of the movie captivates you, causing you to ignore almost any flaw you may find other wise with the film.
Another very strong point of the movie is the movie's score(see Slow's Review (http://www.ninsheetm.us/smf/index.php?topic=3581.msg122168#msg122168) for in detail analysis of the whole thing). The music fits wonderfully into the film and is very well done. Besides the credits song. *shudders*
Overall: Ponyo is a wonderful piece of animation that should be watched by every children. Not the best movie by Studio Ghibli, sure; but still one of the best anime movies out there.
Rating: 8.5/10
I like all of your reviews, and agree with the anti-climatic feel of Ponyo and how it was still amazing.
Quote from: SuperFireKirby on October 22, 2011, 10:47:54 AMPonyo
I would have done Spirited Away but I believe I must watch it at least once more before I can properly review it. SO instead, it's Ponyo, Ponyo. Tiny little fish. Tiny little fish in the deep blue sea!(That's a reference to the tacky End Credits song)
Now then, to get things started off Ponyo is the story of a brave little boy(Sasuke) who finds a magical little fish girl. The fish girl escaped her father and wants to become a human. Fish girl(Ponyo) and the little boy become best friends and the world goes out of balance and floods and prehistoric fish come back and a whole bunch of other crazy stuff happens.
So first off, Ponyo is not revered as Studio Ghibli's best work and there are some very obvious flaws.
First off, the dialog, at many points, is rather campy and tacky, as seen in many English dubs of anime. But this mainly is a fault of Sasuke's voice actor, who just isn't very good. And unfortunately, he contributes quite a bit of the dialog of the film. But the cast does include a few all-stars such as Tina Fey and Betty White. Unfortunately, these actors don't get very major roles(and I would have loved for Betty White to have more dialog).
Now aside from that, the plot isn't extremely great and though it has some very high points of action(Ponyo running on the waves), the story itself seems very anti-climatic. The whole thing kind of just, well, ends . Sasuke talks to a big fish lady and the world goes back to normal. The End and queue the annoying credits song.
But their are quite a few strong points in the movie as well. For starters the animation is spectacular, as you would expect from Studio Ghibli. The amount of imagination that is poured into every little detail is amazing.(One of my favorite things being how the waves are fishies) Also, just a the overall charming quality of the movie captivates you, causing you to ignore almost any flaw you may find other wise with the film.
Another very strong point of the movie is the movie's score(see Slow's Review (http://www.ninsheetm.us/smf/index.php?topic=3581.msg122168#msg122168) for in detail analysis of the whole thing). The music fits wonderfully into the film and is very well done. Besides the credits song. *shudders*
Overall: Ponyo is a wonderful piece of animation that should be watched by every children. Not the best movie by Studio Ghibli, sure; but still one of the best anime movies out there.
Rating: 8.5/10
Love this. I agree with everything. Lol the weird techno credits song. You can have back the medal you awarded me.
Your problem is that you're watching an English dub of an anime. You're never supposed to watch an English dub. They are literally always terrible.
Quote from: KefkaticFanatic on October 25, 2011, 09:46:38 AMYour problem is that you're watching an English dub of an anime. You're never supposed to watch an English dub. They are literally always terrible.
Wrong. Spirited Away + Howl's Moving Castle aren't. Just Ponyo has a couple awful voice actors.
So true. The person who did the voice for Ponyo in the Japanese version made her a billion times more cuter than the English one! :D
Quote from: KefkaticFanatic on October 25, 2011, 09:46:38 AMYour problem is that you're watching an English dub of an anime. You're never supposed to watch an English dub. They are literally always terrible.
That's exactly what all the weeaboos tell me! D:
Are you implying that Kefka is a weeaboo?
No, of course not, that comment was just weeaboo-ish. Also, Professor Layton has great English voice actors. :| I'm not going to watch the movie in Japanese.
Quote from: Jub3r7 on October 25, 2011, 01:43:14 PMThat's exactly what all the weeaboos tell me! D:
What does that mean?
Studio Ghibli normally has exceptional voice actors in the english dubs of their movies. It's the main reason I pointed out the flaws with the voice acting in Ponyo.
Anyways NEW REVIEW.
What time is it?
ADVENTURE TIME!
Created by: Pendleton Ward
Directed by: Larry Leichliter
Starring: Jeremy Shada - Finn the Human
John DiMaggio - Jake the Dog
Adventure Time is a cartoon set in the magical post-apocalyptic land of Ooo. It's two main characters are Finn the Human and Jake the Dog. It is a mostly non-linear story, save a few key events in certain episodes that change the show. The show focuses on the wacky adventures Finn and Jake and generally strives to be as bizarre as possible.
First off, the whole concept of Adventure Time is something I can enjoy. The odd artistic style and animation is very different from many cartoons and catches your eye right off the bat. I, personally, am a big fan of it. The odd character and world design and the crazy colorfulness are all very appealing to me. I mean, who doesn't just love this face?
(https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_llqcxheIl31qzez5w.gif&hash=704c019da6cd9c8bc229d556694c89f8d05f739d)
The humor is also very nicely put. Slap-stick comedy and randomness seem to be Adventure Time's preferred methods of bringing forth the lolz. It has a few innuendos every so often but it's nice to take a break from any real raunchiness you find in more "mature" comedies.(Mature being in quotations because shows that are usually considered for mature audiences most often are the least mature in material)
And aside from humor, the show is just plain entertaining. Especially when you take into account the fact that the show is set in a post-apocalyptic world, watching them find bombed out cities and other remnants of a forgotten world can't help but perk your interest. Plus, the faact that's AT is a partial bro-comedy, to me, makes it all the more awesome.
The music ,like in many a cartoon, is forgettable. I would try to describe some of it but I can't remember how any of the tracks go(besides the theme song).
Voice acting is superb. Jeremey Shada does a great job portraying a curious, hyper thirteen year old boy with a love for fighting and adventure. But, as usual, hats go off to Mr. Joe DiMaggio. You may know him as Bender from Futurama. His voice fits perfectly into a blunt, lazy pug with a love for mischief and pranking.
Overall, Adventure time has shown that crazy fantasy and children's comedy cartoon go hand in hand with one another. It may not be for everyone, but seriously, how can you not love this face?
(https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_llqcxheIl31qzez5w.gif&hash=704c019da6cd9c8bc229d556694c89f8d05f739d)
Rating: 9.0/10
Watched Tales from Earthsea, a Studio Ghibli film. Pretty good, but surprisingly violent and grossly, incredibly weird.
My rating: 8.0/10
I agree. I thought it was pretty good. Disturbing in some parts though.
Quote from: SlowPokemon on October 25, 2011, 04:45:34 PMNo, of course not, that comment was just weeaboo-ish. Also, Professor Layton has great English voice actors. :| I'm not going to watch the movie in Japanese.
Not really. Dub actors are in most cases inevitably going to be less professional and shitty compared to the original voice actors. I dunno if this is a problem because I have watched 3-4 animes ever, but if the mouths don't match with the voices that would be annoying also. Plus they won't fit what the original directors wanted from the voices as well.
All the basic film stuff really. I also watch other foreign films with subs and in their native language.
Quote from: KefkaticFanatic on October 31, 2011, 12:34:35 AMNot really. Dub actors are in most cases inevitably going to be less professional and shitty compared to the original voice actors. I dunno if this is a problem because I have watched 3-4 animes ever, but if the mouths don't match with the voices that would be annoying also. Plus they won't fit what the original directors wanted from the voices as well.
All the basic film stuff really. I also watch other foreign films with subs and in their native language.
Ohhh I see what you mean, if you're watching an anime SERIES watch it in its original format. Yep. I agree.
No clue about series. I've only ever watched films.
Well i don't think I've ever seen an anime film with noticeably bad voice work besides Ponyo. :P
Dunno, it's always sounded awkward to me when I accidentally forget to switch the voice tracks.
Plus it's fun to try and understand pieces from the dialog and not just read the subtitles.
Unless it's Ghost in the Shell and they're going into the heavy philosophical discussion o.o
AND ON TO THE NEXT REVIEW.
In the spirit of Halloween, it's time for a little nightmare. What's this?
The Nightmare Before Christmas
Written and Produced by: Tim Burton
Directed by: Henry Selick
Original Score by: Danny Elfman
The Nightmare Before Christmas is the story of Jack Skellington the Pumpkin King and his discovery of Christmas. He wishes to take part in it and ends up causing quite a bit of trouble. A beloved halloween classic, this merry, yet eery tale has woven it's way into the hearts of many of our generation.
Now, if you somehow have not seen this movie, be warned, it is a musical. Musical's tend to turn some people away from a movie the instant they hear the word for reasons I personally don't understand. But being a musical, music is one of the chief components in this films greatness. The score is some of Elfman's best work to date. Every song is truely a work of genius, lyrically and musically, and truely shows off both Elfman's talents as a writer and a vocalist(he plays Jack's singing voice). But fair warning, these tunes are as catchy as they come and will most likely be stuck in your head for days to come.
The animation is beautiful and flawless. Every frame of animation has such magnificent detail it is almost difficult to believe the amount of work put into it. Besides the music, the other truly memorable quality of the film is it's art style. Not only was it completely new and original for this time, it brought about a whole new sense to dark cartoons and the like and has been a huge influence on the world of animation. But The Nightmare Before Christmas, even close to 20 years after being released, still has a fresh and original feel to it that you will not find with many other animations.
Voice acting is superb. I am amazed at how flawless the transition between Chris Sarandon(Jack's speaking voice) and Danny Elfman(Jack's singing voice) are. It's difficult for me to even discern that there are two different people playing the role. Every memeber of the cast does a beautiful job at portraying their character, no matter how large or minor the part. I also love that Grep Proops(Who's Line Is It Anyway?, MadWorld) is in the movie, as I simply love his voice.
Overall, The Nightmare Before Christmas has more than earned it's rank as one of the best animated movies to ever be produced and I'll be damned if kids 50 years from now aren't being stupified by it's crazy, creepy, merry, wonderfulness.
Rating: 10.5/10
Did you know this was my favorite movie or are you just being awesome?
Both. It's one of my favorite movies too.
Also, I apologize for the shortness of the review. I would have made it much longer but I didn't have enough time.
And now it's time for an extremely biased comparison.
Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory(1971) VERSUS Charlie and the Chocolate Factory(2005)
Now before I get into this, I must say both movies were great in their own regard. Unfortunately only one may reign supreme.
First up:
Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory(1971)
Directed by: Mel Stuart
Screenplay by: Roald Dahl
Starring: Gene Wilder - Willy Wonka
Jack Albertson - Grandpa Joe
Peter Ostrum - Charlie
Based off the the book by Roald Dahl
Now to give a quick synopsis of both films, this is the story of a poor boy named Charlie who finds one of 5 golden tickets in a candy bar which allows him entrance into the magical chocolate factory of Willy Wonka.(as if you didn't know this already)
Now for those who had read the book before seeing the movie, it is easy to see that the 1971 film is a much less accurate portrayal of Dahl's novel compared to Tim Burton's version. But does that really matter? No, it doesn't.
First off, the screenplay was written by Dahl himself, ensuring the excellence of the film. Second off, it has Mutha Fuckin GENE WILDER. The man is a marvelous actor, and in my opinion, his portrayal of Willy Wonka was the perfect balance of brilliance and total insanity, as was the movie. The movie has such a child friendly look to it, that it seems perfectly harmless. But then you get scenes like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Zail7Gdqro which make you do a double take.
But back to Gene Wilder. Yeah, he pretty much made this movie. His blend of eccentricity with madness with brilliance with wit was just so AWESOME. I'll get to more on this later but let's take a quick look at the challenger.
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory(2005)
Directed by: Tim Burton
Screenplay: John August
Starring: Johnny Depp - Willy Wonka
Freddie Highmore - Charlie
David Kelly - Grandpa Joe
Tim Burton's version of the film is more in line with the book, true, but does that make it better? Well to start off Johnny Depp is an exceptional actor. But it's no surprise to see Johnny Depp here seeing as he has been in virtually all of Burton's live action films(as well as Corpse Bride). But a doll faced Johnny Depp is not what I picture or will ever picture Willy Wonka as. I understand where Burton was coming from, giving him a childish appearance to convey that he never really grew up, but it just doesn't really seem right to me.
Now the story in Burton's version extends past that of which you will find in the 1971 version. At the end of the tour, instead of being the end of the movie, Charlie rejects the offer for the chocolate factory because his famiry would be allowed to stay there and he would never be allowed to see them again. And then more stuff happens. I do enjoy this because it allows the movie to go deeper, mostly into Mr. Wonka's past. Also Elfman's score for the film, as usual, was wonderful to listen to.
Comparisons and such:
Speaking of music, one of my least favorite parts of the Tim Burton version was the Oompa Loompas, or should I say Oompa Loompa. They didn't look magical or exotic or other worldly. It just looked like an army of 100 cloned short dudes. Singing what I remember to be show tunes, none the less(well not necessarily show tunes, but I lack a better word to describe them so yeah). Without even teaching a discernible lesson! What kind of song is that! I'll stick with my 5 creative, non-cloned Oompa Loompas teaching me about how I should read books instead of watch TV. Because you get no, You Get No, YOU GET NO COMMERCIALS!
Secondly, while both Depp and Wilder are spectacular actors, Gene Wilder played a much better Willy Wonka. Gene Wilder, as I have said, just combined insanity with brilliance in a spectacular manner. Johnny Depp didn't necessarily play Willy Wonka. He just did what he does best, which is be Johnny Depp, with a high pitch voice none the less.
Aside from the Oompa Loompa songs, I must say I did enjoy the overall score of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. I dare say it was better that that 1971 version's score. Until you get to the part where Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory's musical number were undeniably awesome. That's not even coming from nostalgia, since I hated musical parts of movies when I was a kid. Willy Wonka makes you feel like your in a World of Pure Imagination like no other when he breaks out into song. Not to mention Gene Wilder has a wonderful voice. Peter Ostrum,well... not so much. But as I said earlier, Elfman's score was wonderful and if the 1971 version had not been a musical, his score would have, without a doubt, be the winner of the musical debate.
While many people would assume that Burton's version is much darker and crazy than the 1971 version if they never saw either of the 2 films, I would say they both have about equal amounts of darkness. While the "Tunnel Scene" is one major example of this in the 1971 version there are many others. One of the most amusing to me being the 1 in 2 chance that Veruca will be incinerated in the garbage furnace, though it is never revealed in the film if she lives, so you are left to your own imagination. I would go into Tim Burton's use of dark elements, but is it really even necessary. I mean, it's freaking Tim Burton! That should pretty much cover it.
Overall:
Both films incorporate their own level of brilliance and awesomeness and both are excellent movies to watch. But only one can reign supreme.
And the winner is: Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory(1971)!
As for Charlie and the Chocolate Factory: You Lose! Good day, sir! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5QGkOGZubQ&feature=player_detailpage#t=3s)
Note: This choice was not fueled by nostalgia in any way, what-so-ever but more so by my love for all things Gene Wilder.
I really enjoyed that! :D they're both great films.
Btw, did you know Roald Dahl actually hated the 1971 version? Despite writing the screenplay? I always found that hilarious.
Sfk, you really have a dryly comic flair...you could totes be a comedy writer.
Quote from: SuperFireKirby on December 20, 2011, 07:58:00 PMit is easy to see that the 1971 film is a much less accurate portrayal of Dahl's novel compared to Tim Burton's version. But does that really matter? No, it doesn't.
I have to disagree with this one. I'm assuming you saw the movie BEFORE you read the book. That's the only explanation for this...
Quote from: spitllama on December 20, 2011, 09:15:59 PMI have to disagree with this one. I'm assuming you saw the movie BEFORE you read the book. That's the only explanation for this...
No, it's much closer to the original book... this is true...
orly? I actually haven't read the book.... but I remembered something about the Tim Burton version being closer to the book than the original one.
Sorry, I should have clarified, I meant this part-
Quoteit is easy to see that the 1971 film is a much less accurate portrayal of Dahl's novel compared to Tim Burton's version. But does that really matter? No, it doesn't.
Like after reading the book first, I enjoyed Tim Burton's more BECAUSE it was accurate and gave nostalgia and all that good stuff. Stuart's I was like WTF IS THIS NONSENSE lol.
Time for another review. Today's review is actually of a fairly recent film you probably haven't heard of:
The Artist(2011)
Directed and written by: Michel Hazanavicius
Produced by: Thomas Langmann
Starring: Jean Dujardin as George Valentin
Berenice Bejo as Peppy Miller
The Artist starts in the year 1927 where we meet silent film actor George Valentin, who has just unveiled his latest film. He meets a girl named Peppy Miller, who had dreams of becoming an actress. As the movie progresses, the new "Talkies"(movies with sound) start to rise in popularity and George ends up being left behind in the silent film era, and despair takes in.
There are two things that must be understood before watching this movie. First, 99% of the movie is a silent film. And second, this is, without a doubt, the best movie of 2011.
Dujardin is an excellent actor. I had never even heard of him before this movie, but he had definitely shown his talents throughout the entire course of this film. Conveying emotion without any use of words is very difficult, but Dujardin doesn't need to talk for you to perfectly understand his emotions and his character. Bejo also did a great job as Peppy Miller, through I do not think her performance was quite on par with Dujardin's.
Also, the use of sound was fantastic. You might be thinking "Wait, use of sound? But this is a silent movie!" and for the most part it is, with exception of two scenes. One of which is George having a nightmare about "Talkies" where you can here sounds of everything but his voice. The sounds are harsh and unpleasant to help emphasize George's feeling about these Talkies. I won't spoil the use of sound in the other scene as that would give away some of the plot.
Not only was the use of sound great, but also Hazanavicius' use of silence. He uses that lack of sound to play tricks on the audience because we lack the knowledge as to what may be making what noise is described in words. One key point in the film specifically does this and will make you understand why I felt this was necessary to mention.
Overall, this is just a brilliant movie. It is such a great throw-back to when movies were black and white and the only sound was that of a live orchestra playing in the theater. And if you do decide to wise up and watch The Artist, I challenge you to not smile for at least half of the film, a challenge which you will fail.
Overall:
A beautiful tribute to the silent film era which no one who enjoys movies of any and all kinds should miss.
10/10
Next you should critique Inglorious Bastards ::)
Or Doctor Who!
Doctor who?