More power to them. After a year that had 16 or so CGI animated flicks...many of which seemed interchangeable, it'd be nice to have some variety.
Posted by JumboWumbo (Member # 10047) on :
I thuoght Monster House had an entertaining enough plot, though It was one of the few CGI films I saw (in fact I think it was the only one). I don't know how they plan to create and interesting third and fourth shrek while keeping them fresh.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
Doing some traditional animation would be very -different- right now.
--j_k
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
How about not making animated movies? There are so many of those lately that they are hardly original anymore.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
stihl1: substitute "live-action movies" to see the problem with that view .
Its entirely possible to have a large, vibrant and varied animation sector; Japan does it, for instance.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
I guess my point is that most animated movies are variations of child based themes about cute animals or talking inanimate objects. It's been a while since I've truly seen something that was innovative or original in American animation. When they start applying it to all kinds of genres, and not just cutesy kids type movies, then American animation will approach Japanese levels.
How many shreks and ice ages do we need to see?
Posted by Me, Myself, and I (Member # 10003) on :
What scares me is the planned-perpetual-sequels they are talking about:
quote: To strike the jackpot of one sequel a year in the long term, the studio needs at least three franchises running at any one time. It currently has two: "Shrek" and "Madagascar."
DreamWorks executives say "Shrek" likely has two movies left in it after No. 3 (a fourth is already in the works for 2010). "Madagascar" has been sketched out as a four-chapter series, with a third movie teed up for either 2011 or 2012.
The studio already has plans to keep those franchises alive in other ways. It is planning a spin-off of "Shrek" called "Puss in Boots," based on the swashbuckling cat voiced by Antonio Banderas. A "Shrek" Christmas TV special is in the works, as well as a Broadway musical for next year. It also is developing a TV series with Viacom Inc.'s Nickelodeon based on the penguins from "Madagascar."
But the real bucks are in feature films. DreamWorks President Lew Coleman says: "What we're really doing here is looking for sequels." While sequels are more expensive than the originals, they are less risky and usually more successful, he says.
No wonder Hollywood has trouble writing good stories. Instead of trying to come up with some original stories, they are going to spend most of their time pumping out sequels because we already know those characters. They know the sequels don't have to be that good, because people are going to watch them since they are already attached to the characters. There are far too many sequels. I would much rather they slow down, only make a sequel when it is truly warranted, and give us something worth waiting for. But we all know what the true motivator is here, so I won't keep my fingers crossed.
ALMIGHTY $$
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
Five Shrek movies?!
O_O
Bad! Stop! Make something new!
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
quote:Originally posted by Me, Myself, and I: No wonder Hollywood has trouble writing good stories. Instead of trying to come up with some original stories, they are going to spend most of their time pumping out sequels because we already know those characters. They know the sequels don't have to be that good, because people are going to watch them since they are already attached to the characters. There are far too many sequels. I would much rather they slow down, only make a sequel when it is truly warranted, and give us something worth waiting for. But we all know what the true motivator is here, so I won't keep my fingers crossed.
ALMIGHTY $$
That seems to be an increasing problem across the entertainment industry. It's hard to not roll one's eyes at a pre-movie docu-ad about the latest prefabricated pop princess, or the latest half-dozen PC "Tychoon" games. And one truly begins to wonder when they're going to run out of television shows to make movies out of.
I feel kind of bad for Aardman. The reviews I heard of "Flushed Away" were actually fairly warm, but I heard squat all about it in terms of advertising, to the point that I hadn't even heard it *was* an Aardman film until after it had left theaters.
You would think as technology improves and computing time and power grows ever cheaper that it would decrease the overhead of CGI animated productions and increase the willingness to make an innovative movie or two, perhaps even (gasp!) going beyond kids' fare. I'm hoping it will happen somewhere up the road.
Hmm- then again, there was that Final Fantasy movie. *sigh* That may have scared the big studios away for a while. Though that had nothing to do with being CGI (which was fairly beautiful) and everything to do with a convoluted script that didn't recognize when it was emulating basic American action-movie cliches. ("Noooo!..." *bang* *bang *bang*)
Anyway, I wish Dreamworks well. More entrants in the field should increase the likelihood of some passable work, right?
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
ALMIGHTY $$