You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs

Posted: Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 6:46am

Post 1 of 54

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member



Alright guys, take note: this movie rocks.

In fact, this is the funniest movie I've seen in years, and probably one of the funniest movies I've ever seen. In terms of sheer jokes-per-second, this film is unmatched; seriously, it's unrelenting. During nearly EVERY SINGLE SCENE for the ENTIRE RUNNING LENGTH, there is always a joke hidden somewhere, either in the background or in the main action (or both). And the jokes are at the epitome of timing and delivery, being absolutely silly and genius at the same time. No movie I've seen has ever come close to matching the number of laugh-out-loud moments found here.

Then, you've got the damn-near perfect art direction, hilarious animation and characters, unique and gripping story, wonderful pacing and well-chosen, pertinent, better-than-usual morals. All of this combines to make something I thought was impossible: a CG animation movie that rivals Pixar's work. Of course, that's more in a "what the hell was in this brownie I just ate" way than in a "wow that's so touching and thoughtful!" way.

Last edited Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 6:51am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 6:49am

Post 2 of 54

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Psshhhhh... No way. You're just nostalgic because you read the book as a kid. That movie's not good... It can't be... can it?
Posted: Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 6:52am

Post 3 of 54

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

What book?
Posted: Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 7:39am

Post 4 of 54

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Aculag wrote:

Psshhhhh... No way. You're just nostalgic because you read the book as a kid. That movie's not good... It can't be... can it?
Incorrect, I had hopes for this becuase of the directors. They have worked with Scrubs creator Bill Lawrence and he has said that they are talented. After a slightly weak trailer, I still thought it might be good (remember the trailer for Kung Fu Panda?). No surprise I say. I'll definatley see this on Blu-Ray.

Last edited Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 4:42pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 9:11am

Post 5 of 54

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Pooky wrote:

What book?
This is probably the reason you didn't see it in a bad light.
Posted: Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 10:05am

Post 6 of 54

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

I'd never heard of the book or the film until a week-or-so ago when I saw a poster for the film on a bus stop. Still have no idea what it is, and just dismissed it as a random silly kid's film. Based on Pooky's post I might have to investigate it further.

Everyone seems to be going on about the associated game as well.
Posted: Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 10:34am

Post 7 of 54

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1196077-cloudy_with_a_chance_of_meatballs/

Wow, it's got an 84%. I've also never heard of this book but now that I'm hearing good things, I'll have a go at this.
Posted: Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 11:59am

Post 8 of 54

Limey

Force: 547 | Joined: 11th Sep 2005 | Posts: 752

Gold Member

That's a kick ass idea, food falling from the sky but I wonder how they stretched a 10 page book into a feature length film...
Posted: Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 3:03pm

Post 9 of 54

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Oh and the Real D work in this film is quite nice. The movie lends itself perfectly to it, and there's a bunch of neat effects with glass, jell-o, sunlight, and so on. If you can see it in 3D, absolutely do so, it makes the movie a lot better.
Posted: Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 7:51pm

Post 10 of 54

TheOutlawAmbulance

Force: 931 | Joined: 16th Dec 2008 | Posts: 938

EffectsLab Pro User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

The book looked better than this but who knows? I guess I'll just have to watch and decide for myself.
Posted: Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 8:43pm

Post 11 of 54

jawajohnny

Force: 1965 | Joined: 14th Dec 2007 | Posts: 829

VisionLab User VideoWrap User MuzzlePlug User Windows User

Gold Member

Ahhh... one of my favorite books when I was a kid. It's just a short picture book where a grandfather tells his kids about how it rains food in the town of Chewandswallow. There's no "plot" to it. I honestly can't imagine it as a movie at all. I think what they've done is completely made up an origins story explaining the phenomenon. Am I correct?

Just from watching the trailer, it seems really stupid. It looks as if they just made a brainlessly silly story out of the book's concept. I always saw the story as one of those unexplainable "in a faraway land, 'this' happens..." tales. It rains food. Insert picture of a giant pancake on top of the school. End of story.

Hey, what do I know? smile I'm just having a really hard time imagining what the movie is like. If people are liking it, maybe I should go see it. Is it really Pixar quality?
Posted: Wed, 23rd Sep 2009, 9:02pm

Post 12 of 54

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

The only similarity with the book is that it rains food. They only took the title and the concept for the movie.

And it isn' Pixar quality, as in it isn't remotely as emotionally deep as those movies, nor is it as artistically pioneering. On the other hand, the writing and humour are wonderful, and it does feel like a labour of love. It's a movie with a lot of personality and a lot of heart, and some fantastic art design.

I don't think anything will top, or even match Pixar for ages, but this is the closest I've seen anyone come.
Posted: Thu, 24th Sep 2009, 12:59am

Post 13 of 54

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

jawajohnny wrote:

Ahhh... one of my favorite books when I was a kid.
How old are you now? 15? I'm 14 and still a kid.

I used to think this book was really funny when I was little. And I suppose if I read it now I would still be somewhat amused. But I would never have thought of it being turned into an animated film. (Of course, I had never heard of animated films back then.)

Chewandswallow. Baddest of the bad.
Posted: Thu, 24th Sep 2009, 1:12am

Post 14 of 54

jawajohnny

Force: 1965 | Joined: 14th Dec 2007 | Posts: 829

VisionLab User VideoWrap User MuzzlePlug User Windows User

Gold Member

Richard III wrote:

How old are you now? 15? I'm 14 and still a kid.
I'll be 18 in two weeks. I should have said, "when I was younger". Of course I'm still a kid at heart... smile
Posted: Thu, 24th Sep 2009, 1:20am

Post 15 of 54

Axeman

Force: 17995 | Joined: 20th Jan 2002 | Posts: 6124

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

SuperUser

Richard III wrote:

I had never heard of animated films back then.
Pardon? You didn't watch cartoons when you were little? Disney has been pumping out animated films since 1937 (feature length, anyway the shorts started in the 20's); they all escaped your radar?

Anyway, back on topic, I love this book though I haven't read it in ages, and while an adaptation does seem odd, I remember it having more story than is implied by some of the earlier comments. I've been looking forward to the film for a while now, so I hope to see it soon.
Posted: Thu, 24th Sep 2009, 2:11am

Post 16 of 54

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Axeman wrote:

Richard III wrote:

I had never heard of animated films back then.
Pardon? You didn't watch cartoons when you were little? Disney has been pumping out animated films since 1937
But I didn't know they were called animated films. I just thought, "Oh, a movie." Made little to no difference. I thought the cartoon characters were actors behind a cardboard cutout. (Seriously.)
Posted: Thu, 24th Sep 2009, 3:18am

Post 17 of 54

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

How old were you?
Posted: Thu, 24th Sep 2009, 3:35am

Post 18 of 54

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

It does make the whole 'homeschool' thing make more sense.
Posted: Thu, 24th Sep 2009, 3:40am

Post 19 of 54

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

I was homeschooled. NOW WHAT?
Posted: Thu, 24th Sep 2009, 3:44am

Post 20 of 54

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Yeah, and every once in a while there was a 'nice' Nazi, too. There's outliers in any group.
Posted: Thu, 24th Sep 2009, 4:12am

Post 21 of 54

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Hah, well. I pretty much taught myself entirely, and it was Correspondence via mail, so "Homeschool" might not be the correct terminology.

On topic, I'd have to say this movie looked pretty average. Although I might rent it.
Posted: Thu, 24th Sep 2009, 4:47am

Post 22 of 54

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

You guys should quit comparing it to the book, because it's not a film adaptation of it. Like, at all. Whatsoever.

They just went "Oh, food raining from the sky, that's funny." and made a totally unrelated movie out of the idea. The characters, setting, story, explanation and morals are all different. I mean, this movie has MR. T in it. Also, Bruce Campbell.

And yeah, it did look hugely average to me from the trailers... but then it's hard to make a kid's CG animation film look above average in a trailer without sticking "Pixar" at the end.
Posted: Thu, 24th Sep 2009, 1:37pm

Post 23 of 54

Orin Warren

Force: 658 | Joined: 2nd Oct 2006 | Posts: 461

Windows User

Member

Wow I did not think a topic for this movie would come up. But I'm with Pooky this is great. It cannot match up with Pixar but it got closer then any C.G.I movie I've seen. I must do say its nothing like the book at all. most movie based on books are not word for word. Hints the words "Based on." When I was young I enjoyed the story due to it dealt with food falling from the sky. Yet as I got older this book drifted away into the darkest part of my mind. But when I found out this movie was coming out I dig back into my old childhood and reread the book. The book great if you are a kid. But as for the movie it self it is not a waste of time or money to go see. The story isn't like the book, but its characters, humor, core plot makes it a good movie for anyone. I do admit that the teasers where lame and didn't give the movie justice at all. If one give it the time to watch it you can see from start to finish how great this movie is. There may be a few..at lest one cheesy part but its an important part of the movie, in which why the main character is doing what he doing.
Posted: Thu, 24th Sep 2009, 9:55pm

Post 24 of 54

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

CX3 wrote:

How old were you?
5.

Get it now? wink
Posted: Thu, 1st Oct 2009, 8:08am

Post 25 of 54

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Rating: +1

OK.

Film of the Year.

Sheer brilliance. I don't think I've laughed this much or this loudly at a film for years.

I still have a grin plastered all the way across my face.

Podcast review coming on Friday.
Posted: Thu, 1st Oct 2009, 10:47pm

Post 26 of 54

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Whoa, didn't see that reaction coming.
Posted: Fri, 2nd Oct 2009, 8:11am

Post 27 of 54

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Atom wrote:

Whoa, didn't see that reaction coming.
Me neither! After the comments here I thought I'd probably enjoy it, or at least appreciate it for what it was, but I wasn't expecting to love it.

Absolutely the best feel-good film I've seen for yonks.

As for 'Film of the Year', which might sound like a bit of a wild claim...the thing is, I can't actually identify any bad/poor/negative sides to the film. There was nothing in it that I didn't like.

Sure, there have been films this year that have shot higher (Moon, District 9), or come from much deeper, richer source material (Watchmen), and I've enjoyed them all, as you know. But they've all had major flaws in a few areas - not enough to make them bad films or spoil the enjoyment, but there are still clear areas where they don't quite get it right.

Meat With A Chance of Cloudy Balls, however, does what it sets out to do pretty much perfectly. I'm sure I'll spot some stuff on repeat viewings, but on first viewing it's the best cinema experience I've had in ages.

Full podcast review is up now: http://spiffingreview.com/2009/10/01/51/
Posted: Fri, 2nd Oct 2009, 8:45am

Post 28 of 54

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Tarn wrote:

Meat With A Chance of Cloudy Balls, however, does what it sets out to do pretty much perfectly.
Is this another movie's name, or a gay bar? biggrin
Posted: Fri, 2nd Oct 2009, 8:54am

Post 29 of 54

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

ben3308 wrote:

Tarn wrote:

Meat With A Chance of Cloudy Balls, however, does what it sets out to do pretty much perfectly.
Is this another movie's name, or a gay bar? biggrin
My sentiments exactly. razz

It's in the running for best title mash-up this year.
Posted: Fri, 2nd Oct 2009, 10:50am

Post 30 of 54

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Eh? Eh? What'd I tell you!
Posted: Sat, 3rd Oct 2009, 12:42am

Post 31 of 54

Thrawn

Force: 1995 | Joined: 11th Aug 2006 | Posts: 1962

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Wow, no kidding? I've gotta see this...
Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2011, 5:23am

Post 32 of 54

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Did anyone else ever end up seeing this?
Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2011, 5:26am

Post 33 of 54

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Yes.
And it was awesome.
Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2011, 5:56am

Post 34 of 54

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

I hated it. Really awkward characters, cliche everything, cheesy humor, bad pacing. It just felt awkward through and through. There were very few positive things I could find in this film.
Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2011, 3:06pm

Post 35 of 54

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

I mostly agree with Serpent. Tarn had my expectations through the roof for this and it didn't deliver for me. It was amusing enough for the first two acts, but it just fell completley apart in the third act. "Weird" and "New" don't necessarily mean better, and while I understand that wasn't why Tarn liked this film (I remember he found it was really funny), I find that I haven't really liked any of the stranger animation films to come out recently from underdog studios. I'll see if Rango can change my mind (I'm a giant ILM and John Knoll fanboy so I'm hoping it will). For me though I really prefer the "polished Hollywood-blockbuster" feel of Pixar and newer Dreamworks film. I borderline hated Despicable Me (juvenile humor, unfunny comic relief characters, strange world that didn't seem quite right, and a really weird plot), but loved Megamind (though it was a little forgettable).

I can't believe that people will go on about films like Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs and Despicable Me, but overlook Over The Hedge.

By the way Megamind is the closest film to ever show what a live-action Superman should look like. Snyder should be taking notes. Big, super fights that destroy half the city; yes please! Superman getting weakened by some mortal with Kryptonite and then beat up for the films climax? Hell no! We've seen it a million times, and it was never entertaining to look at in the first place.
Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2011, 9:05pm

Post 36 of 54

rogolo

Force: 5436 | Joined: 29th May 2005 | Posts: 1513

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 4 User MacOS User

Gold Member

I caught this a few weeks ago on Netflix Instant, vaguely remembering this thread. Thinking I'd give it shot, I started it up....and absolutely loved it.

Staff Only wrote:

It was amusing enough for the first two acts, but it just fell completley apart in the third act.
As you said, Staff Only, the first two acts were amusing enough - reminiscent of the sort of clever/funny family film fare we expect from Pixar. But the last act is where they really hit it out of the park. It was pure imaginative fun, and if you looked at me while watching it, I probably had a dumb grin on my face through those last 20 minutes. smile

I actually cannot understand someone who sits down to watch a cartoon kid's movie about food raining from the sky and thinking the last act's weirdness precludes it from being an entertaining film. The last act culminates in simple and unabashed fun by stretching the original concept to its extremes and indulging itself in the resultant setting. It's a fantastic combination of vibrant surreal imagery and dime novel action-adventure....all while exploring a whimsical and unknown world. And while the filmmakers could have easily broken my trust (and connection to the movie) by using this new world to introduce some sort of deus ex machina, they (thankfully) kept the film grounded in the world they built. The film itself is a great example of Chekhov's gun.

Conversely, about a week ago, I watched How to Train Your Dragon and didn't understand the excitement on these boards at all. Whereas Cloudy really has fun with it's ridiculous premise and takes it to absurd extremes, Dragon was very tame within its world, stiflingly by-the-book with its storytelling, and visually flat for the most part (didn't see it in 3D). There was nothing extraordinary about it. Not to say it was bad, but it simply doesn't rise much above the level of 'ordinary kid movie'.

Oh, and Jay Baruchel's voice got incredibly annoying by the end. mad
Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2011, 10:49pm

Post 37 of 54

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Well said, rogolo!

rogolo wrote:

Conversely, about a week ago, I watched How to Train Your Dragon and didn't understand the excitement on these boards at all. Whereas Cloudy really has fun with it's ridiculous premise and takes it to absurd extremes, Dragon was very tame within its world, stiflingly by-the-book with its storytelling, and visually flat for the most part (didn't see it in 3D). There was nothing extraordinary about it. Not to say it was bad, but it simply doesn't rise much above the level of 'ordinary kid movie'.

Oh, and Jay Baruchel's voice got incredibly annoying by the end. mad
I agree with you. I thought How To Train Your Dragon was really entertaining and had a lot of heart, but it did absolutely nothing that I hadn't seen before. In fact, I thought Tangled was a better take on classic formulaic fairy tales.
Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2011, 11:34pm

Post 38 of 54

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Wow. o.O

I was almost sure that Toy Story 3 could do nothing to beat How To Train Your Dragon as my favorite animated film of the year. It's a great film about dragons. If I'd seen that film when I was 10 years old Star Wars might not have been my favorite film today. Not only that but it has the best aerial scenes/battles in any film. Ever. I'm including Avatar, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Serenity, you name it. Dragons! The one thing that can resonate with the boy in us better than cars and boobs. Can it get any better? And the worst/best part is that it hasn't been done yet. Dragonheart is the closest to a decent dragon-film and it's so dated. You can't really count Two Towers and Return of the King. And even with ILM's brilliant work, I think we all want to forget Eragon. Someone finally did dragons right. I don't think we can even mention HTTYD in the same breath as Cloudy or any other weird animated feature. HTTYD is in my Blu-ray shelf next to Star Trek 2009, Avatar, Terminator 2 and The A-Team. Where it belongs. wink

The animation on HTTYD was amazing. I kept staring at the individual hairs on the viking's arms, or Stoic's amazing beard. Toy Story 3 did end up beating it because Toy Story 3 has that feel that the super intelligent people at Pixar had discussed every minute detail, every joke, every beat of that film to death, until it turned into the flawless film we all saw.

Anyway, I did appreciate the use of the spray-on-shoes as a Chekhov's Gun in Cloudy, but nothing really resonated with me. My favorite joke was "You can't run away from your own feet" and that was 40 seconds into the film. I hated the whole ending. The chickens, the intentionally uncomfortably cheesy "talk" the dad had at the end (which I thought backfired, and I just cringed through the whole thing)...it was waaay to much. It's still nice that others loved it. smile
Posted: Sat, 12th Mar 2011, 11:59pm

Post 39 of 54

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

You thought Toy Story 3 was better than HTTYD? I actually thought it was one of the less great animated movies. Not nearly as good as 1 or 2, which in turn were not nearly as much fun as HTTYD and Cloudy.
My only major issue with HTTYD is that the main character/conflict felt like a major retread of Cloudy's protagonist and conflict.
Boy is an anomaly, father is part of the system and disappointed with boy, boy does something amazing, someone takes advantage of said amazing thing, boy and pals use something to beat the Mega Boss that is produced and save their colony. Fortunately, Dragon was so good in every other aspect that the obvious recycled premise was pretty much drowned out.
Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2011, 3:16am

Post 40 of 54

Thrawn

Force: 1995 | Joined: 11th Aug 2006 | Posts: 1962

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs was a very fun film. It wasn't amazing, but it was enjoyable. I enjoyed the humor, so I'm not entirely sure where Staff Only is coming from. Difference of opinion, I suppose.

I also thought How To Train Your Dragon was entirely overrated. Besides the rather cliche plot, it was an awesome movie, but no where near the perfection that was Toy Story 3. I'd take every Pixar film in history over HTTYD. It wasn't a bad film (maybe even groundbreaking in some regards) but it certainly wasn't as great as Staff is making it seem.

Terminal Velocity, you're dead to me.
Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2011, 4:41am

Post 41 of 54

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Thrawn wrote:

Terminal Velocity, you're dead to me.
Wow, I've heard that four times this week.
Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2011, 6:57am

Post 42 of 54

Axeman

Force: 17995 | Joined: 20th Jan 2002 | Posts: 6124

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

SuperUser

Yeah, How to Train Your Dragon was enjoyable, but not very memorable. The character designs for all of the dragons were lame, which really hampered the default coolness of having dragons involved. None of the dragons looked cool. A month later, I can't remember the name of a single character, though i do remember the formulaic plot in completely out-of-place accents. Why on earth do Vikings have American accents as children, which promptly change to Scottish accents when they become adults? It did have some nice rendering, some cool visuals, and some sequences of nice cinematography.

Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs, on the other hand, also had some nice rendering, cool visuals, and nice cinematography, but combined them with excellent, memorable characters, a good tight script, and roughly 7x the humor quotient of HTTYD.
Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2011, 8:43am

Post 43 of 54

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Terminal Velocity wrote:

My only major issue with HTTYD is that the main character/conflict felt like a major retread of Cloudy's protagonist and conflict.
I hope you are kidding. Or at least that I'm misunderstanding you. These movies take three years to make at the least. There is no way they were "retreading" anything from Cloudy. Also that a movie like HTTYD would take any inspiration from a movie like Cloudy is laughable to me. If you want to know where they found their inspiration you can just look at almost any film here. I can assure you, even if Cloudy came out in 2006 it wouldn't have crossed their minds to take inspiration from it.

Still you are no worse than Roger Ebert. That guy made me laugh with this little gem in his Megamind review.

Roger Ebert wrote:

This set-up is bright and amusing, even if it does feel recycled from bits and pieces of such recent animated landmarks as "The Incredibles" with its superpowers and "Despicable Me" with its villain. "Megamind" even goes so far as naming Megamind's fishy sidekick "Minion" (David Cross), a nod to the Minions who serve the despicable Gru.
What? Aren't you supposed to know about film? Does he honestly think they had time to rip off Despicable me in five months?! That guy must be getting old. Also he is clearly separating animated films from live action film as if they exist on separate plains. The set up feels recycled from "such animated features as The Incredibles and Despicable me"? Because of superheroes and having an anti villain as protagonist? So all the other superhero films don't count? -.- Whatever.
Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2011, 1:41pm

Post 44 of 54

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I'm not saying they actually were ripping off Cloudy. I know that production can start a long time before the film actually comes out. My last post was under the mistaken assumption that they were both Dreamworks. But it was very similar; a misfit in society makes a discovery/invention, becomes a celebrity for a short while, then someone takes advantage of him and causes a catastrophe. Again, though. I don't really have a problem with this, since it was a well-done story. I thought both of the films were good; Cloudy was a little funnier, while HTTYD had somewhat better animation.
Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2011, 6:01pm

Post 45 of 54

Axeman

Force: 17995 | Joined: 20th Jan 2002 | Posts: 6124

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

SuperUser

Terminal Velocity wrote:

Cloudy was a little funnier, while HTTYD had somewhat better animation.
I'd disagree. The animation in both was darn near perfect. I think what you are referring to is that HTTYD was rendered in a more realistic, detailed style. Which has everything to do with the modeling and rendering, and not really anything to do with the animation. Animation is how the characters move, the staging, and the timing of all of the action; and I couldn't find fault with it in either film.

But since animating, modeling, and rendering are all very different jobs, performed by different people, I think its important to make the distinction.
Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2011, 7:46pm

Post 46 of 54

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Axeman wrote:

Terminal Velocity wrote:

Cloudy was a little funnier, while HTTYD had somewhat better animation.
I'd disagree. The animation in both was darn near perfect.
Yes however...

Axeman wrote:

I think what you are referring to is that HTTYD was rendered in a more realistic, detailed style. Which has everything to do with the modeling and rendering, and not really anything to do with the animation.
While everything you said was true Axeman, you made it (possibly intentionally) sound like it was purely an artistic choice when in fact Terminal Velocity was correct (even if his terminalogy was a bit off). How To Train Your Dragon had a waaaay higher budget than Cloudy, it was made by a veteran studio, and it called for way more difficult visual effects, such as fire, water and flying physics. Cloudy undoubtedly looked good and did the job, but the CGI (by which I mean animation, modeling, lighting, texturing, rendering etc.) and cinematography in How To Train Your Dragon and Cloudy is incomparable. How To Train Your Dragon also had one of the years best scores. I just don't get how you can compare them.
Posted: Sun, 13th Mar 2011, 7:58pm

Post 47 of 54

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Yeah, I noticed the mistake when I posted it, but I figured that it would get the same point across, so I didn't bother changing it. I was talking about the models etc. And not just in how well they did it, but what they did. Most of Cloudy's visuals weren't super unusual or breathtaking, while HTTYD had all the landscapes and sky shots that made it much more noticeable just how good it was.

Staff Only wrote:

How To Train Your Dragon also had one of the years best scores. I just don't get how you can compare them.
Because while they were very different films, they were both aiming for different things. Cloudy wasn't nearly as impressive, sure, but it wasn't trying to be. It was supposed to be a funny family film, which I think it did very well. I think they succeeded about equally in their own domain.
Posted: Mon, 14th Mar 2011, 12:13am

Post 48 of 54

Azulon'sAssassin

Force: 1108 | Joined: 26th Oct 2010 | Posts: 648

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Really? I thought the movie was actually pretty stupid. I guess I just didn't get the entire "turn water into food" and "food falling from the sky" thing...Oh, well.
Posted: Mon, 14th Mar 2011, 12:56am

Post 49 of 54

Terminal Velocity

Force: 2507 | Joined: 7th Apr 2008 | Posts: 1350

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Azulon, if that was the reason you didn't like the movie...you've probably just discredited every fantasy and scifi ever made on account of being exactly what they claim: fantasy and fiction.
Posted: Mon, 14th Mar 2011, 1:10am

Post 50 of 54

Azulon'sAssassin

Force: 1108 | Joined: 26th Oct 2010 | Posts: 648

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

No, that wasn't the only reason, and I LOVE scifi movies. Star Wars is, and most likely always will be, my faveorite movie(s). I just...I really don't know EXACTLY whay I didn't like it, I just didn't.
Posted: Mon, 14th Mar 2011, 1:14am

Post 51 of 54

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Yes but has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
Posted: Mon, 14th Mar 2011, 2:25am

Post 52 of 54

Azulon'sAssassin

Force: 1108 | Joined: 26th Oct 2010 | Posts: 648

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Pooky wrote:

Yes but has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
ok...
Posted: Mon, 14th Mar 2011, 4:25am

Post 53 of 54

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Are faveorites more, or less, dangerous than faveors? If so........whay?
Posted: Mon, 14th Mar 2011, 9:11am

Post 54 of 54

danielgwood

Force: 5650 | Joined: 7th Jun 2010 | Posts: 224

VisionLab User PhotoKey 5 Pro User Windows User MacOS User

FXhome Team Member

To move back on topic, I thought Cloudy was awesome. I don't watch many pixar/animated films in general, because they aren't usually my thing. A friend made me watch Cloudy, and about 10 minutes in I was hooked.

Steeeeeeve!