Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas

[Danny]

Who here has seen the new Sinbad trailer?

http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&id=18 ... er&intl=us

The animation looks good, but I think this movie will suffer the same fate as 'Treasure Planet' (which I think is an awesome movie btw). Even though the trailer shows a lot of the two female characters, this movie still pulls off as a boy movie, which TP, Atlantis, and Fox's Titan AE all failed at.
I also think that it's funny that most DreamWorks animated features get big name actors and actresses to try to pull in the crowd, like using Brad Pitt for Sinbad, and Matt Damon for Spirit. Too bad 'Shrek' is the only movie DreamWorks has to gloat about. Hmmm...I think DreamWorks lacks the magic Disney has in animation.

Your thoughts?

[Luke]

Too bad 'Shrek' is the only movie DreamWorks has to gloat about. Hmmm...I think DreamWorks lacks the magic Disney has in animation.

Your thoughts?

While it's not a DreamWorks production, I thought Chicken Run (a DW distribution) was very good, even better than Shrek.

Overall, though, I agree with your assessment. DreamWorks may get big names to do voices (Pitt, De Niro, Damon, etc.), but from the features I've seen, they lack the intangible element of "magic" that most Disney films can lay claim to.

A lot of their projects also seem suspiciously similar to settings and stories as Disney and Pixar features. Such as...A Bug's Life and Antz....or even, the upcoming undersea comedies.

[MickeyMouseboy]

Dreamworks is the ghetto version of Disney just a pencil and stolen ideas

[Luke]

Seriously, they remind me a bit of the "Children's Film Favorites" studio:

<img src="http://images.amazon.com/images/P/63057 ... ZZZZZZ.jpg">

<img src="http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0000 ... ZZZZZZ.jpg">

[MickeyMouseboy]

<img src="http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0000 ... ZZZZZZ.jpg">

LOL who wants a collector's edition of that!!!!

[Paka]

I agree, Luke. DreamWorks has always seemed a bit shady to me, and Katzenberg's a real jackass, to boot. There's obviously the infamous falling out he had with the Disney company around ten years ago (because he wanted more power but didn't get it - how wholesome), but look at this Jim Hill article for an anecdote about the slimy suit's dealings with poor Jim Henson (it's about halfway down).
Anyways, yes - I don't like Katzenberg, if you couldn't tell. ~_^ I personally harbor the conspiracy theory that he's deliberately greenlit stories for the animation department and PDI to produce because of their similarity to Disney and Pixar features. He's so damn bitter at them that he's taking "revenge" on them through his films. Who knows - maybe he even pays people to take these "borrowed" concepts and make a script with them. O_o No sir - I don't mean to champion Disney - because heaven knows they're acting pretty shameful right now, too - but DreamWorks so far has yet to impress me. Prince of Egypt was okay, if only just another Bible rendition, and Antz had some great adult humor in it, but is too suspiciously like A Bug's Life. I think Shrek is far less than it's cracked up to be - I don't think it deserved the Best Animated Feature Oscar, and it doesn't seem to be the timeless type, either. Sinbad will just come and go - it'll be lost the flurry of huge summer movies this year, and won't create much of a stir, just like its "inspiration" - Treasure Planet.
Sharkslayer looks dreadful. I'm sorry to be so quick to judge, but it does. Those character designs are simply gawdawful - way too much anthropomorphization of those fish - yechh. Not to mention it looks like another Antz to Pixar's Finding Nemo - a bit too similar. At least Pixar knows how to make their fish look believable. Yeesh.

[Danny]

I'm glad that someone else agrees that Shrek shouldn't have won that Oscar. While Monsters, Inc. had heart, Shrek had toilet humor. Plus the whole Eddie Murphy-as-Donkey thing didn't work for me. Reminded me too much of Mushu from Mulan, except a little more annoying. The only reason why this movie is so 'popular' is because Katzenberg and his crew took cheap shots and poked fun at Disney.
Although Katzenberg says it is coincidental about 'Antz' and 'Bugs', and 'Sharkslayer' and 'Nemo'...you know that there's something phony about the similarities.

Pixar still has 'The Incredibles' and 'Cars' coming out...what should we expect from DreamWorks? 'The Invincibles' and 'Trucks'???

[Jake Lipson]

Let me throw in my two cents.

I have an on-again off-again relashionship to DreamWorks animated pictures - not at all like my almost unconditional support of Disney's Feature Animation output. Some DreamWorks pictures I love (Spirit, Prince of Egypt, Joseph), some I hate (Chicken Run), some I won't see at all because of their afromentioned simmilarity to Disney pictures (Antz, anyone?) DreamWorks is certianly capable of producing a great animated picture, but I wish they'd be a lot more quality-consistant and stop stealing from Disney (get their own ideas!) And, just for the record, while Shrek was good, I do agree Monsters, Inc. was better and deserved the Oscar.

[2099net]

Shrek's an awful film to win an Oscar. Just wait 5 to 10 years and Shrek will be dated. I don't mean in CGI terms, but popular culture terms. Monsters, Inc. was a much better film, becuase the actual story and content is timeless (like all the good Disney animated films).

Dreamworks as a studio is strange. It has a reputation for being "original" but really it's no more original than any other studio - in fact, as has been pointed out they are perhaps much less original due to their animated films parallel's to Disney.

I've nothing against Dreamworks products as such - Spirit was dull but I've enjoyed the rest (including Shrek for what it was). I'd like to see them tackle more Bible stories (I enjoyed Prince of Egypt and Joseph King of Dreams)

[Maerj]

Dreamworks to me has been okay. I liked Chicken Run, it was a cute movie. I hated Spirit, I found it to be a very annoying film. I liked Shrek, I don't know if I would have voted for it for best animated picture though. But, the whole awards thing is still kinda fuzzy to me.

Anyway, it is kinda strange that some of their projects are similar to Disney/Pixar films. But, comparing 'Antz' to 'A Bug's Life' is like comparing Deep Impact to Armageddon. Similiar subject matter handled two different ways. Antz is basically an animated Woody Allen picture geared toward adult audiences and A Bug's Life was more a family oriented picture. So, let them go on with their Sharkslayer or whatever. Only Disneyand Pixar have found a way to consistantly capture the magic, but Dreamworks, and other studios, can still produce some interesting animation.

[MickeyMouseboy]

death to DreamWorks! their films will fade and wont be remembered in a few. Disney and Pixar films will always endure the test of time cause they are good, sorry to break it to ya Katzenberg!

[maj]

death to DreamWorks! their films will fade and wont be remembered in a few.

Hey, I liked Shrek and Antz.


Isn't there room for both disney and dreamworks? Disney tends to aim for the family audience most of the time, whilst dreamworks tends to grab the audience of the teen market up.

Besides dreamworks doesn't operate a limited release policy, making their movies difficult to get hold of- if disney's classics were available all yr round, it'd be easy to recommend say 101 dalmations or Aladdin to people. People see shrek, say it's really good, without having any quality movies to compare it against. There are quite a few people who haven't seen that many of the better disney movies- so Shrek looks even better when they see it.

Anyway, rant over

Animated moviewise non-disney stuff I enjoyed recently include iron giant, antz, shrek, the wallace and gromit stuff. Wasn't too enthusiastic about chicken run however.

As to monsters inc- when was it released in the US- over here, shrek was in summer 01 and monsters was on 02 wasn't it?

[MickeyMouseboy]

Shrek was stupid and its joke were mostly dissing Disney very stupid. Iron Giant was very good and i will get the Special Edition coming out this year Warner Bros still know how to make them! hehe

[poco]

Dreamworks puts out some good films...mainly live action type of stuff I really like, so can't diss there.

Shrek was good and i own it, but i would trade it for a Disney flim anyday (what was my mind thinking when I picked it up to begin with?).

Dreamworks does have this "competition" thing going on with disney though...i remember both Antz and a Bugs Life came out in theaters around the same time....i own both but Bugs Life wins hands down. Can't Dreamworks have their own originality and quit taking from Disney?

[disneyfella]

I was just reading a book called Keys To The Kingdom: How Michael Eisner Lost His Grip (which I'm sure was a bit slanted), but apparently the story with Katzenberg is that he was promised the job when Frank Wells left, and after he died Michael said no I can handle BOTH President of the Studios and CEO (which he did for a while). Since Frank never wrote an actual contract Michael saw no reason to honor it.
Much of Disney's success in the late 80s, and early 90s was due to Jeffrey Katzenberg's love of animation. Beauty and the Beast, Little Mermaid, Aladdin, and yes....Lion King were all under the hands of Katzenberg (even preliminary work on Pocahontas and Hunchback were his too). Now I don't mean he drew anything, but he oversaw and gave direction to these films. So if there is any similarity in the work of Dreamworks, maybe it's because they are trying to hold on to somehting that worked for so long. Honestly, I have to say that no Dreamworks animated film that I've seen has ever held up to par with Disney features, but then there are some Disney features that have completely bombed since Katzenberg left as well. Having an environment where two great minds like Eisner and Katzenberg can butt heads and create something awesome (i.e. the afore mentioned animated features) is what in my opinion created "lightning in a bottle" as some have come to call it. No, I'm not a Katzenberg lover, but I don't think everyone should slam on him when he did an awful lot for Disney. He may have been greedy wanting a promotion, but no more greedy than Eisner was in not giving him the promotion and holding 2 positions for himself (not to mention some serious bonuses upwards of a reported $200,000).
To me, it seems like ever since Katzenberg left, Disney has been experimenting; making memorable films, but lacking that pixie dust that you walk out of the theater with.
Thank God for Pixar!

[Maerj]

Well, experimentation is a good thing. Sure Disney may have had some films that didn't do well financially in theaters, but they are still good films. Even Walt himself had his share of films that weren't successful commercially, that doesn't make them any less magical or entertaining. When Brother Bear hits theaters everyone will say "The magic is back!"

[disneyfella]

I hope you're right.

[Jack]

IMO, the magic of Disney's animated films died after Lion King and hasn't been back since. Yes, I am excluding Pixar - Disney is in no way responsible for what made Pixar's films great, just as Disney isn't responsible for Miyazaki's work, even though they distributed it.

The only animated movie DreamWorks put out that I liked was Shrek - and I think it did have heart. It had a good moral, and had some nice hidden humor for the grown ups in some places too. I'd say it was on par with Monsters Inc. overall, with MI. having slightly more edge.

I HOPE Brother Bear brings back the magic of Disney, but we'll see.

[MickeyMouseboy]

actually your wrong! disney has not lost its magic in their animated features after lion king! pocahontas was really good! and so was hunchback and hercules, mulan, tarzan, fantisia 2000, L&S and TP all have the disney magic! just because they didnt have fluffy characters, and people striking up in song and been a tipical disney movie doesnt mean the magic wasnt there!

[Loomis]

I have to admit that I liked Shrek. I do think the Oscar should have gone to Monster's Inc, but I still enjoyed the former.
However, many of Dreamworks films have failed to connect with me (I found Prince of Egypt was one of those films that was tailored to be so inoffensive that it became boring, to me at least). Shrek - despite the fact that I normally don't dig on toilet humour (and those parts of the film did kind of make me cringe) - did have a sense of humour about itself that is lacking from some of the epic 'serious' pieces of animation.
Haven't seen Spirit yet, doesn't appeal to me. But who knows?

IMO, the magic of Disney's animated films died after Lion King and hasn't been back since.

I tend to agree that the 'serious' Disney flicks have lost their charm since the Lion King, but the more lighthearted ones (New Groove, Lilo and Stitch, Tarzan).

At the very least, it is good that animation has a few competitors on the screen now. It might not be very interesting now, but I think in the coming years we will start seeing some grand competition that will push Disney and the other studios towards a level of excellence we haven't seen for a while...