Comments on: $9.99 trailer

By: JPDJ

JPDJ — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 23:42:19 +0000

““Kuleshov effect”- less is more (regarding the “static” faces). In various closeups during this trailer, I found myself drawn into the characters, BECAUSE their faces were hard to read, static. I prefer being an ACTIVE audience member, bringing myself willingly into the story.”

Hey, I’m all about being an active audience member–I think most visitors to this site are–but I’m not sure the “less is more” argument really applies here. If it did, then the character designs would’ve been simplified to match the minimalist acting. (Or in more visual terms, styled more like Charlie Brown than ’80s He-Man)

Because the characters are so specific in their design, so realistic in their features that I think the more appropriate term here would be the “uncanny valley.”

Obviously I’m only basing my opinion on what I saw in the trailer. I’ll see the movie if it makes a stop in the DC Metro area and I sincerely hope it blows me away.

By: Roberto

Roberto — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 19:57:44 +0000

I’ll surely watch it, I think the story seems interesting, but that doesn’t change the fact that it doesn’t look especially aesthetic to me.

By: CW

CW — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 15:20:40 +0000

“Kuleshov effect”- less is more (regarding the “static” faces). In various closeups during this trailer, I found myself drawn into the characters, BECAUSE their faces were hard to read, static. I prefer being an ACTIVE audience member, bringing myself willingly into the story. I like to read a face, to try to see into it, into its emotions, its inner thoughts, its inner workings. It keeps me engaged (much more than explosions in true 3d, sorry Mr. Katzenberg).

Puppet theatre in all its forms around the world (and stop motion in animation, for the most part) don’t merely “accept” that their characters faces are static, they embrace this fact and use it to wonderful effect as a way of keeping the audience engaged. It relies on an audience that WANTS to be taken away, taken INTO another world, to believe that something inanimate and clearly NOT alive can, in fact, be alive in the projected world of the film. If you aren’t open to imagining that that these puppets are alive (not despite their stylized appearances but BECAUSE of them), then why are you watching in the first place?!

For the nay sayers here, complaining that the faces are static and boring, that the mouths aren’t in sync, that the animation looks jerky, that question “why even do this in animation,” most of whom have not even seen the film, I have to say you have little understanding of stop motion as a medium (which can be forgiven) and that you are extremely eager to cut something down that just MIGHT be profoundly effecting… without even giving it a chance.Not so easy to forgive. I can’t imagine that a true lover of animation would be so short-sighted.

By: Roberto

Roberto — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 11:44:58 +0000

Yep, it looks like an interesting movie story-wise but the visuals are not very aesthetic.

By: robcat2075

robcat2075 — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 02:29:55 +0000

The rigid faces and strange mouths bring to mind the “Super-Marionation” puppets of Gerry Anderson in the 60’s.

I’ll have to take your word for it that it’s smart and funny and serious. Can’t tell from the trailer.

By: tom

tom — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 00:55:03 +0000

Hmm. I would definitely see this, and I’m sure it will be good, but I agree with some of the other comments that this doesn’t feel like it needs to be animated. And I’d have to say- it pains me to say- that if this had been CG, or if it had been a Linklater film, I doubt it would be as warmly received here as it has been.

That will be the only time I’ll ever be even slightly critical of my beloved Brew.

By: Rafa

Rafa — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 00:03:18 +0000

They have mouths like Renee Zewegger´s

By: JPDJ

JPDJ — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 23:54:59 +0000

All I could focus on were the limited expressions on the characters’ faces. They weren’t subtle –which would be nice if done properly– just limited. As if the figures’ acting couldn’t sufficiently match those of the voice talent.

Which is a shame. I hate to come down on a film that is a refreshing break from what we’re used to in animation. No, it’s not unique as far as indie films go. But it is when compared to other animated features being produced today.

$9.99 should be supported. I want to see more films like this down the road. (With the animators proving that they can be every bit as nuanced/emotive as their live-action counterparts!)