Looks fun!

The fortune cookie gag at the end had me laughing pretty good.

C.G.I. and GIANT FOOD! ……I’m there!

why does this look a lot more epic that it seems.

I had to stop watching because the trailer threatened to tell me the the story of the entire movie! However, spoiler-ridden trailer aside this looks great. The oddball plot and graphic designs make me very, very happy.

I’m still not feeling this project. I will give it a chance at theaters, but right now, I’m still not having an anticipation for it…not like Sony’s Surf’s Up.

Now I wanna see it.

This is too weird not to see. The trailer locked me in.

Finally a really cartoony movie! I love it!

Looking forward it, it would be nice if someone could show Dreamworks how a pure comedy should be done.

This would have been cool only if it matched the Ron Barrett illustrations from the clever book. Those illustrations drew you into the story, they had heart. I remember reading through the book again and again because of those illustrations. They were great.

The design of this mediocre adaptation immediately repulsed me. Lifeless and generic characters and backgrounds. It’s pathetic.

I’ll definitely not see this with my kids in the theatre, won’t buy the DVD either. Maybe we’ll check it out on pay-per-view one night. A BIG maybe. What clinched it for me is when seeing Up (an amazing film), my kids saw this trailer and none of them said they wanted to see it.

This movie could have been so amazing.

Well, now that I’ve gotten a full look at the story, I might as well give it a shot.

This second trailer is way better than the first. Good— hopefully it’s successful. There’s a lot of talent over at Sony.

Can I get a beer to go with those meatballs? I think I’ll need to be drunk to see this flick.

Yeah, it’s starting to look good, but they pretty much gave away the ENTIRE story in the trailer!

I hate spoilers. Gusy, if you sell a script, and the studio wants to wrest creative control away from you at the very LEAST, try to get control over the trailers!

This is cute, with a chance of taking my kids out to see it.

If i had kids.

I can’t stop thinking of how disgusting that town will smell a week later when the food begins to rot.

Kyle: I don’t think the designs from the original book would have been conducive to CGI.

I think the book gives away the story… I think the trailer’s awesome.

I like the look of the film - the character designs remind me or Rankin/Bass, and I love the lighting.

There are a lot of nice details - the posters of Einstein, Tesla and Philo
T. Fansworth; sardines in the baby bottle; the news crawl below the anchor says “Stay tuned for ‘Wet Pets’: 2 hours of puppies caught in the rain”… The “No School!” gag still cracks me up.

But I agree: the trailer gives too much away.

I agree with Kyle. Ron Barrett’s illustrations were the principal reason for loving the book. This looks ugly. Nothing to get me near a theater.

“because sardines are super gross….”

It’s very cool to see the Clone High type humour transfer over to this. Can’t wait!

cute but uninspired. The team that worked on that spaghetti shot, though, should get a medal.

I hope it does well or Sony Pictures Animation will probably close down.

Thanks Tim Sarnoff and Don Levy!

… my computer just exploded! what an incredible piece of stupid, bad designed, senseless, @%ƒ*>^$å#…trash!

“It’s very cool to see the Clone High type humour transfer over to this. Can’t wait!

The fact that the movie’s from the creators of “Clone High” sold me instantly. I’ll see anything they do.

Don’t mince your words Hans… …Tell us how you really feel!!! ;)

Christopher: Why would it have to be CGI? A closer adaptation of the original illustrations in traditional, hand-drawn animation would have been GORGEOUS! Probably “too risky” for the execs at Sony.

Long live 2D!

P.S. Thanks, Michael!

If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all… :)

As much as it is *nothing* at all like either of the books, the second trailer does at least make the film look clever. It still looks like typical a Dreamworks rapid-fire pop culture joke-fest, but it might be an inoffensive day at the movies with the kid.

Slighty Off-Topic:

I hope the theater here does a better job with their 3D projection than they did on UP, though. I loved the film, but the screening I saw was just out-of-focus enough to give me a headache. Plus, they left the lights on during the preceding short. Grrr. I complained twice, but nothing got fixed. If I’m having to pay $25 to take my kid to a matinee, it had better be the finest screening in the world!

In the book, the city called Chewandswallow was a place where it had always rained food naturally; the citizens knew no other tradition. In the end (spoiler!) they were actually driven out of the city and had to adjust to life in our world. The book’s presentation of this culture, and the suggestion of the culture shock that the citizens endured upon leaving their city, was one of its most endearing aspects for me as a kid.

While I don’t mind the movie showing us how the tradition started, one gets the impression that there’s no real tradition involved: it’s about a scientist who figures out how to make it rain food for a little while; then there’s a disaster; then life presumably goes back to normal. So the element of people having grown up in this world is gone.

No matter how good the movie is, then, it shares very little with the book except the general concept of raining food going berserk. While I’d agree the book didn’t have enough story in it for a feature-length film, it’s a shame it had to be fleshed out specifically in a way that contradicts its original nature so bluntly. Did they really need to license the book to tell this story? (Sure, I’m a partisan. But the book was my favorite as a kid. Dave Gerstein ignore raining food? No way.)

God I’m so excited for this! The colours, the lighting, the model designs, the acting, the humour, the epic-ness of giant food squashing people….I REEEAAAALLLYY hope the story does this justice!

I don’t understand people who complain about spoilers. I’ve only ever seen two films where a spoiler would have considerably lessened my enjoyment of the film: Psycho and The Usual Suspects. In all other cases, the big reveal is kind of not the point, and the STORYTELLING that gets us to - and through - the big reveal is far more important.

Further, I PARTICULARLY don’t understand people who complain about spoilers for a work that has been available for a good long while. Psycho was made before I was born; complaining that someone “spoiled” it would be as asinine as complaining that someone spoiled an adaptation of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, or Enid Blyton’s Famous Five, or pretty much any Roald Dahl book.

I’m just saying, please stop whining about spoilers. Films shouldn’t be about the surprise of the narrative - and, really, how often are you genuinely surprised by the plot of a film, animated or otherwise? - but about the process and joy of good storytelling. (Heck, films noir begin at the end!)

Part of my Internet Campaign to Eradicate False Outrage.

(The movie looks like a reasonable matinee choice.)

First up, the movie seems appealing because the character designs look sort of like the demo reel of a mildly-impaired recent “school of design” graduate. ADULT SWIM has taught me that crappy-looking stuff can be hilarious.

What throws me is the message that “sardines are gross”. Bunk. I eat them every day. The oil protects my joints. That the smell is reminiscent of a gynecological clinic’s “problem ward” is of concern only to my many cats. What do ya want, I never have any company.

Not fond of that kind of forced humour, with an action scene every 10 minutes because the videogame kids might get bored. Sort of like the film of “Horton Hears a Who” compared to the book.

it seems that the makers of this film are taking some liberties when it comes to gags, the goofy story is appropriate, i like it a lot