fantasticfox fantasticfox
Feature FilmStop Motion

Fantastic Mr. Fox Trailer

Fantastic Mr. Fox

Trailer is out today for Wes Anderson’s first animated feature Fantastic Mr. Fox. Maybe it’s just me, but the dialogue delivery sounds stilted and leadfooted throughout the trailer. On the other hand, the production design looks fantastic indeed. Like Coraline, we’re seeing another stop-motion feature that is pushing the boundaries of mainstream feature animation design and searching for an original look. That’s never a bad thing.

  • Yep, the dialogue delivery was very American, in the worst sense. (a trait I’ve noticed in American voice-acting for animation – all too often – is that the actors don’t take the characters seriously, and act as if they’re in a Looney Tunes production. This was particularly noticeable in the star-studded American voice-overs of Russian animated classics made by Films by Jove, which were awful – the sensitivity of the original dialogue replaced by forced wackiness that failed completely)

    The production design for this film is old-fashioned and charming, while the dialogue sounds like the latest Dreamworks film. There’s a real disconnect.

    Odd that the actors chose this direction for what is really a quintessentially British story.

  • MattSullivan

    This looks awful. And very amateur-ish, even though I know there are probably some very talented animators working on it.

    I hate to say it, because I like stop motion. But.. I actually kinda wish it had been done in CG. And the designs are too human. It’s like…something that would have given me nightmares on PBS when i was a kid.

  • The badger is a demolition expert.

  • TheGunheart

    I have to say…I’m a little creeped out by the designs. Their faces make me think of taxidermy and their skinny bodies are strange, not to mention the weird, stage-style camera angles.

    It’s certainly different, but I’m not entirely sure it’s what I’d want. I kinda wish Henry Selick was still attatched.

  • BT

    I strongly disagree about the voice acting. I believe I read somewhere that it was recorded on location instead of in a studio, that’s why it sounds unusual. To me it sounds nothing at all like “the latest Dreamworks film,” which is refreshing. It also seems very in line with the tone of previous Wes Anderson films.

  • Dan

    I feel like the voice acting was the best part of this. Anderson’s favorite players are instantly recognizable. I’ve been spoiled by Coraline, the choppy style stop motion just seems sloppy to me now. Even if that is what they are going for, I can’t get beyond it. In 2 minutes at least. We’ll see after an hour.

  • joel brinkerhoff

    This was a long time in the making. What is surprising to me is the adherence to ‘old school’ techniques. I see no digital effects and some shots looked like the characters were on glass. the smoke and other elements looked like cotton batting.

  • DT

    I was really hoping this would be another stop-motion triumph. Unfortunately, it looks more like Robot Chicken than Coraline.

  • startend

    Huh. I thought the humans would be live-action!

    It’s definitely Wes Anderson, but the fact it’s animated makes it look a bit odd. What made his previous films charming were his style that you DIDN’T see in any other live-action film, but here, it looks pretty mundane. I hate how their bodies aren’t animated when they’re just standing and talking, but they sure don’t try and hide that these are puppets on a miniature set, which I really like. I’m sure the aesthetic will grow on me.

  • ZN

    I’ve never really complained about the uncanny valley effect until now. Those are some FREAKY looking characters.

  • Hulk

    I think it looks pretty good. It’s reminiscent of Cosgrove Hall’s “Wind in the Willows” series which used to show on the Disney Channel.

    As for the Voice acting I have an alternate theory: These are actors who’ve done VO for cartoons before so I wouldn’t blame them for lack of know-how. I would place that responsibility on Wes Anderson. This is his first foray in to animation of any kind, and he’s the one who probably felt that “animation” equals “flat and insincere” performances from the voice actors. I know that from experience. Having worked with live action directors who transitioned in to animation, I can tell you that they usually feel they have to over-exaggerate certain things to make it “cartoony” and also ignore the possiblilities of design and other elements that could be enhanced by caricautre. “Space Chimps” is an excellent example of that.

  • Eric

    Cheers for trying Wes!

  • Gaby

    I’m happy to see a main stream stop-motion feature that still looks like stop-motion. “Coraline” was amazing but it was still slick and shiny. “Corpse Bride” might as well have been CG it was so “perfect.” I love the fur crawling and all the loose cloth and practical effects. What really annoyed me is they had to say “From the Author who wrote Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.” Does no one know who Roald Dahl is anymore?

  • top cat james

    So it’s an animated “Oceans Eleven”?

  • The choppy animation is kind of distracting, but otherwise, I’m still looking forward to this film. I like that it’s old-school. I laughed a few times at the dialogue. I like that it resembles an animated film made for adults. The character design is totally frightening, but I’m a little fascinated by frightening stop-mo, like in Alice (with the White Rabbit). We shall see!

  • Mike Kazaleh

    I thought this story took place in the English countryside. Imagine my surprise when the sounds of the Bobby Fuller Four came out over my speakers.

    Hollywood is incapable of coming up with stories by themselves. They do, however, seem to have an inexhaustible supply of ways to butcher other people’s stories.

  • Jared Pettitt

    I think you guys are a little quick to hand out harsh judgement. This trailer and its dialogue look much, much better than anything recent by Dreamworks I’ve seen. It might be because I already like Wes Anderson, but I think the whole thing looks very charming. I just hope it gets a wide release.

  • David Cuny

    I think the animators, designers and voice actors have all done a great job capturing the Director’s vision here. Unfortunately for me, I find very little to like here.

    After films like “Coraline”, it’s hard to watch this style of animation, and it feels like an stylistic decision that draws attention to the fact that it’s hand animated. Instead of being charming, it just feels cheap, which is especially galling because I’m sure the animators were capable of creating real performances.

    The characters move, but the “illusion of life” never comes through.

    The 2D staging only reminds me that I’m watching an animated film – there isn’t a moment when I’m drawn into the world.

    The characters are too aware that they’re on camera. They say things for the sake of being clever, not because it really serves their character or the plot. It again only serves to break down the fourth wall.

    The result – for me – seems to focuses animation and style, rather than making it subservient to the story.

  • Scott

    “recorded on location ”

    What? They put the actors underground in dirt? I doubt it.

    Some day, Anderson will make a good movie.

  • Saturnome

    I love it’s look, it’s choppy animation and love the 2D effects and style in some shots. It’s all good to me.

  • I like this. The lo-fi nature just makes it more appealing, like they’re going out of their way to NOT do something polished and slick. It exudes a certain charm.

  • Mac

    I dunno. It looks kind of awful. The voices are the worst thing about it and I think that’s what’s putting me off the most. It seems like they’re trying to go for a very English feel with the look of this film and its characters, but the dialogue and voices are very American. I can imagine this idea being used for comic effect, but in the trailer it just comes off as a very bad fit. I hope I’m wrong, but it looks like another case of stealing the story from a classic children’s book and desperately trying to make it hip for a new audience – resulting in something lame.

    When’s the next Aardman film coming out?

  • That was… weird.
    I’ve been curious about this for a long time, since half of London worked on it, and I was expecting some sort of super-craftsmanship thing like Coraline (given the talent involved). But what’s with making the WHOLE MOVIE either sideways or direct to camera? There’s original style and then there’s just grafittiing all over the fourth wall. Go that way for a dream sequence or something, sure. But the WHOLE MOVIE? Not into it.
    People have GOT to stop employing talented stop-motioneers to do deliberately clumsy work.
    -wait a minute-
    this is all to do with Bill Melendez and Charles Schultz, isn’t it Mr Anderson? That’s what’s with all the sideways, right? I can see that. I’ve used it myself. Doesn’t seem to work with tall people I’m afraid. Sorry Wes.

  • Matt Lamothe

    It looks good, but again seems to fall victim to the “In a world… In a place” trailer style. So many films get screwed by this type of advertising. I bet if they just took out the announcer’s terribly cheesy voice and zany soundtrack, this preview would entice both kids and adult much much more.

  • Jason

    Really creepy and unappealing.

  • Gobo

    I think it looks wonderful, in that it’s intensely HAND MADE. Everything about it looks detailed and handcrafted, in the most Wes Anderson-esque way. There’s quirky details everywhere — a badger in a badger-skeleton costume! The character design is taken straight out of the original Dahl book, which I greatly appreciate. I’m there, opening day.

  • Rob

    I agree, Wes Anderson has been watching his share of Jan Svankmajer.

  • Wow, when i first saw screenshots of this, I wasn’t really expecting it to be so…fast paced? Like Wind and the Willows but in fast forward, very snappy gags, things you don’t expect from this very traditional British stop motion animation. I’m not going to say that’s a bad thing though, in fact many might find it to be a breath of fresh air, and it’s not obnoxious, though maybe trying to imitate American comedy quite a bit. Of all the stop motion films in cinemas over the last 10 years this one is really celebrating it’s stop motion-ness more than any other with what looks like no computer short cuts or over-slickness anywhere. Even the explosions appear to be entirely rigged up with cotton, brilliant!

  • Thomas

    I’m looking forward to it. I like Wes Anderson’s stuff though, so the idea of a Wes Anderson movie with stop-motion puppets sounds just peachy to me.

  • Mike

    I don’t really see anything wrong with it.
    The dialogue is typical of any Wes Anderson movie. And I think it’s kind of charming the animation is handled in such an old school way, where you can see the movements in the fur from the animators handling the puppets. Maybe the film looks the way it does because this is what stop-motion is to Wes Anderson. If he meant it to look as slick as Coraline, he probably would have just done it in CG.

  • Scott

    I felt the voice acting sounded like it came from a pre-existing live action movie, then animated on top of– which I liked. It’s refreshing that they aren’t trying for over-the-top/funny voice/falsetto/speech impediment style of voice that most cartoons go for.

  • Chris Sokalofsky

    I had high hopes for this, but I was really disappointed by the trailer. I have to agree with Matt Sullivan and say that this story may have worked better in cg. I’m not a stop motion fan boy, but I own all recent films in the style, and this one doesn’t seem to look nearly as polished as, say, corpse bridge or coraline. And as mentioned above, the voice acting sounded as if the actors didn’t even read the books or scripts before delivering the lines. When I watched the trailer, I didn’t hear Mr. Fox. I heard Clooney. Same with the badger. All I could hear was standard Bill Murray.

    It’s a shame, really.

  • Lucky Jim

    This looks exactly what I imagined a Wes Anderson stop-motion film would look like. I really like that they’ve gone completely old school for the design, and I think it brings a nice charm to the film a more polished look wouldn’t have.

    And as for the voice acting; that’s how people talk in a Wes Anderson film.

  • I’ve been waiting to watch a trailer for a while, and I must say I’m a little dissapointed. I love Wes Anderson stuff, I usually hate CGI, and I usually love stop-motion. But there’s something in the animation that’s not working.

  • Looks pretty funny, I’m looking forward to it.

    Celebrity voice-acting, I’ve long since grown immune to it.

    There’s also something that deserves mention which might be overlooked… the scale of the characters. Not all of the armatures used in the production of the movie were the same size; most were one-foot in height, others six inches, others were the size of a kid’s action figures. I won’t be surprised at all if the quality of movement between the characters varies a bit over the course of the film.

    This of course, as opposed to an Aardman or LAIKA production where everything is pretty much created on the exact same scale.

  • Rat

    Here’s my take.

    I think the movie is probably fine. I think the acting probably works fine, if Wes Anderson-y. By that I mean, it’ll be distinctive and quirky.

    I think someone cut a trailer thinking they were making a dreamworks movie. Meaning “HA HA FUNNY! Got any more shots where someone falls down?!?!”

    I’d like to see what kind of trailer Wes Anderson would cut.

  • Gobo

    “What? They put the actors underground in dirt? I doubt it.”

    Actually, sorta, yeah. For a lot of the movie Wes Anderson had the actors run around in the forest and in caves and such, recording their lines with a boom mic. Jason Schwartzman said that in scenes where the characters are digging in the dirt, he recorded the actors while they were digging dirt with their hands.

    “So it’s an animated “Oceans Eleven”?”

    I think the studio pushed the trailer that way due to George Clooney being the star. The secret-agent stuff is only a small part of the book.

  • Doofus

    I bet this trailer won’t do it justice.

  • You know, I watched the trailer a second time, and had a slightly different impression. I realize now that the narrator annoys me the most by far. If I tune him out, ignore the over-the-top editing of the trailer and just focus on the actual scenes and words being spoken, it gives me more hope for the film.

  • doug holverson

    The characters look like they’re based in middling level furry fan-art.

    Too literal animal heads on human bodies.

  • i don’t care what anyone says, wes anderson + stop motion = animation geek boner

  • Brian Kidd

    I think we need to remember that this is only a trailer and, as such, will bear little to no resemblance to the finished film. I’m happy that stop-motion is viable again and hope that the film is good. I’ll wait until folks have actually seen it before making a decision about whether or not I’ll actually plunk down $10.

  • Lindsay

    HD trailers are available at this link –

    Better to judge by with the markedly increased clarity. I think this looks very charming, and it’s nice to see projects like it still cropping up once in a while. I don’t really understand the gnawing need many seem to have for smooth, slick, might-as-well-be-CG stop motion. I like that the film is deliberately low-tech. Variety is the spice of life, no? ;)

  • No, it isn’t Coraline where each character has 100+ computer-modeled, digitally-milled mouth-shapes at their disposal (for a few moments Art clokey came to mind) and I’m sure a lot of reviews will tag it as “cheap-looking” because of that but as a whole it looks promising.

    But it’s all about “Story, story, story!” right? Not technical finery, right? That’s what everyone keep shouting here, unless they don’t.

    Not that the trailer gives us much to go on. I have a theory that most movie trailers do more damage than good.

  • I dunno. The celebrity voice acting is pretty routine, but I really love the look of the characters and stop-motion animation! It looks fine to me, as I’m used to anthropomorphic characters, and good ones. (And this is nowhere near as bad as some of the “furry” art on many art forums.) I’ll judge for myself this November!

    Other than that, it’s great to see another animation technique used other than CG, even if it’s not up to the level of CORALINE.

  • TheGunheart

    I guess the thing is that it really doesn’t look like anything the mainstream has seen before. It has a very quirky look to both the animation and camera angles, giving it a look almost reminiscent of cut-out animation.

    I’m just hoping it doesn’t flop and prove Hollywood right.

  • Wes

    If this was from a Japanese director that no one here has ever heard of, you’d be falling all over yourselves to praise it. I’m not really a fan of Anderson’s other films, but it’s clear there’s been a backlash against him for some time now. I was just reading on Glenn Kenny’s blog about other sites enthusiasm in proclaiming a premature death for this film.

  • Sylvain

    That’s a Wes Anderson movie all right :)
    I agree with Lindsay that the low-tech quirkiness is possibly deliberate.

    If only the stupid hollywood narrator could shut the f$%# up, excuse my language, I could have a more precise opinion. I’m still looking forward to see it, it looks very quirky and different…. I read the book just now (80 pages, for children 8-12 or so) and I don’t think there’s nearly enough material for a full-length film, so I can’t wait to see how much he extended on that. So far it could be wonderful or terrible.

    Anyone have an idea of the budget, or what is the actual production company ? I thought it had been transferred to Fox Searchlight some time ago, but the trailer is still only 20th century Fox. What’s up with that ?

  • Anyone who hates on this should just go lock themselves up in their rooms with their ‘Coraline’, ‘Corpse Bride’ and ‘Wall-e’ DVDs and just stay there till Burton’s atrocious ‘Alice’ is released. Then they can go waste their energy gushing all over that.

  • The trailer really reminds me of a cross between ‘Pinccliffe Grand Prix’ and an amped up version of the old ‘Wind in the Willows’ series.

    About hallways through the trailer there is a billboard for “Paddington Cycles” which I thought was a nice nod. The HD trailer reveals many beautiful details. I like the color color palette so far too.

    There my be a lack of smoothness to some degree, but it’s not to the point of distraction. Five minutes in to the film, and you are likely not to notice. The performances are slightly deadpan, and I’m not entirely sure Clooney was the best choice. Other than that I am pretty excited for this. It’s nice to see something organic and tactile rather than the super glossy, photo-realistic globs with attitudes that are so prevalent in most current animated films.

  • TheGunheart

    Sylvain, I read an excerpt from an interview where Anderson said that the book takes up the second half of the movie, and I think I remember it saying that it would have an extended ending, as well.

    Wouldn’t it be awesome though if this turned out to be a success and…aww, who am I kidding? Pixar puts out a smash hit year after year and no one seems to learn from them, either except how to make their graphics better.

  • huh, it just seems, the animation is nice, but the fur moved when the characters weren’t, that was a little offputting. However The voice acting seemed sufficently subtle. Overall I’ll probably see it, it will grow on me ^^
    P.S. I HATE GEORGE CLOONEY, terrible actor, in this however, im sure he’ll do his best

  • Loves it! As a Wes Anderson fan I feel like this fits in perfectly with his other films. I like that he’s not trying to create a super-realistic world, but is instead going for a lot of style, thats what I love about him. I’m more excited about this than I was about Coraline!
    P.S. Love all the little imperfect moving hairs on the animals faces!

  • To Hulk: I remember the Wind In The Willows Series as well, grew up with it in fact, and I have to say, I was reminded of it as well while watching this. Reminded on how a stop-motion cartoon with animal “people” was done right.

    Watching this, I didn’t really notice or care about how the voice acting went, but I did notice how labored the movement was, almost as if the characters were moving through molasses. Compare that with Cosgrove Hall’s Wind In The Willows, where the animal characters moved fluidly, and the voices and characterisation fit the British Countryside setting, and I feel my expectations for The Fantastic Mr. Fox lessen considerably.

    And George Clooney? I felt like I was watching an animal version of Ocean’s 11 rather then a Roald Dahl story. Why couldn’t they have taken someone who actually sounded like they fit in that period the movie is set in?

  • TheGunheart

    Well, the movie itself seems to be set in something of a neverwhen. Note how one scene is apparently in a supermarket, another has a modern credit card, and of course the electric fence at the end.

    I’ll admit, I was definitely off put by this when I first saw it, but it’s already grown on me. It really looks like nothing I’ve seen before, and that alone has me interested.

  • Sylvain

    TheGunheart, that’s great ! it makes sense, wes anderson is known for some great character introduction and development, and that requires a long 1st act, which is lacking in the book. I thought the book jumped into action without introducing anyone (to be expected in a children’s book).

    “Pixar puts out a smash hit year after year”

    Sorry I have to comment on this, Pixar did make money, but they haven’t produced the most successful animated feature of the year since 2003, while they systematically produced the most expensive one every year. There’s a reason they are making Cars 2 and Toy Story 3 next. Sadly. Th

  • This is my least favorite Roald Dahl book that I’ve read (sorry to any who view it as a classic), and I’m a big fan of his work. So, having read the book, and recently at that, I don’t care if Wes Anderson deterred from the original story or not. Also, the book is pretty short. I read it aloud with my brother in 2004 (prompted by the film being announced) in one sitting.

    But I gave the son fox the voice of a small British boy…

  • Royce Day

    I love the animation style. No, it’s not all that sophisticated looking. I don’t think it’s supposed to be. It looks like nothing so much as a Rankin Bass animated special from the sixties, which from this baby boomer’s perspective is NOT a bad thing. You can see fur moving on King Kong too, and fingerprints in the plasticine on Wallace and Gromit in “Curse of the Were-Rabbit”. Those aren’t flaws so much as a bit of charm from my perspective, indicating that Yes, someone’s hands were touching this for each bit of movement, and it hasn’t been CGI ‘enhanced’ until its soul was removed.

    God, the voice acting is terrible though. :(

  • Don´t get me wrong, I thought “Coraline” was beautiful.

    But come on, not everything has to be “Coraline”. Why would you want every stop motion movie to look the same? This looks amazing in its own way.

    As for the “flatness”, well, this sort of symmetric, 2D composition is in every single Wes Anderson live-action film. It´s his thing, and I think it works perfectly for an animation.

    Can´t waity to see it. And Jason Schartzman´s voice acting sound anithing but standard for a cartoon.

  • You call it stilted, I call it pure Wes Anderson lovliness. :)

  • I only just watched this. I’m a huge Wes Anderson fan, a huge fan of stop motion and a big fan of the source material.

    So I really wanted to love this.

    But it looks awful to me. The faces look like they are trying to make a CG Dreamworks movie in stop motion. Really nasty. The limbs have no structure and the roughness and unfinished feel that could have come across as charming just comes across as rough and unfinished to me.

    Aside from the choice of clothing, I’m not seeing much of Wes Anderson here either and it seems to have gone so American that it doesn’t feel like there’s a massive amount of the source material either. Odd how that would make much of a difference – actually, it’s probably not just the voices, the humour seems very American too.

    I imagine I won’t be able to resist seeing this but the trailer doesn’t exactly leave me hyped.

  • Jay Taylor

    My first impression was not very positive. Upon my second and third viewing it has gotten better, but I’m still not sure about the whole thing.

    I don’t mind the fur moving by itself. Incidentally, that’s one of the things I loved about Coraline; the sizzle of the clothing.

    The character designs… well, there AREN’T any designs here. It’s a bunch of foxes and other animals.

    The voice acting just doesn’t work for me. Particularly George Clooney, and Billy Murray. The dialogue itself is just bad.

    You like how Mr.Fox explains his “trademark”? Also, do you they say “fantastic” enough?

    I agree with others who felt the animation resembled Robot Chicken. It’s certainly NOT a compliment.

    I’ll probably check it out when they release the dvd.

  • Sylvain

    Jay, it’s the narrator who said “fantastic” 7 times. Ignore the narrator.

  • Is George Clooney still alive? It’s hard to tell from his performance.

  • i’m cheap, but i’d definitely buy that on dvd. it may be rough around the edges, but that’s part of the amazing design and charm of wes anderson’s stop-motion. the acting looks like it’s way more design-based, and less life-based,unlike anything else in cartoons these days. i’m glad to see he’s using the full potential of the medium.

  • cartoon

    I don’t know what half of you were expecting from a stop motion film directed by Wes Anderson. The cheap look I’m sure is very intentional.

  • It looks interesting and I don’t get a lot of the hate. The biggest problem I have with it is that the exaggeration of Anderson’s stagey/side-on/symmetrical shooting style which works strikingly in live action kind of unintentionally gives it something of the student stop motion “models walking around on a table” look which most people (should) strive to avoid at all costs.

    Also I have it on good authority that at least some scenes were animated beautifully on ones but then had frames removed to make it look more ‘stop motion’. This whole ‘make it jerkier’ idea is pretty inexcusable ad-man style behaviour, would have thought better of a real film director. There are far better ways to keep stop motion unpolished and human without compromising the actual animation.

    But yea, otherwise it looks like it will be fun/good/interesting at some level.

  • Skeptical about the animation itself. It just doesn’t look as interesting as it could be, or in comparison to Henry Selick, Tim Burton, or the Aardman guys.

  • jordan reichek

    the haters here really need to place themselves in a different mode. this is not a hollywood/feature cartoon. this is a wes anderson film. much different yet so perfect.

    he’s not making a traditional/all the rules of the illusion of life/classic here. he’s doing what works for him and it always has a charm of its own.

    the most important thing is, he’s intending to do it. this is not a case of cheap or bad taste animation. anderson is after conscious effect. just take a look at the henry selick animation in life aquatic…sure, it’s not men in black style CG…that’s absolutely the point. he’s after charm and dreaminess.

    as far as acting and character, there’s very few director/writers today that come close to fixating on unique characters more than wes anderson.

    i think a lot of the detractors here are also responding to the trailer itself, which no doubt was NOT cut by anderson. this looks like typical corporate/dreamworks splash-cut hype. unfortunately, the distributors still have no idea how to properly market this man’s wonderful films.

    please give it a chance and try not to categorize it. i’m sure you’ll be surprised. we could use a lot more wes andersons in animation and less “players” wanting to “out-spectacularize” (yeah, i said it) each other with flashy cliches.

  • acetate

    Tim I agree. Wes obviously has a bigger budget. I can’t see why someone would choose on purpose to make it look like it was shot on a table with a bolex. I had to do that because I had no money, but Wes…come on man.

  • I think it’s a bit unfair to compare it to Coraline, Corpse Bride or Nightmare Before Christmas, since this seems to have a more experimental/indie aproach on purpose like everyother Wes Anderson film. I feel like they got Jan Svankmajer as a role model, he used dead animals as stop motion puppets, hahaha. So yeah, I have faith in this movie

  • Mannnnn, it feels like I have been waiting LIGHT-YEARS for this trailer! :)

    I was excited to see how Wes Anderson’s aesthetic and sensibilities translate into animation… I won’t judge anything based solely on the trailer, but it’s a pretty lenghty one, so it may be a pretty fair glimpse. Personally though, I’d like to see more. What if you judged Tenenbaums based on IT’S trailer, right?

    I do think it’s fair to say that it is pretty difficult to translate Anderson’s vision into a 2 minute promo-spot, no matter which of his films you’re discussing.

    I am excited that the film is stop-motion… And I dig that it seems like a completely un-CG, old-school approach to the medium.

    I am especially looking forward to Jason Shwartzman’s voice performance. Sounds good so far!

    Guess we’re gonna hafta wait and see… But, Anderson really is a master of character and a master of dialogue and timing. There’s such a unique and wonderful feel to his films… So, hoping this won’t dissappoint.

  • Hopefully, Anderson will bring some magic to the story. The trailer is wholly unappealing. It looks like bad tv stopmotion of clothed taxidermy. These animals don’t look alive, and the animation accents it. Raold Dahl seems to be undergoing another disservice by filmmakers.

  • darin m

    Looks great! Amateurish, odd and great.

  • Tom Heres

    It has a Russian vibe to the look of it. I’ve seen a lot of Russki Stop Mo over the years and it has bags of charm. I love the homemade qualities, and they don’t at all distract from the humor, which I really liked.

    To each his own. I do wonder why, after working with him on The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou Wes Anderson didn’t try to hook up with Henry Selick and Laika. That’s a question I’d like to have answered.

    On a side note, I have to say that some comments on the Brew make me wonder where the great works of some of the commenters are. If you have such talent, and you want to position yourself as a noted creator of notable creations, might I suggest actually doing something about it and not just tearing into whatever doesn’t align with your tastes?

    I say this with a lot of love and admiration for anyone who is involved in any creative pursuit. It’s a hard life sometimes, but we’re a community of creators, so let’s create some amazing things. Anderson has a singular, odd vision as do, I’m sure, many of the Brew’s habitues. I’d love to see work from any or all of the people whose words I read here.

  • Bruce

    For a lack of a better adjective, the film looks fantastic. Anything by Wes Anderson (I highly recommend seeing his first independent film, Rushmore) is an instant win in my Book. That guy can do no wrong for me!

    Also, I am glad that people haven’t given up on stop-motion animation yet, as I believe that there are boundaries that have yet to be reached with this medium.

    And Bill Murray as a Badger in a suit? Perfect. “Looking For A Fox” by Clarence Carter was a good song choice for this trailer.

  • christy

    i think this looks awesome. can’t wait. and jarvis cocker wrote songs for it! woo hoo!

  • Tom Heres-

    Henry Selick was originally attached but left the project to do Coraline, as far as I know.

  • Mesterius

    Welll… this look kinda fun, but not too FANTASTIC in my eyes. I love the fact that this is stop motion, but the humor feels at times pretty clichéd, and the character designs look too generic and bland. The latter may be what disappoints me the most, because ever since I heard of this project, I was hoping for a design style that could sorta reflect the wonderfully loose line drawings by book illustrator Quentin Blake (like this drawing of Mr. Fox and Badger – I still think this movie would have been better off with more expressive/surrealistic character designs like that.

    To be fair: Neither the designs or puns are by any means downright terrible — but what on earth has happened to the creative, burlesque spirit of Roald Dahl’s original book? At least in this trailer, it’s nowhere to be found. They are obviously extending/changing the story for a movie scope, but so far, Roald Dahl’s book story still feels a lot more fantastic than the film footage does.

  • Looks cool to me, especially liked that it looks like old school british stop motion, loved that stuff as a kid!!

  • Blasko

    I like it, too. It’s nothing like I imagined or hoped for, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. It’s different … and it really seems as though Anderson wants to make the tone, pace and style his own. Stop-Motion needs a few more champions besides the Burtons, Selicks and Parks. And I agree with those who are tickled about the obvious nod to Ladislaw Starewich — certainly not a bad place to draw inspiation from.

  • Dan

    This looks like the low budget stop motion work on TV when I was a kid.

  • aaron

    Not sure if anyone has mentioned it but the very talented Mark Gustafson was the animation director. Mark has been in stop motion from the very early Will Vinton studio days and really knows his stuff. So any “crudeness” to the animation is obviously a stylistic choice. I did hear that Wes Anderson wanted the characters to look like taxidermy so for those complaining about the design at least you know that it was a choice. Personally I think it’s refreshing to hear dialogue that doesn’t sound like typical over-acted animation voice performance. There’s always so much yelling in modern animation.

  • Actually i like animated movies and about Mr. fox i think voice is the main part of this movie.

  • Sylvain

    I’m worried about some people (who are artists themselves) instantly spitting on years of hard work, based only on a badly cut trailer… I’m just saying…

    I’m hoping the Disney Legend will comment again about the return of the old school zero-CG films that he’s been talking about for some time. Because this can be considered one.

  • meh

    anyone complaining about how bad and “amateur-ish” this looks obviously doesn’t watch enough stop motion animation.

  • Pedro Nakama

    I actually like this trailer.

  • Wow. They took an incredibly British book and turned it into a movie where only the villains are voiced by British actors. Oh Hollywood. At it again, are we?

  • I love the animation, but I hate the voices. It jars me right out of it.

    I’m going to be taking my kids to see it, probably. I have pretty low expectations, though. I hope that the actual film is better than it appears in the trailer. I was very wrong about Kung Fu Panda and Cars. Maybe I’m wrong about this.

  • I’m really looking forward to this film. Wes Anderson has yet to disappoint me. I love the fact that we’re seeing such diversity in the look of stop-motion projects.

  • I grew up on tons of old stop-motion stuff, including the already-mentioned-repeatedly Wind in the Willows, which I still enjoy a lot.

    This looks like something I’m going to enjoy, at least in some way. I really love that the visuals are ‘rough’, ‘raw’, ‘unpolished’ or whatever you want to call it. I’ve had enough slick fancy stuff for a while.

    Some (all?) of the voices seem weird coming out of the characters, particularly Bill Murray. I think he’s really funny, but his voice coming out of that badger just doesn’t feel right to me.

    I won’t lie though, the part about him being a demolitions expert made me laugh.

    I’m not familiar with the original story. I don’t know much about Roald Dahl beyond the BFG and The Witches, at least to my knowledge. For quite a while I didn’t realize Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory was based on his book.

  • “Wah! We want more traditional animation! CG is the scourge or the industry!”

    “Ewwww…what’s with all these slight imperfections in this new movie?! It looks like actual human beings worked on it! Gross! Get some computers on that shit!”

  • Ethan

    To me, the word “quirky” has become an admirable quality compared to the overly sanitized and sleek computerized look of everything else out there.

    Hopefully it will be rated PG (for mild language, drinking, and severe comic mischief), all other Wes Anderson films are rated R :)