Ness-Wednesday wrote:Okay, I think no one understood what I was saying.
I have quite negative thoughts on what can come up in the final film.
Sure, I do have some vibe on what they've could've done to make it good, but I don't understand what people have against AC even though it was forgotten after 2017 began, at least it had something.
Indeed, people have different types of taste but the literature would have to be the fact that the trailer doesn't represent much which can explain why it's already getting massive hate before it's release two months from now.
But comparing it to a video game (or a video game film), is basically comparing 2003 to 2016.
Although I've seen some gameplay of it, the hate of the game mostly came from the concept of it.
This however can be a close minded thought, I mean it's Paper Mario, the way paint was used in the game was quite clever.
But it can also come up from the previous rants towards Sticker Star and SPM (sure I can understand SPM but I thought it had lots of great events and characters, thus Sticker Star did have some nice gimmicks).
They'll think "Oh hey this one sucked so the next game/film will suck as well," and that's what happened before Color Splash was released.
The same goes for the exact reason why people on the internet (especially from the animation industry) are hating this film.
Most people in public have been treating animated films like they're only meant for kids (which is probably one of if not the most ridiculous things I've heard in cinema history).
This is why (although there are some obvious exceptions especially Chicken Run and Shark Tale) we sometimes get creative films from animation studios like Disney, Pixar, and Dreamworks animation.
But underneath the top studios are the ones who fail to give us truly great films like Lionsgate, Open Road films and the Weinstein company, and sadly Sony Pictures Animation fails to keep itself away from this.
Now look at Shaw from Open Season, the detail on him looks pretty good and even though it isn't 100% accurate (not that every animated films has to show real humans ew) at least it's not terrifyingly crazy like their current designs.
And in Surf's Up, the characters don't flop about and they had what they could've done in general today, learn how to correctly execute a concept.
Sure the characters may look bland, but at least the story makes them develop and interact like how a documentary film would do, thus the camera's interactions are very creative as sometimes it will move about and pretend like if the movie was actually a real event that took place in the artic or on an island (like an sports game).
You can see how the water reflects towards the camera's axis and how the lighting and shading is done correctly do most of it doesn't blend in.
However, the real fall started when they released Cloudy with a chance of meatballs, although despite some people giving it acclaim because of it's story, some critics weren't pleased about this as the animation was really sloppy and cartoony, despite it having minor gags and colorful food animation the characters and execution were ruining the film overall.
I mean, sure it does look really goofy but how did they forget how to design humans?
I don't recall anyone I know who has a potato like nose that was big as Flint Lockwood's.
At least when they worked on both of their Collaborative films Arthur Christmas and Pirates band of misfits with Aardman they did have some creative and nice ideas into them.
But from Hotel Transylvania, this one I have major and mixed thoughts on as the animation is very cartoony and sometimes there are these kid-friendly moments that make the film feel dated.
I respect anyone who likes this film, but what came from most of the community was basically a lot of hate towards this film.
However, the destruction didn't get worse until Cloudy 2 came out, in fact this is their current "style" as of today.
Despite the food animals being well developed and the film being very colorful, the story only repeats itself but changes some parts of the film, and most of the characters were left to become a useless unfortunately now forgettable filler.
And this continued on with their films until Smurfs: the Lost Village, even though it bombed because of the failure of the two Smurfs hybrid films, it had a story that was better than their previously animated films since Cloudy 2 even though it had some mocked parts, and was almost perfectly animated and colored with the only part that the animation doesn't work would be the backgrounds.
With the Emoji Movie, people are hating it this early because the story was quite obvious (heck, it's literally not a story), people are stating it that it's a rip off of Pixar's Inside Out by having the emojis interacting with the human world but instead it shoves this in the viewer's face rather than properly presenting it through the entire film.
They're also upset towards the style the animation only gets a bit of shading and decrease in hue thus making it darker, and the product placements aren't used like in the way it's gene would do, the way Wreck-it-Ralph done it was by reflecting it towards the film and that it's gene/fact had to do with video games.
What you get with the Emoji movie is really just, "Oh hey, this is an i/smartphone we're talking about so we can pretend that advertisement is right in this part" really, what do emojis have to do with YouTube and Candy Crush?
Also, the usage of the poop emoji is a major mess up as references, humor, and/or usage of potty humor have been dying due to them being overused.
It also shows off why memes in a movie being released into theaters are always a bad idea, if that wasn't enough.
That's pretty much the reason why most of the people on the internet are hating the trailers and (so far) the movie itself.
