Author Topic: Flushed Away  (Read 14294 times)

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Flushed Away
« on: Saturday, November 11, 2006, 07:13:27 PM »
I watched Flushed Away with my 6-year-old today.  I went in fearing the worst, and I ended up getting a lot of unexpected entertainment.  It's Dreamworks, so I had no idea it was produced by Aardman, the studio behind Wallace & Gromit.  It's CGI rather than clay, but the look is unmistakable.  Good voice cast delivers decent humor, with nice touches here and there way over children's heads.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,498
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: Flushed Away
« Reply #1 on: Saturday, November 11, 2006, 09:28:11 PM »
It looked pretty terrible to me in both execution and concept, but it's hard to judge these kinds of movies based on previews.  They show all the low-brow kiddie crap jokes to pull in the families but none of the potentially entertaining parts.  Anyway... I had no idea it was CGI.  That actually makes me rather sad.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,930
Re: Flushed Away
« Reply #2 on: Saturday, November 11, 2006, 09:29:29 PM »
I knew it was Aardman from the first I saw it. I'll probably end up seeing it, but its kind of sad it wasnt stop-motion.

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,234
    • OW
Re: Flushed Away
« Reply #3 on: Sunday, November 12, 2006, 02:36:26 AM »
Apparently it cost a lot of money to put it together.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Flushed Away
« Reply #4 on: Sunday, November 12, 2006, 08:47:36 AM »
Artwork is not a problem in this movie.  I think everyone here understands that "computer animation" is no such thing at all.  The animators are people, and the computer does the mindless crunching out of their work.  (The smartest thing it does is interpolate between key frames.)  If the technology allows for easier, faster, and cleaner artistic expression than the old frame-by-frame photography of clay models, I'm all for it.  I do know that there's a certain "method loyalty" ingrained here, and departures will cause some anxiety.  I'm a big fan of Ray Harryhausen and Will Vinton myself.

Aardman even preserved the stop-motion feel here by dispensing with motion blur.  I really have no problem at all with the artistic output.  Whether the story and tone would appeal to all here is another matter.  What's there has very high production values, and that definitely includes the audio.


Apparently it cost a lot of money to put it together.
Do you mean that the movie cost a lot to make, or that it would have been too costly to make with stop-motion clay animation?

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,234
    • OW
Re: Flushed Away
« Reply #5 on: Sunday, November 12, 2006, 10:29:01 AM »
Well I was reading an article on how it cost nearly 300 million to make and market the movie worldwide. Let me dig that up again.

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,602
    • Facebook Me
Re: Flushed Away
« Reply #6 on: Sunday, November 12, 2006, 11:43:38 AM »
Jennie saw it with her son and said it the funniest, most entertaining youth-oriented movie she's seen since The Incredibles.  She said I would have found it hilarious.

Edit: Clarification
« Last Edit: Sunday, November 12, 2006, 12:53:39 PM by scottws »

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Flushed Away
« Reply #7 on: Sunday, November 12, 2006, 12:43:45 PM »
Well I was reading an article on how it cost nearly 300 million to make and market the movie worldwide. Let me dig that up again.

Wow, that's way over the top.  If I could only figure out how to tap into just a little of that Hollywood money torrent . . . wooo.

Yeah, I had some good laughs too, and not because of the toilet humor.