“Fantastic Mr. Fox” Pre-Release Discussion –spoilers–

You can put me in the crowd who thought it looked cheap and rushed. But now, I have to say I like it. It's pretty clear that all of it is deliberate, anyway.
 
It IS intentionnal. There was an article about it in Variety.

The puppets are covered in REAL animal fur and they went out of their way to make it jerky, not digital-camera-smooth, to give it a retro vibe.

Also the human characters talk in a British accent but the animals are given an American accent to distinguish them from one another.
 
Count me in the crowd that loves the way it looks. It's choppy and slightly realistic look gives it a unique touch that separates it from most of CGI flicks i've been seeing lately. Let's hope the script/acting isn't mediocre.
 
Skimming through, it's interesting that all three of the negative reviews are objecting to Dahl's book being Americanised. This one doesn't really comment on anything else.

If that's the main objection, then this ought to be a pretty solid film.
 
MonkeyFunk's British, and he doesn't care.

Out of all those British critics that have reviewed the movie, only three didn't like it, and solely for the fact that it isn't British enough.

I personally would've loved it if the animals were all voiced by British actors, but I'm not losing any sleep over the fact that they didn't.
 
Yeah, there's a difference between something like, say, U-571 (which took a real-life British military victory and attributed it to Americans) and this. This is just an American director putting his own spin on a novel; calling it cultural imperialism seems a bit much.

'Sides, it was animated in London, it gave jobs to British animators, I'd say it had a positive effect where it counts.
 
Back
Top