Anti-Dreamworks Bias?

I think there is some validity to the point of "if not Disney/Pixar therefore Dreamworks" in the minds of much of the public. Other studios have not done a great job of building their own brands with the general population apart from animation buffs. The blame for a lot of garbage gets laid on Dreamworks, and only a portion of it is deserved.
 
You are missing the point. Pixar doesn't market their movies heavily around the voice actors. They don't have to. Dreamworks on the other hand relies on the big marquee names to sell their movies.
 
All the press you see about Pixar movies features the big stars in them. If they didn't think having Tom Hanks orJohn Goodman in their movie would help draw audiences they wouldn't shell out the bucks for them. Every Pixar movie except for Wall-E, which is light on dialogue, has had a "name" celebrity voice attached.
 
Dude, John Goodman has never been an A-list Hollywood talent. He became famous for one role in one primetime sitcom, and has rolled with it for a while. And Tim Allen is completely washed up nowadays.

Besides, like everyone said, Pixar doesn't emphasize their voices. They have them, but it isn't considered the draw. Dreamworks tricks out every single big name on their cast as often as possible. THAT'S the key difference.
 
Prince of Egypt was a wonderful little movie. Strong visuals, strong character relationships. Definitely my favorite film from Dreamworks.
 
Differences in animation quality, emotional strength, and willingness to take risks (Toy Story, The Incredibles, and Wall-E all took risks; even more predictable movies like Monster's Inc., Ratatouille, and Up have creative and unique qualities to them) escape you?

As far as the voice acting issue goes, the main difference between Pixar and Dreamworks is that Pixar comes up with the characters first and then casts the voice actors (sometimes "names", sometimes lesser-known actors, and sometimes professional VAs/people working at Pixar) whereas Dreamworks bases their characters on the celebrities they want to voice them. Writing roles for specific actors isn't always a bad thing (see Sam Jackson in Pulp Fiction), but basing an entire studio's creative strategy off that (as well as limited your pool of actors to big name stars; I can't see Dreamworks building a movie around Craig T. Nelson or Ed Asner) is limiting.
 
Roseanne was the number one show in the country. For two years. And John Goodman has headlined and co-starred in tons of major movies including iconic roles in Coen brothers movies like The Big Lebowski. He may not be Tom Cruise level, but of course he's A List. That Pixar movie he was in co-starred Billy Crystal, also A-List.

I just get the feeling that people who might say Pixar doesn't promote its star power with Monsters Inc. and anyway John Goodman doesn't count could turn right around and crap on DreamWorks for using big huge star John Goodman in projects like Bee Movie. I really think that there's just a generalized anti-DreamWorks bias that has nothing to do with the quality of their movies and everything to do with picking a side. You see the same thing in comic books, with fanboys picking one major company over the other and then acting as if everything the company they don't read produces is dirt.

And Tim Allen is a little washed up now. But he was huuuge when the Toy Story movies were being made. Huuuuge.

Also, there's this:

http://www.starstore.com/acatalog/toy-story-2-one.jpg
 
Which was saved after it was just going to be a horrible DTV and Pixar feared the brand being diluted, so they did their own movie and it turned out wonderfully.

I'll admit being a non-Dreamworks person. Their blatant pop culture references, marketing movies around the actor, not the film, just typical lack of trying in general really put me off them.

I will give them this though. Kung-Fu Panda is an amazing movie that suffers from the typical Dreamworks movie tropes, but turns out great. I was expecting horrible "now" jokes and fart humor, but it was a fun little movie that tried and succeeded at going above the Dreamworks template of terribleness.

Also, since no one has done it yet, I gotta post this

3422044886_0ea1da9ee8_o.jpg
 
I'm sorry, but I just took a look at that Toy Story 2 poster, and Buzz(as well as Woody to some extent) has the same exact face as all those animal characters in this picture. Come to think of it, many Pixar characters have that face, like Flik, the Denis Leary ladybug, Lightning Mcqueen, Sully and many more.
 
Good grief no. If Pixar didn't exist, DreamWork's approach of in-your-face-celebrity blandness would still be there to turn me off.

Worth repeating:


Addendum: I don't hate Dreamworks, some of their films are thoroughly enjoyable. But I do have a problem with the way they go about things sometimes.
 
Quite frankly, I do think this forum is biased. A great example, would be the recent review of MvA. IMHO, I thought that review was unfair and completely negligent of the demographic it was set for. Really, it's a kid's movie. They'll enjoy it, regardless of its flaws. The only Dreamworks movie I hated as a kid was Shark Tales, and that movie was just dull. But to be fair, I never liked Cars.

 
I thought Bolt was one of the interesting Disney movies that lampshaded a lot of stuff that would be considered cliche. And character development.
 
I agree with TripleS. I feel a lot of bias also and a lot of people sound like Pixar is perfect also which it isn't. Pixar and Dreamworks are both good production companies. God this arguing is just so silly.

The review of Monsters vs. Aliens felt incredibly biased.
 
First things first: I have no bias against any of the major animation studios. I like to keep it fair, mm'kay? So keep this in mind if you read my post and go, "omG ur defending dreamwrks ew!!!1"

That said, I think DreamWorks is VERY hit or miss.

They've had their greats (Shrek, Prince of Egypt, Road to El Dardo, Chicken Run, Over the Hedge, Kung Fu Panda)

...and not so greats (looking at you, Shark Tale and Bee Movie)!

However, two things that I feel are unfair jabs are:

The Eyebrow Thing: True, it is amusing they keep recycling that expression, but Pixar is guilty of it, too: Hello, Toy Story 2! (it's even the right eyebrow too!)

Pop Culture Jokes: Again, remember Toy Story 2?
(paraphrasing)
Zurg: *to the thinking-he's-a-real-ranger!Buzz, not actual Buzz* Buzz, I am your father!
Thinking-He's-A-Real-Ranger!Buzz: NOOOOOOOOOO!

I just really hate it when bias gets in the way of things.


:^: This.

I love Pixar, don't get me wrong (that whole Up story about the little girl is amazingly touching and classy on their part), but I'm willing to admit that Shrek, El Dorado and Over the Hedge happen to be part of my Top 10 Favorite Animated Movies of All Time.
In fact, IMHO, Over the Hedge is DreamWorks' crown jewel (though I can see why some would say Shrek or Kung Fu Panda is their crown jewel)

Also, I can't completely hate a studio that gave us the epic wins known to us as the Madagascar Penguins and King Julien. *shot*

So count me in the middle about DreamWorks.

I hope they improve soon, seeing as they have Chris Sanders working over there now, who happens to be one of my favorite Disney directors.
 
I agree that the Monsters VS Aliens review was very biased.

I disagree that Dreamworks makes better movies than Pixar. They have made some very good ones, (Shrek, Madagascar/2, KFP, and even Over the Hedge to an extent) but I enjoy Pixar movies more.
 
quick thought on the comic the one person posted a little bit ago. what else can happen in a animation movie for kids? a cute thing goes on a serial murder rampage? i mean sure they can do a mystery type thing but what will the mystery be about? they tried this already with hoodwinked i enjoyed the movie but it was nothing special. imagination is limited by the incessant politically correct soccer moms who refuse to keep score at their kids games.

this for me is why pixar is so good. they keep things fresh when they make their movies. better sequel shrek 2 or toy story 2? i enjoyed toy story better because it had a good twist. i did like shrek 2, i really enjoyed it but if i had to choose i choose toy story 2.

the point has been made very well that dreamworks pimps out their licenses a little too easily, and alot of the anti dreamworks bias comes from the false if it is not pixar it is dreamworks assumptions.

to my earlier point about the imagination as it were. pixar does a good job framing their movies in different genres and creating from that, and dreamworks does alot of the standard movie arcs. also pixar tends to explore their characters more, while dreamworks displays personalities.

people have been saying this alot but i thought some outside framing or different perspective might be helpful.
 
Check the Bolt talkback thread on the Disney forum. Its midway through. There's even a link to the Cartoon Brew post that brought it up, as well as the relevant quotes.
 
Back
Top