Unpopular Opinions You Hold About Animation

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Yeah, I'm actually not a fan of Miyazaki or the Coen brothers either, so I'm in full agreement with both of you when it comes to each of those creators. I can at least get the appeal of Miyazaki's work, though, even though its not my cup of tea. The same isn't true for me when it comes to Tarakovsky and the Coen brother, but I suppose that's just how I am.

[Spark Of Spirit]

As much as I like ST, I agree that the art style was feeling tired by that point and while I enjoyed it in Dexter's Lab it did kind of wear thin over the years.

Also, I'm like this with the Coens. The only work of theirs that I enjoy is The Big Lebowski, which also happens to be a comedy.

Wow, I thought I was the only one. I just can't get into these guys, their work is so lifeless.

[Avaitor]

No Country for Old Men is a really fascinating idea, and Javier Bardem's performance is great, but it just felt so flat to me and had too many plotholes for it to really work. Fargo was too confused for its own sake. A Serious Man, Burn After Reading and O Brother, Where Art Thou bored me to tears. And if you can name a more fucked up movie than Barton Fink, I'll eat my hat.

The bros have obvious talent, but they're not for me.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Did you know that Burn After Reading was supposed to be a comedy? I'd be hard-pressed to believe that if I didn't read its genre classification, because I can't for the life of me figure out just what the hell was supposed to be the slightest bit funny about it. All I saw were obnoxious, cold, and emotionless characters and a completely uninteresting story.

I also still don't get why so many people loved No Country for Old Men. Like Avaitor said, its a good idea for a story, but the execution is god-awfully boring, IMO.

[Foggle]

I fucking love Fargo and The Big Lebowski, but I'm not a Coens fan either.

Did you know that Burn After Reading was supposed to be a comedy? I'd be hard-pressed to believe that if I didn't read its genre classification, because I can't for the life of me figure out just what the hell was supposed to be the slightest bit funny about it. All I saw were obnoxious, cold, and emotionless characters and a completely uninteresting story.

I also still don't get why so many people loved No Country for Old Men. Like Avaitor said, its a good idea for a story, but the execution is god-awfully boring, IMO.

Agreed and agreed. There Will Be Blood was way better than No Country IMO.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Yeah. Admittedly, There Will Be Blood wasn't my kind of movie either, but I'd agree that it was definitely a better film than No Country for Old Men. At least it wasn't full of plot-holes and had an interesting main character.

[Avaitor]

Agreed and agreed. There Will Be Blood was way better than No Country IMO.

It really is. Just like... anything nominated the year Hurt Locker was nominated was better than it.

[Kiddington]

I love Fargo, even if it is, admittedly, a bit of a hard movie to follow. Still enjoyable though. "Here's your four dollars, you pathetic piece of shit." 

...but yeah, I guess I need to toss my hat into the "Coens are overrated" ring with everyone else. I actually caught Burn After Reading on cable about a month ago, and aside from the hacky editing job they did on it, the only thing that stood out to me was Brad Pitt acting goofy as hell (none of his antics really being "funny", though, just weird). Even John Malkovich being his usual surly self didn't stick with me at all. Such a forgettable movie; can't believe the critics liked this one as much as they did.

And yeah, No Country For Old Men absolutely bored me to tears. I expected so much more from this. Tommy Lee Jones was surprisingly sleep-inducing in a lead role, and aside from Bardem, nobody else stood out at all. It's been a while, so I do owe it to myself to catch this again, but I remember being really unimpressed with it the first time around.

[Avaitor]

We should probably move this to another thread on the Moving Picture board. I won't move any posts here, but I will say we should try to stick to the subject now.

In defense of Jack, this is one of my favorite scenes, bringing up points I brought up earlier. What do you think about it, EK?

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

That's a good scene and fits into Tartakovsky's sense of style. It particularly works because, as I mentioned before, I don't think that the animation in Tartakovsky's shows are well-suited to action scenes, but in this case it kind of disguises that with the black  shadows and white light gimmick. That said, this also shows how he has a tendency to get carried away with stylistic scenes like this and, IMO, drag them out for far too long. It was an interesting art style but I found myself getting tired of it about about 2 minutes, yet he dragged the scene out for about twice that length. Maybe I'm just being too critical, but even so, a lot of his stylistic scenes aren't even always this good to begin with (at least I don't feel that way), which I suppose is my main problem with Samurai Jack. I don't really mind it being a style over substance show, but the style itself is hit or miss, and while I do enjoy the better uses of style such as in this scene, it doesn't have the substance that gives a show good re-watch value.

Of course, that's all just my personal opinion.

[Avaitor]

I do enjoy the show, and when I look back at the highlights, I come back to cenes like this, the robot beetle fight in the third part of the premiere movie, Jack vs the blind archers, and Mako dicking around as Aku. But then my critical glasses come back on and I remember that Tartakovsky has a tendency to drag every thing out just because he can.

Often times he pads stuff out for tension, which is something he can't do very well. I'm more forgiving for extended scenes like that, at least in comparison to his goddamn need to overedit everything. Oh my god, this guy loves panel cuts too damn much. I get it, Gennedy loves comic books. So do I. I don't need to see him cut the screen into thirds at least once an episode to show that he does.

And when I think about it too, some of the siller aspects do annoy me. I do like the show's tendency to clown around and experiment, like in the episode where Aku told fairy tales, but stuff like the time Jack turned into a chicken, when he ripped his sandals, and those fucking dogs in the second part of the movie? Gag.

I seem to be pretty harsh on this show, which I don't really like to be. I do enjoy it. I own 2 of the seasons on DVD, and that might change to 3, since I found season 2 for $5 at Big Lots and I wanna go back now that I have some more cash. But it's far from perfect.

[Kiddington]

I seem to be pretty harsh on this show, which I don't really like to be. I do enjoy it. I own 2 of the seasons on DVD, and that might change to 3, since I found season 2 for $5 at Big Lots and I wanna go back now that I have some more cash. But it's far from perfect.

/jealous

I haven't watched Jack in years, so I'm a little foggy here, especially when it comes to the very early stuff. I've been meaning to get caught up, but so far I've just continued to push it off. I really should get around to buying those DVD sets, but they're still a bit too pricey for me right now (Season 1 was still at least $25 on Amazon at last check).

[gunswordfist]

Here goes EK saying GT is overrated. EK, the guy who said STB was a generic robot show after just watching a few episodes. The guy who actually agreed with someone about people only liking SJ because of its art style and that it was a bad action cartoon because its story sucked even though it's CLEARLY an adventure of the week show. The guy who said that the CG Clone Wars could be better than GT's because the new show could have a better story. I wonder what other stupid shit EK could come up with about his shows.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Here goes EK saying GT is overrated. EK, the guy who said STB was a generic robot show after just watching a few episodes. The guy who actually agreed with someone about people only liking SJ because of its art style and that it was a bad action cartoon because its story sucked even though it's CLEARLY an adventure of the week show. The guy who said that the CG Clone Wars could be better than GT's because the new show could have a better story. I wonder what other stupid shit EK could come up with about his shows.

I never criticized SJ's "story" at all, so I have no idea where you pulled that from. I did say it had weak writing, and I still stand by that. You're of course too thick-headed to understand what style over substance is, since it only takes a lot of flash to impress a peanut-sized brain like yours.

Also, a few episodes of SBT is all it took to realize what a generic and boring show it was. If you missed a few posts earlier, I actually said I tried again and watched about half of it. I still think it sucks. Once again, though, I can see that it doesn't take much to impress you.

[Dr. Insomniac]

Nowadays, I find Adventure Time more enjoyable than classic-era Looney Tunes.