ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ธ.ค. 2010
- / eddleigh
Originally broadcast on 23 October, 2009 on BBC 5Live.
Mark Kermode reviews the 2009 stop-motion animated picture, Fantastic Mr. Fox (© 20th Century Fox) directed by Wes Anderson adapted from the Roald Dahl book.
Contains clips from Wallace & Gromit: Curse of the Were-Rabbit (© 2005 DreamWorks Pictures)
Hello to Jason Isaacs - บันเทิง
I was 10 when I first saw Fantastic Mr Fox, and I loved it. It's so quirky and charming.
This was actually one of my favorite movies of all time in the animation genre. The "too talky" was also quite stupid, no offense but it doesn't have to be a children's movie.
+Zelnyair Good point here, saying "it doesn't have to be a children's movie" can readily be reworded into "this movie fails to connect with its target audience, the children" depending on perspective. I tried watching Fantastic Mr. Fox a while ago but dozed off after 20 minutes or so. Without going into specifics, it seemed to utterly lack the warmth or charm that made e.g. Wallace and Gromit or Nightmare Before Christmas an instant hit among kids and adults alike. It's possible I'm missing something here, and I'll be giving it a proper shot over the holidays, but I'm highly trepidatious about the end result :p
One of the five greatest animated movies ever made. Wonderful.
What's wrong with making an animated film for an adult audience?
animation is for children. It is so creative, so imaginative, that to simply shoehorn the adult narrative (fixed rate mortgages, bad neighbours, shitty job, disappointing kids etc.) into an animated format is to simply make a movie that would have been better done live. A movie made this way simply doesn't take advantage of the creative possibilities of animation that inherently appeal to the minds and imaginations of children and big children (adults) alike. You can have adult themes, but to make a 'real world' story with all the touchstones of 'real' life without actually exploring a reality with different rules is just a wasted opportunity. Plus it lacks the spirit of the original book and as Kermode highlights it wastes the huge opportunities of physical slapstick comedy, as you see to great effect in Wallace and Gromit.
I love animation, I'm 20 and I agree with Kermode. This film was just too clever for its own good and lacked creativity. Plus the 'all-star' cast seemed to include american leads (most auspiciously George Clooney) for a story set in the english countryside. I have a similar opinion on the Paddington films, in so far as they lacked the spirit of the original and emphasised the cast over the actual heart of the stories and characters.
@@artistsometimes2729 are u saying Akira or any Japanese cyberpunk animation is for children? There is adult animation just so u know. This format of cinema may be slightly more accessible to children. But it is never exclusive.
@@artistsometimes2729 animation is for everyone. I hate this mindset of animation being for kids. There are some animated films exclusively for kids but most of them are for all ages.
I loved this movie
First saw this when I was 10. Loved it and have ever since. Even as a 22 year old, I look fondly on this lovely film.
He must have really hated Where the Wild Things Are.
I was 8 when I first saw it and I thought it was boring. Just watched it again now I’m 19 and I think it’s pretty good
For me I loved it and I first saw it in 2010 when I was 16 and at the time my brother was 11 and we would watch it again and again and cry laughing
I was 12 when I bought and watched this. And loved it. And the whole 'too talkative' thing made me like it, because the characters had rather realistic conversations (well, for a bunch of animals that can talk) and sometimes really clever words mashed together. I don't know, it feels like even though there's a lot of talking, the visuals (or shots), animation, and the detail! It's really amazing at how much attention to detail was put into it, with stop-motion no less. Which means you must have a lot of patience. Maybe it's because they're used to more British humor, not really sure. And that Wallace and Gromit movie, wasn't that funny to me. And saw that when I was much younger! The shorts I love because, how could you not.
While it doesn't get too dark, it certainly implies it a lot. Mr. Fox gets his tail shot off, a character dies, being told someone wants to kill you in a rather gory way, so on and so forth.
( And now I ramble on about two characters.)
And now, characters. Mr. Fox is voiced by George Clooney, who I was familiar with. I liked him because even though he was clever and funny, he still made mistakes. It's something not many people do because they try too hard to make the character to be a 'role model' for kids, meaning they're perfect and make little to no mistakes. But I just love it when a good writer steps in and makes a someone like that, grown no less, flawed. It shows when you get too cocky or believe in a stereotype that foxes are clever and sneaky, comes tumbling down on not only you but your family.
That's another thing that Mr. Fox teach to adults and maybe even teenagers; getting older means you have responsibilities and sometimes those people want to be young again. Wild and free, with no family or responsibilities to think about. It's fun but a lot harder than he remembered, showing how old he's really gotten. But he forgot that he does have responsibilities and his 'living in the glory days' phase comes to a break, and not only is his family in danger, but also everyone else. But like a teenager, he thinks it can be simple with, what else, reckless stealing. But it gets worse, they're all flooded out of their temporary home. That's like a literal slap in the face at how real this situation is, and his cousin is also held captive.
He then does something very moving and leaves to offer his life. Of course, he stops to save his son Ash. Both are something most adults do for their family and even others.
Ash, a character that a lot of people, maybe even kids, can connect with. He has a mother and father but his father seems uninterested in him because he doesn't go and steal stuff or because he's different. Ash seems like a typical teenager, grouchy and acts tough. But really he's very nice but he's afraid if he shows it often then people will see him as a wimp that can't do anything right. The giant beaver bully that shoves dirt in his face gets beaten by Kristofferston. That shows how little he really is, and before that the bully states that's what's going to happen. And what does he do? Whines that he won't and doesn't fight back. That happens often with kids and teenagers, in their fantasies they could easily protest but instead they can't because they don't want to be beaten up and shown how weak they are.
Lastly, he's always overshadowed by Krisofferston. Most of the movie he hates him and his father for praising him and even bringing him along to steal from a farm. This shows how little Fox thinks about his son. Fox doesn't seem to realize how much he's hurting Ash.
But, there's a scene a remember of them trying to get the rabid dog distracted while getting Krisofferston out. They're almost killed but Ash risks his life to dig under the gate while getting shot at. We then see a shot of Mr. Fox looking worried and horrified at the possibility of his one and only son killed. This from him rescuing him and talking to him afterwards.
I'm sure it can go deeper than that but that's all I've got to say. My, looking over this I can see why I like the talking so much.
Mr Fox has, is and always will be my favourite Wes Anderson film. I've loved it since i was a kid and my appreciation of it only grows every time i see it, which is far too many to remember right now
I watched this when it came out when I was 9 and loved, I still love it to this day
i liked it for all the reasons you guys complained about it. and i dont know who that banjo player is but i thought the gag was funny as hell. PS my little sister thought the movie was fucking hilarious and she was 10 when she saw it.
A film obviously exists outside of its release date and its run in theaters. I didn't understand it at first, but it has definitely grown on me over repeated viewings and that might be because I see it as a Wes Anderson film and not a kid's film. It's making me happy, Mark.
I think Mark should come back to this and review it again. Especially considering he’s had lots of people who grew up with this movie and adored it debunk his view that the movie can not be enjoyed by children
I actually loved this as a child. I think it’s because I was so entertained by the visuals and music, as well as its brilliant charm. I think it’s fantastic.
I saw this film alone and I really enjoyed it but had exactly the same concern as Mark Kermode, then I watched it with my nieces and they loved it and I was so relieved!
I kinda agree with Mark, I saw it in the cinema when I was 11 and was bored to tears.
However, when I rewatched it as a teenager it became one of my all time favorites.
If you go into it with the idea that it's got the same tone as 'isle of dogs' you'll have a blast, but it really doesn't work as a kids movie imo
the animation is amazing and it was a good movie and i loved it
i love the talkative element, it reminds me of tarantino’s way of how the characters speak. also i’ve never really seen it as a kids film i don’t think he she keep bringing that up. animation doesn’t equate to kids film. look at tv shows such as south park or futurama!!
Just had to come back and say I recently just showed this movie to a 7 year old and her 3 year old sister and both of them ask me to turn on the fox movie every day now. I re listened to this and you guys go on about a lot of things that aren't even true. What about the dialogue is for grown ups only? I know the movie by heart and can't think of any yet you two drone on about how it's not for kids at all.
+digitalblasphemy1100 Whee Whee click click!
I don’t really understand Mark on this one. It’s a beautiful film, masterfully done and it makes children think. It tackles really thoughtful topics like death and aging, which is something we must expose children to, or it will be all the more harder for them to cope with it in later life…idk maybe I’m just a teenage girl who thinks she knows about film criticism…
I don't know Jarvis cocker and i still thought that part in the movie was hilarious
Saw this the other day and really liked it. It was always my favourite Roald Dahl book as a child and I didn't think it was an overtly intellectual reading of it.
He took the story and made it his own. Most don't like it because it wasn't done like how the book portrayed it. Taken out nearly all of the words from the book and replaced them with his own language. I really like that, it shows he has ideas to show and portray rather than simply taking someone else's ideas and copying it almost word for word which is just boring.
I was 7 when I saw this, it was my favorite movie and it cracked my brain in half. I knew there was something here that was so much more and better than everything else I was watching. I saw it a thousand times. I respect Mark’s opinion, but this is very much still a kid’s movie, one that as you grow reveals hidden layers of desperation and existentialism that only make you love it more, he gave them and us too little credit. I want a kids movie that grows with you. I want a movie like Spider-Verse or Mr. Fox that I can still watch now, not something juvenile and stupid like Shrek or Cars that I retroactively feel embarrassed about (Never liked Cars.) the best kids movies are the ones that acknowledge how smart and weird their audience can be.
Never though about it like that, good review.
I really liked this and hope to catch it again, and as someone who is sick of seeing everything that's animated to be annoying and childish, that's you Pixar, its nice to watch something for a 23 yr old and remind me of my age and what it was like to watch animation, in all its forms, in the 90s!!!!!!!!!!
I saw this film when i was 9 the week it came out and i loved it to pieces i watched it 7 times in one day... so yeah kids can love this movie.. or maybe I'm just weird
I grew up with the book and this is one of my favourite animated films ever.
This is the first time when I have thought that Kermode is wrong wrong wrong. I love his reviews and have agreed with him on most of them. This is a great film and it is a kids film, if you have smart kids. (Sorry, I bet that sounds smug) I dont have children, I dont want children but I am sure a lot a parents would agree with me and they will show their kids this film.
Terrible review, wonderful film.
True
See, this is his point of view so I wouldn't call i a terrible review. And I'm not a hater of this movie, I absolutely love it as well.
I am a 13 year old teenager I have loved this movie since I was 9. Does that count as a kid loving this movie? Also I have no idea what where's anderson is.
Now I'm not a film analyst, but I really liked it because it was a kids' movie for adults. It's an innocent, fun, animated film made for adults, and that's not a common thing. I thought it was brilliant. Maybe it's just my soft spot for any kind of juxtaposition, maybe it's my fondness for foxes, maybe it's that I'm a teenage girl trying to be smart and grown-up. But I thought it was brilliant.
Fantastic Mr. Fox is a masterpiece. Mark didn't see the same film I did.
I watched this film when I was seven, I liked it and I thought the story was easy to follow, but that is just me.
It so obviously is not a children movie, and there's nothing wrong with that.
It was marketed as a children's movie.
Lmao he says its not a kids flim but 7 year old me loved it
I liked it when I was little.
No, it doesn't affect their value/quality at all. You're absolutely right about Hitchcock, Tarr, and Melville in their films being similiar in tone and subject not having to do anything with them being less great. I mildly dispute about Ford, but anyway.
In the case of Wes Anderson, how should I put this. He's of that category of filmmaker (like the ones you stated) where If you were to look at one frame or watch a 30 second clip from any film of his, you'd know immediately it's his work.
as a 5 year old this was funny...as 13 its funny and helpful. st
I know a bunch of kids who enjoyed this movie as much as adults did because some parts do have more humor towards kids and other are for an older audience. The review is bad and this movie was extremely under appreciated. It brings in an old nature instead trying new animations. And the movie puppets just make the film classic
Wonderful film although I was surprise with the maturity. I remember this as quite a fantastical story and one that made me ponder for a very longtime (if remember the ethical debate between Badger and Mr. Fox). This film has not been appreciated and recognised as much as I think it should be. I think I enjoyed this more than Disney's UP. My little nephews couldn't enjoy this but I savoured the wonderful scriptwriting.
Agreed 100%. I do think Isle of Dogs is a lot better, though still not perfect.
If you think about it, Fantastic Mr. Fox is a kids book, but its from 1970, so it could be said, this book targets it audience perfectly. Animation is just another medium used to convey ideas, it should not be boxed in as child's thing.
@notsukutsu I think you're right in saying the fact that the film doesn't sit well with its 'intended audience' doesn't make it any worse a film. Although I've been slighted irritated by the 'smugness' in past Anderson films, I actually didn't mind Fantastic Mr. Fox.
Saying that, I wouldn't go as far as saying it was one of 2009's best films.
Jarvis Cocker the lead singer of 'The Pulp'
This movie appeals to children and adults it has funny child humor and is done like a child's book but has the style of an adult comedy don't be so hard on it for being different I loved it and hope it dosent die away any time soon
I was bored during Curse of the Were-Rabbit, and I love Wallace and Grommit. Maybe I need to revisit that...
This movie Is actually surprisingly great and It's great In a completely different way.
It's good to know that the good doctor is out there proving that I'm not crazy for disliking this movie.
Wes Anderspon you mean.
Mark has it spot on
Nah he doesn't, have you even seen it?
I fairly recently got a chance to watch this movie.
Let me just say, that I enjoy a lot of Wes Anderson films, and I generally enjoy film that respects patience as a virtue and takes it's time to do things correctly. But Wes Anderson's style clearly does not work with stop motion. The entire film I couldn't help but notice how utterly disconnected the dialogue felt from what I saw happening on screen. I would say the majority of the characters seemed to be just 'reading the bloody script with no care towards the context of the scene.
Now even though I enjoy most of his other films, even those can seem the same way at times, but it's just amplified so dramatically with stop motion, it just makes me cringe with embarrassment. I think the last time I felt this embarrassed for the people making a movie this much was when I watched "After Earth".
As for the comments about this movie only appealing to 'smart' audiences. I think that's a very shallow comment. I grew up on Roald Dahl stories, still cherish quite a few of the hard backs on my book shelf, been a fan of Wes Anderson since "Bottle Rocket", and I tend to watch the so-called 'smart' movies to boot. Yet I still believe this movie to have been poorly executed. Knowing what I know about what went into the production of it, it certainly wasn't laziness, but perhaps a lack of care.
@notsukutsu wes, not pt
I saw this when I was 9 and loved it.
@notsukutsu
Wes Anderson.
Most of his worries seem to be about whether this, animated and thus falsely assumed to have been made for the kids, feature would go down well with toddlers or attention-deficit teenagers. It may very well not. Which DOESNT make it worse in any way. It's a PT Anderson movie, which is fine, and it's told with intentionally badly animated puppets, which makes it great. Smugness is quite intentional (and funny) considering the title. I'm not alone in saying it was one of the year's best films.
I think Kermode has misunderstood Wes Anderson's intentions here. Firstly, The Fantastic Mr Fox was published in 1970. I'm not convinced that this animated film was created for children. Do kids today know who Roald Dahl is?
The main theme, which seems to run through all of Wes Anderson's films is nostalgia and i don't think that The Fantastic Mr Fox is an execption.
Another brilliant piece of work Mr Anderson.
This whole review is predicated on the moronic assumption that because it's animated, it's intended for kids. Review fail.
Paul Thomas Anderson makes films. Wes Anderson makes Wes Anderson films. There's the difference.
You thought wrong
@notsukutsu *Wes Anderson
If PT Anderson ever made an animated movie it'd destroy this. ;)
I know I'm stupidly late to this, but I've got to say I kind of agree and disagree with this. When you mention how insanely talkative this movie is, I have to admit its very true and the way its done and executed kind of does make it go against the common kids film and the purpose of animation. However I feel like it can keep kids and the family audience happier than its getting credit for here. The banjo player was funny as its clear he's singing nonsense when he's told "that's bad song writing" in an odd interupted manner, there's some humorous visual gags like the beagles and the knock-out blueberries, and the tale of a fox theif gone wrong is still easy to see through this movie for everyone. With the dialogue and the tone the way it is, I wont be surprised if some stuff goes over quite a few heads including adults, I know I sure understood it a ton better than I did the first time. but I wouldn't say it makes the whole movie bad or too adult in total, its still got plenty of gags, cool moments, and interesting points that make it cool for everyone, even if some details are easy to miss for the younger portion of viewers.
Did anyone ever claim that this was a kids movie? Because it's clearly not. I don't get this review at all. I guess adult animation wasn't a thing 12 years ago?
What Kermode forgets is most children and families are tasteless idiots who would rather watch a Madagascar movie or some other trash. When I saw it I felt like I’d been accepted into some sort of club. I was already a weird kid who knew all about actors far older than me, this was the movie for me. If you gatekeep movies like this from a whole kids movie market you do a disservice to kids in general and then you get stuck with Trolls and Paw Patrol and Minions.
Down voted for confusing PT and Wes Anderson howver I do agree
Finally watched this recently, and maybe it's charming as a Wes Anderson story (but the sensibilities didn't click with me) but why did he have to do a Roald Dahl story rather than come up with his own? I don't mind talky stuff, but I was annoyed by the lack of the book's... I dunno, essence, soul, whatever. No kids' film should involve the line "you really are a sort of a quote-unquote..."
This movie is for the Adult that is a child at heart...FFS.
Mark is wrong
Yeah. Fuck him for having his own opinion
Kermode is spot-on. This movie is BAD.
Hard disagree. I don't even think it was made for children. I loved this film.
That clip alone was horribly annoying, and I'm a 21-year-old so not even a kid. It seems like the film suffers from the opposite problem of most kids movies - most kids movies amuse the kids but do nothing for the adults, whereas this is for the smug end of the adults whilst the kids just sit around wondering what on Earth the foxes are blethering on about.
I completely agree with this review - it didn't touch me on an adult level or relate to my inner child, just annoyed me really
Mark commode is a better name for him and whats with the dumb laugh track?
It was pretty clear from the beginning that it's not a kid's film. end of story.
I am annoyed how Kermod goes on about it missing out on the brilliant humour, bespoke animation - and I'm not exaggerating, it is very unique for today and worked through characters.
The film was unpredictable and i genuinely enjoyed it to bits. from the beginning to the end.
I can’t put my finger on it.
But I fucking hated it.
no it wouldnt pt fanboy >:(
Completely agree. I found this film too long and all wrong for a children’s movie. So much yakking and smug self-reflection.
Kids no nothing about good movies.
I found this to be an arch, hipster, post-modern and clever-clever version of a children's story that in someone else's hands could just have been a simple, fun romp. Kermode is right - Aardman would have absolutely nailed this.
Kermode - A typical offender of the Animation Age Ghetto.
Kermode is really wrong and missing the point with Fantastic Mr Fox, sure it won't appeal to little stupid kids like Ice Age or something. The Wes Anderson nostalgia thing is right, he was interested in that part not to make a "kids" film. More films should be like this, Kermode just reviews this in the wrong context
this is a silly review. making the same point over and over instead of touching on parts of the film. im not sure it's supposed to be aimed at young children, i like the talking and classyness of the film. also as an adult, i hate wallace and gromit. i think thats only good for young kids.
I disagree. Kids relish trying to catch up. I certainly did when I was young
You are all so very wrong and Mark is so very right.
Wes Anderson movies are horrible.
It's hilarious listening to a bunch of smugly condescending, trying-to-sound-sophisticated faux-bourgeois fools smash and thrash this movie while awesomely animated sequences of it whiz by.