Editorial: Ten Bad Posters for Animated Movies

Movie posters really don't get that much credit. The movie poster is another form of advertisement for a movie, and unlike a trailer it has to give you a feel for the movie in one image. So while it is absolutely nice to see some posters get an extra amount of effort and care put into making them look nice, representitive and appealing, it's also really funny to see when that just straight up did not happen. So, yeah, today I'm looking at posters for animated movies that ultimately just don't really work. Why? Because I've always been of the belief that knowing why something doesn't work is just as important as to knowing why something does. When you look at bad art and know why you don't like it, you can incorporate that into your own art. So, let's see what we can learn from these ten examples of pretty mediocre and lame attempts at advertising.

I really want to stress this is not a ranked list, just a list of examples.

10. Kung Fu Panda 2

You know, I can forgive the first Kung Fu Panda movie for having a silly poster because, yeah, let's be real it sounds like a silly movie and that was probably why people were interested in it. It's just that beneath the surface of the silly Kung Fu movie for kids, was actually a very deep movie. So, Kung Fu Panda 2 comes out, and what poster do we get? Something that literally screams "We're the exact same thing the last movie was". In fact, it may actually be worse than that because ultimately, since the depth and nuance of the last movie was a bit of a surprise to people, now it seems like this movie is going to have even less of that, because just look at it, if this poster doesn't scream "The same but less" than I don't know what does.

9. Horton Hears a Who

You know, DreamWorks face barely works for DreamWorks movie posters, it works even less for what amounts to a lesser Pixar/DreamWorks movie studio. No offense to Blue Sky, but they did not have the best filmography before they were shut down. Anyway, this poster is hilarious, like change the title to "Harold and the Elephant" and you have a movie about a man who is having a psychotic episode trying to escape an imaginary elephant who is also a sex offender. Look, I'm just saying, making faces like that while behind someone is not something you do unless you're thinking about slithering in-between that person's buns.

8. Princess Mononoke

What does a movie about the war between man and nature and a looming threat of a dark entity really need to sell itself? A woman riding on the back of a wolf, that's what! Okay, truthfully, I can see this being appealing, like someone might look at this poster and think, "Wow, who is this badass riding the back of a large wolf?" and on that level, I can see this poster being good, but again, a poster needs to be some kind of representation of the movie itself, and I'm fairly certain that there's something a lot deeper in this movie than a woman riding on the back of a wolf.

7. Kubo and the Two Strings

You know, DreamWorks face barely works for DreamWorks movie posters, it works even less for... Actually I think the biggest issue with this one is that it just looks like a very generic action movie.

6. Zootopia

Ah yes, Zootopia... Zootropolis. Crowded shots for movie posters are usually a bad idea, but at least they have the main characters as the most prominent in them. In this poster, Nick and Judy are shoved off into the side, not even in the front, they're behind two random characters. This crowded shot does make this place feel like a big city, but this look like a poster for a slice-of-life film, not a comedic mystery. Even then, this poster doesn't really make me want to explore the Zootopia world, it makes me remember why city life kinda sucks, overcrowded and noisy.

5. Missing Link

There is an awful trend of DVD covers just being close-ups of a character's face, it honestly kinda looks like Laika was just gonna cut out the middle man by making this the poster so they could make an easy DVD cover with minimal editing. On the bright side, the actual DVD covers are a step-up from this.

4. Tangled

Well this looks like the most generic adventure Disney has ever given us. We got a movie about Rapunzel, so why not have a poster that focuses on her long hair? Maybe her climbing out of the tower? Maybe her tying up the other characters? There is another poster with her and Flynn and the lantern festival thing, that was a beautiful poster, so why is this the poster I will see in most places? It just... looks so generic and bland.

3. Ratatouille

This is kind of the Kung Fu Panda principle, where it looks like they're making a silly poster to advertise what is in actuality a much deeper movie. One thing though, this is Pixar, you know, Toy Story Pixar, Incredibles Pixar, A Bug's Life Pixar, silly movies with depth is kind of their bread and butter, so why not instead of a poster that is essentially just "You're probably wondering how I got here" as a still image, why not have a shot of Paris? Remy looking over the beautiful night sky in Paris with his idol's restaurant in the distance? Why go in this direction?

2. Kiki's Delivery Service

Okay, we got a movie about a witch who is trying to adapt to life in a small Japanese town, what is the best image to advertise this movie with? I know! Kiki slumping over the counter of a bakery. Thankfully other posters had the right idea and used an image of Kiki flying over a city, which is definitely a better image. I dunno, I know this is a more slice of life movie, and it's based on a slice of life book (Which is actually a really good book by the way), but I just look at this poster and think, "So this girl delivers bread, wow...".

1. Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken

I... really should not count this one since, as of writing this, this movie isn't even out yet, but my immediate reaction to seeing this poster was, "Oh gosh, that is bad". It is simultaneously too much, and yet too little at the same time. There's a big battle going above, and a character just chilling out below, I mean, what? It really does appear that DreamWorks has no idea how to market this movie, because nobody really knows exactly what it's about, and this poster really doesn't help, hopefully the movie will be good, but this is easily one of the worst movie posters I've seen.

The movie poster is an important part of the movie going experience, they are often one of the first images we see of the newest movies, and in and of themselves are works of art. There are so many movie posters out there that are as enticing as the movie trailers, just with one still image. There are lots of pieces of art that I feel a lot of people overlook, like Movie Posters, Video Game Box Arts, Album Covers, and I want us to learn from it all. If you were making a poster for a movie, what kind of things did you see in these posters would you not do? Is there anything in these posters you would incorporate into your own work? Looking at and studying bad art is just as important as studying great art, and I think that is ultimately the thing I want you to take away from this post. These posters may not be great, but we can still learn from them.

Disney Live Action Trudge: Alice in Wonderland (2010)

It's easy to forget that the first live-action remakes of Disney properties came out in the 90s, because the first big ones would come out in the 2010s. 2010 was such a game changing year for entertainment, for televised animation Adventure Time, Regular Show and My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic began airing, for film there was Inception and The King's Speech, plus Disney seemed to be entering a second renaissance of sorts with the release of Tangled and Pixar's Toy Story 3. DreamWorks was starting off another franchise with How To Train Your Dragon, a film trilogy I desperately need to review some day, and Iron Man 2 was building up to the eventual Marvel Cinematic Universe. Video games had releases like Red Dead Redemption, StarCraft II, Halo: Reach, Amnesia: The Dark Descent and Super Meat Boy. It may be easy to forget, but in hindsight, 2010 might have been one of the most important years for entertainment, it did pave the way for quite a lot of things, including the Disney Live Action Remake.

Alice in Wonderland was not one of the movies I was looking forward to for this marathon, but I eventually bucked up and gave it a watch, and honestly it really wasn't as bad as I thought it was gonna be, because somehow it was worse. Not all that much worse, but if given the choice to watch this movie or take five slaps to the face like Barney Stinson, I'd take the facial slaps. It's a shame because I really do think a darker and more twisted take on Alice in Wonderland could totally be done, something that really added in some horrific aspects and put an emphasis on the darker tones. I dunno, maybe someday one of the guys who did Design work for ID Software or that Czech who does Claymation can do a better version. Ha, yeah, if you haven't quite figured both American McGee and Jan Švankmajer have both done darker takes on the Alice in Wonderland story, with Švankmajer's Alice releasing in 1988 and American McGee's Alice releasing in 2000, but Tim Burton has his own style, so it would be fascinating to see what he could do with the story, at least I thought so. That was before I watched this movie.

My first major issue with the movie is quite simple to state, it's boring. I figured that the opening scene was meant to be boring to kind of contrast to the zany and wacky stuff happening in wonderland, not that the mentality excuses the opening from being boring itself, but at least it's an explanation, but then again the rest of the movie is also just as boring. It's really odd because not only is this Alice in Wonderland, the definition of "Shouldn't be boring", but this is also a war movie. Yeah, one of the most brilliant decisions made in cinema, Alice in Wonderland, a WAR movie! Now someone's gonna say, "But Disney also made Treasure Island into a Science-Fiction movie, and Shakespeare into Kimba the White Lion, so why aren't you against those?" Easy, Treasure Planet is still an adventure film, like the original story, Lion King still has some remnants of a tragedy, like the original Hamlet, nothing in the original Lewis Carrol books ever implied that the story was best suited to have a war in there. Treasure Island can be put in space, and Hamlet can be told with lions, Alice should not fight in a war.

The movie is also not subtle about it. They really want you to know that people are dead in this movie. The Queen comments about eating one of the Frog Servants kids after sending him to be beheaded, the dormouse plucks out a monster's eye, and that is not done off camera, Alice cuts the Jabberwocky's head off and we see the body wiggle and writhe while it slowly dies. I get this is a PG movie, and a hard PG, but it really feels out of place. But why is this out of place and American McGee's Alice isn't? Well, I think ultimately it's because American McGee actually uses the story to explore themes of mental issues and trauma, which the story of Alice in Wonderland does lend itself too, at least it lends itself better to that than it does to a war. I'm fine with dark kids movies, but there is a limit to that, movies like Land Before Time or A Series of Unfortunate Events are dark, but not too unpleasant, and the unpleasant moments are balanced out by the happier moments. This movie doesn't really have that, it's just moments that are less unpleasant than others.

And the acting, oh my gosh the acting is pretty bad in this movie. No offense meant to Mia Wasikowska, I'm sure she does great performances in her other roles, but something was just not working with her role as Alice. There is a big moment where she is standing up for herself, not letting herself be told what to do and who to be, and she just does not sell it at all. Even when she realizes this isn't a dream, I absolutely do not believe she is the character. The other actors aren't that bad, but not all that great. I'm conflicted a bit on Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter, he slips in and out of accents a lot and kind of does a lot of stuff I think would have been better if it was someone like Jim Carrey in that role. Plus, whoever designed the Red Queen in this movie succeeded in making something truly hideous, and not the good kind. This is like watching the life-sized cross between a Funko Pop and a Conan O'Brien caricature. Actually the design work as a whole is kind of disappointing too, like the Red Queen's castle has like, a couple of heart shapes and motifs in the design, but it looks like any other castle. No Expressionist influence, no excess use of the heart motifs, it just looked really plain and boring.

Yeah, Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland is pretty bad, way too dark for it's own good and not interesting enough to justify it. Is this the worst Disney movie of 2010? Alongside The Sorcerer's Apprentice? I doubt it, but it's definitely one of the worst I've seen. This is very much a different take on the story, but it's a take that does not work. I know I'm only two movies into this marathon, but I'm ready to call this one of the worst of the bunch, but as of now we have seventeen more movies to get through, counting both Peter Pan and Wendy and The Little Mermaid 2023, so it may have some competition, but it is only fitting that this movie really kicked off the Live Action Remake trend, since it was the omen that this trend was gonna suck. Well, that's done, it looks like Maleficent is next on the docket, another one that I'm not looking forward to, but at the very least Sleeping Beauty isn't a movie I hold close, so I may end up liking it. We'll wait and see. 

First Impressions: Elemental (2023)

Elemental is one of those movies that everyone had thoughts on, from the concept alone people had questions, thoughts and criticisms. There was just one major thing though, for a good while we didn't really have much to go off of on what this movie really was. The first teaser was a brief showcase of the world this movie took place in, and even then not by much. It showed us two things, that this was a world full of elementals, and that fire was not very common here. We got a more detailed trailer afterwards, but exactly what this movie was, we still weren't sure. We knew it had something to do with prejudice, maybe? Honestly I probably should have drawn this conclusion earlier, but it did seem like Disney was trying to market this as a second Zootopia. However, those are the trailers, and trailers, even fantastic ones, are not whole movies, so how was Elemental as a movie?

Ultimately, Elemental is a good movie. Not great, not spectacular, honestly it is kind of bog standard for Pixar, but it is a good movie. I think the unsure expectations are what will really keep people away from checking this movie out in theatres, that or theatre prices. This movie is not another Zootopia, sort of, themes of prejudice are still prevalent, but the movie is ultimately not about prejudice in the same way Zootopia was. That being said, it's also not a wholly original story either, you can still find elements from modern Disney in this movie. I can't say it's about intergenerational trauma, this isn't another Encanto or Turning Red, but similar themes are there.

When it comes to world building, I'd say that Element City is about on par with Monsteropolis, but that still puts it leagues above Onward. Anyone even remember what Onward's city was called? I never really got the urge to want to explore this city, or really see how it worked. That being said, this movie's world is quite neat, I did enjoy seeing how the homes for the water folk were made, and I quite liked seeing how sports were done in this world. Some of the technicals, like the trains running on water, and there being canals to catch spills from the ships are nice touches, and of course the movie just looks beautiful, so that is a plus towards the worldbuilding as well.

However, neither the themes nor worldbuilding is this movie's strength. The strength lies completely in the relationship between Ember and Wade, and while the arc is again, not wholly original, it is well done and well-made is always going to last longer than unique. I liked seeing why these two fell in love in the first place, Ember admiring Wade's ability to connect with people and Wade admiring Ember's creative thinking. Ultimately, I wanted to see them together, I wanted to see them have all the fun experiences together, I wanted them to be happy. I think Elemental focused on the wrong side of the story, the engaging bit wasn't how everyone else saw Wade and Ember's relationship, the engaging bit was the relationship.

Saying that Elemental is a standard Pixar film, should be seen as a testament to how high Pixar's standard's really are. Remember this is the studio that gave us Toy Story, Finding Nemo, Up, The Incredibles, so when Pixar releases a film that's good but not great, it can be seen as them slipping up. Pixar's output has been pretty full of slip ups and mixed opinions, I loved Toy Story 4 but a lot of people see it as unnecessary, Turning Red has a lot of controversy attached, Lightyear is the lowest rated Pixar movie that isn't in the Cars franchise on Rotten Tomatoes, Brave and The Good Dinosaur are seen as Pixar's worst movies, and Onward was rather generic. Pixar is still able to put fantastic movies out, but I think it's okay that they put out something that is just "good" as well. So no, this isn't in the upper echelons of Pixar movies, but it's still in a comfortable space. I can see Elemental being someone's favourite Pixar movie, but not a lot of peoples. Even still, I give this movie a solid recommendation.

Also, how have I never used the world "Echelons" before?

Něco z Alenky (Jan Švankmajer's Alice) (1988) - A Truly Fascinating Film

 

So... I decided, because I'm a glutton for punishment, to do a review on each Disney Live-Action Remake, and now I'm forced to watch each an every one of them. As of now, I have to go through Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland, which I am not looking forward to, but that gave me the urge to check out another take on the Alice in Wonderland story, one that is also from the mind of an animator known for the dark and the disturbing, only this one is actually dark and disturbing. Jan Švankmajer is a Czech animator, mostly known for his short films such as The Last Trick and one of my favourites, Dimensions of Dialogue. His work has influenced multiple others from The Brothers Quay to Phil Lord and Christopher Miller. He works mostly in stop motion, but he also incorporates live actors, puppets and cutout animation in his work, and his work is... something else. If you like surrealistic, dark and abstract animation, Jan Švankmajer's short films come with a recommendation from myself. In 1988, he tried his hand at making a feature film, titled "Alice", or "Something from Alice", and it is... fascinating.

This review is going to be a bit different, because this is just such a unique piece, it kind of defies traditional analysis, not to say it is a wholly untraditional film, it still follows the basic story of Alice in Wonderland, but rather than Alice dozing off in the field and seeing a rabbit outside, a taxidermy rabbit comes to life in her room, in fact there's a lot of things like that. The caterpillar for example is a sock with eyes and teeth, and the lizard Bill appears more like a taxidermized reptile with a different animals skull. The rest of the movie is very grungy, dirty and rusted, and all kinds of random things are used as puppets, including cutouts, skulls and raw meat. Yeah if you're absolutely terrified of stop motion animation already, you may want to stay away from this movie because it will make your fear a lot worse. Even Alice sometimes looks absolutely afraid of some of the things in this movie.

Speaking of which, Alice is played by Kristýna Kohoutová, and she does a pretty good job. She looks genuinely curious and weirded out at points. I mention this because, she is the only person in this entire movie that speaks, it's like she's reading the story as we're watching what is going on, which leads to the fascinating choice of having most of this movie be silent. Dialogue only comes in when it is important, and for the most part we have to infer what Alice is thinking, which becomes more interesting when she's in doll form, yes, for a good chunk of the movie, Alice is a live actor interacting with all these puppets, and other objects. They almost never show her in the same shot as the puppets, so this isn't like King Kong or Jason and the Argonauts, but I still believe that everything is in the same room, thanks to the directing and editing.

However, I can see someone having an issue with the editing, as the film is rather slow-paced, and there are some weird editing choices, like whenever Kristýna narrates a character's dialogue, when the dialogue is being said we see the character, but when she says "Said the character", it shows a close-up of her mouth, which I swear zooms in closer and closer as the movie goes on. It is also very Jan Švankmajer in the editing, which is difficult to describe, but if you're familiar with his work, you already have kind of a feel for how his films are edited. If you aren't a fan of his style of films you may not like this one all that much. You may also not like the background music, because there is none. You just hear an almost endless ticking sound, and that is the closest thing to background music you get. I quite enjoy the lack of background music, it lends itself to the eerie and uncomfortable atmosphere, which I think is intentional, since many of the films by Jan Švankmajer have that very eerie, odd and uncomfortable atmosphere to them.

Jan Švankmajer's Alice is a really odd movie, but it's just so fascinating that I had to talk about it. I really did like it, it's one of those movies like Raggedy Ann and Andy or Felidae where I really don't think I've ever seen something like it before, and don't think I'll see anything like it anytime soon. However, like those movies that does come with the caveat that... I'm not really sure how to recommend it. On the one hand, if you love animation, this is a must see, I found a version on YouTube with a translation in the closed captions, so if you want to check it out, that is probably your best bet, since I've heard that Jan Švankmajer's work is hard to find if you're not in Europe. That being said, this is not really a movie I would recommend it casual movie goers or anyone who isn't really familiar with the animator's previous work. If what I said interests you, I'd recommend checking out some of the short films first, and if you liked them, then I'd recommend this movie. Honestly, this movie is truly fascinating, and I do think that if you're an animation fan it is worth check out at least once. This is another case where I'm giving the movie a Slight Recommendation, but you should not take that as this film not being any good, it's just for a more specific audience.

First Impressions: Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (2023)

 

Easily one of the best animated movies from the 2010s has got to be 2018's Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse. It was fun, exciting and unique amongst the rest of the animated releases that year. It wasn't my favourite, I still think Isle of Dogs is the best animated movie of 2018, but this was easily a close second, and it was a lot more impactful on animation than I anticipated, the 2020s, so far have been one of the best years for stylized animation, beyond just Computer Generated 3D animation, and I do think this was, if not the catalyst than where the ball got enough momentum. So, of course a sequel would be highly anticipated and there would be a lot of expectations on this movie. It not only has to stand up compared to the first movie, but it has the challenge of any sequel, which is that it has to stand on its own... Kinda like Miles Morales... funny how that is fitting.

Immediately, the first thing that hit me was the opening scene with Gwen and her father. After seeing it, I thought I sat through a whole mini-movie, like I would have been satisfied if it was just the opening segment. You know what I'm about to compare it to next, yep, this movie's opening was almost as good as the opening to Up. Legitimately, it was that good, I think I'll give the point to Up by just a tiny margin, but that just kinda shows the talent that went into this movie for the opening sequence to be on par with what is often regarded as the greatest opening to an animated movie of all time. Of course, now one would imagine that with an opening so good the rest of the movie would falter by comparison. Right?

While I won't say that this is as good as the first movie, you do have to understand that was a really high bar in the first place, the animation was a bit more stylized, especially in Gwen's world, and especially on the characters, seeing Spider-Punk in such a very distinct style was super cool, and seeing the scene with Miles towards the end, all his memories coming back, it was so cool. Truthfully, there is so much about the animation I want to talk about but, holy moly, I really want to keep this spoiler free. So many cool bits of animation, blending, live-action integration, it's all very cool.

On top of that, I liked seeing where all these characters went, Peter B. Parker became Spider-Dad and was just amazing to watch, seeing where Miles is, where Gwen is, it was all so engaging. I was sitting there, in the theatre, and what was in my seat's cup holder? Warm Sprite, I often forgot I had my drink right next to me, and my friend stopped eating their snacks we were that invested in what was going on. On top of that, seeing all these new spider-men, not just Spider-Punk, but also Miguel O'Hara, Jessica Drew, Pavitr Prabhakar, Spider-Byte, Scarlet Spider, Web-Slinger, and so many other Spider-mans... Spider-men? Spider-mans that... quite frankly I think only those who are DEEP into comics and Spider-Man lore can really appreciate, though they were good for a good chuckle at the utter ridiculousness of things like Spider-Rex, which I thought they were already digging deep for Spider-Ham. Hey, if you guys can name every Spider-Man variant out there like I can name every member of Donald Duck's family tree, this may be a movie for you.

Also J. K. Simmons comes back as J. Jonah Jameson, which is a plus.

So, do I have any issues with this movie? Yes, I have one very big glaring issue, this is part one of a two-parter. Why does this bother me? Because it means that I have to wait another year or so to see how this story concludes. This is one of those movies I would have been glad to see a full three hour cut of, it was so gripping and exciting that knowing that I can't finish this story right now is irritating, is this how it felt to wait for the Lord of the Rings sequels? Like, people who saw Two Towers in theatres and had to wait a whole year before The Return of the King, is this what it felt like? Still, don't let that stop you from seeing this movie, easily it is one of the best animated movies... Hell, one of the best movies of the year so far. It is kinda nice that 2022, despite being a bit of a dry spell for animated movies, it is nice that most of the one's we've gotten have been really good. I'm excited for the rest of 2022's releases... particularly one... you know which one.

As for Across the Spider-Verse, do I even need to say it's a High Recommendation? I'm considering this as mandatory viewing if you want to get into animation.