Shark Tale

Dir: Rob Letterman, Bibo Bergeron, Vicky Jenson

2004

**

DreamWorks Animation's Shark tale became dated pretty much as soon as it was released. It was a huge hit of the production company (their 2nd biggest opening at the time) and it is miles ahead of Shrek, it just doesn't look or feel right, and for a kids film it is aimed at the adults just a little too much. The fact it was nominated for Best Animated Feature at the Oscars just tells you how bad the year was for animation (or how insular the Academy Awards was/is). Although Shark Tale was produced concurrently with Finding Nemo, it ended up coming out a year and half later, which knocked it out of the water somewhat. DreamWorks Animation's CEO, Jeffrey Katzenberg, defended the film in this respect, saying that "any similarities are mere coincidence. We've been open with the Pixar people so we don't step on each other's toes." I'm pretty sure Pixar weren't at all concerned. The story is fairly derivative and full of way too many pop culture in-jokes that only half the target audience would get. I had no problem with animated characters resembling their given voice actor until I saw Shark Tale, but after watching I've become a strict advocate that the characters should be their own creation, rather than adopting any type of similarity with their voice actor. It's horrible. The Shark Slayer of the film is voiced by Will Smith and is basically a version of The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, Robert DeNiro is every gangster his ever played before, Angelina Jolie is the 'femme fatale' the media had painted her as (why would she agree to that?) and Renée Zellweger was Dorothy Boyd from Jerry Maguire. Only Jack Black's character Lenny can't be attached to a previous role of his but Lenny is the character I had the biggest problem with. Lenny comes out as a vegetarian shark, a funny idea that has possibilities. The problem is, the strong underlining assumption is that Lenny is in fact gay, rather than a non-meat eater. He acts camp and has many of Hollywood's homosexual stereotypes about him, it's handed poorly and I don't believe any denial that that isn't what was going on and that the film makers hadn't noticed similarities. The animation is poor, the idea is half-hearted and messy and there is very little warmth to be had. Apart from the fact they had Martin Scorsese do the voice of one of the main characters, I wasn't impressed. They also got the anthropomorphism all wrong, Finding Nemo and Pixar in general knew how their characters should move etc but they didn't give them human objects to interact with, a stingray acted as a bus, rather than them having a real bus. The fish didn't have cameras, television sets and other objects that just make no sense. Poor story and poor visuals don't make for a great animation, animation has come leaps and bounds since 2004 but most animations released before this were far superior.

Goosebumps

Dir: Rob Letterman

2015

***

I was too old for the Goosebumps series of books when they first came out but I think I would probably have read them had I been of age. They seem to be a fairly unoriginal collection of stories dealing with ghostly characters that can be found elsewhere and dare I say, in better places. It's fine though, it is for kids and young horror fans have got to start somewhere. The franchise has been very successful, so a movie version has been on the cards for some time, since 1998 in fact. They could have concentrated on one book and tried to make a series of adaptations but it would always be a risk as to which one to start with. A different approach was decided upon and for my money I think they got it right. With the likes of Werewolves, Zombies, Abominable Snowmen etc. being main characters, it is fair to say there is very little original about the books, so why should the film be any different? Goosebumps sees a fictional version of author R. L. Stine (played by Jack Black) keep his original manuscripts under lock and key as the contents somehow have the ability to spill out when the books are unlocked. It comes as no surprise when after a series of comedy events, one of the books is accidentally opened. It is basically Jumanji. Before long, all of the books are opened and each of the super-fan's favourite character makes an appearance. At this point Jumanji suddenly becomes a child-friendly version of The Cabin in the Woods for kids. Not original but still very well done. The script is actually rather good and it doesn't suffer the usual clichés you'd expect from such a film. The special effects are fantastic and the various features monsters are all a lot of fun. I liked it a lot as an adult but I think I would have gone nuts for it if I were a kid. It felt like a 80s movie in many ways, a bit like The Burbs in fact. It's no masterpiece but it is lots of fun, a very easy watch and the perfect way to get your kids into horror.

Gulliver's Travels
Dir: Rob Letterman
2010
**
Gulliver's Travels is a classic piece of literature that has gone through quite a few different incarnations and much like say A Christmas Carol, it's nice to see the different ways people tell the same story. This version was fine, I quite like what they did. However, if you are not a fan of Jack Black, and I have to say the more I see him the more I dislike him, then you probably wont like it. Why can't he do something different, why can't he act? Honestly, if only he and Jason Segel had swapped roles then this film would have improved 100%. The supporting cast was good but only Chris O'Dowd really embraced his character and subsequently steals the show. The inclusion of Giant Robot was one step too far however and overall the story falls a little flat. Classic literature really needs to be respected a little more than this.