Showing posts with label things with unfortunate names. Show all posts
Showing posts with label things with unfortunate names. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 2, 2013

In Which Trish *Finally* Gets a Look at 3/4ths of "Dinosaur Revolution"!

Yes, I finally saw it.  Out of the kindness of the YouTube elves, since there is not one scrap of evidence that this miniseries will be available in it's original televised form on DVD in America anytime soon.  And with the second episode completely missing, that single episode having been deleted by Discovery Networks (because content providers cracking down on the internet know no logic).  So here are my thoughts, well over a year after anyone could possibly care!  Huzzah and Happy New Year!

Bit of background, first.  The story of "Dinosaur Revolution" (also known by the less-confounding title, "Reign of the Dinosaurs") begins several years ago when a teaser image of concept art appeared on the Internet.  (This was occasionally credited to Pixar, possibly having been conflated with contemporary teaser art from "The Good Dinosaur".)  At the time, we were given sky-high promises about the upcoming miniseries.  Most exciting among these were the promise that this would be a narrative dinosaur film with no dialogue or vocal narration at all, that the dinosaurs would be the most scientifically accurate animals to date, and that noted paleoartists and animators would be contributing to the project.  It was not referred to as a serious documentary, but would instead be a series of short animated vignettes of life in the Mesozoic.  One of the earliest previews shows what they initially intended for the series.

In short, this sounded like the dinosaur animation that I'd been longing for since, like, forever.  And that I'm still longing for because "Dinosaur Revolution" isn't it.

But it comes really damn close to it.  A lot of what's bad about the miniseries has been blamed on executive meddling, so let's tackle the not-so-good parts of "Dinosaur Revolution" first.

There are, to be sure, segments with excellent animation.  There are also segments with very sloppy animation, with "floaty" physics and wonky walk-cycles, and the inconsistency can get jarring.  I didn't have as much of a problem with the more stylized aspects of the series that most people did, looking back at reviews of the series from the time.  That said, there were a couple of scenes that had me thinking, "really?"  Most of them have to do with the non-dinosaur characters, like the weirdly dolphin-like Mosasaur and the pterosaur mother with her babies...  Hey, you know that scene in "The Land Before Time" with the cute baby pterosaurs going after the one berry?  There's a scene in "Dinosaur Revolution" that is the exact diametric opposite of it. <8(

The narration is oftentimes just awful, sounding exactly like what you'd imagine the end-result of a long string of bad decisions from wimpy execs would.  It just keeps showing up again and again, stating the stunningly obvious, and getting in the way right when I was most enthralled with the visuals.

Then you have the segments where Coachella Tupac hologram scientists talk about *sort-of* sciencey-stuff in a very fake looking science lab set.  Oh dear, these were indeed very silly.  Now, it's always fun to have Scott Sampson talk about dinosaurs in a television show, and I like how they interviewed Scott Hartman.  It would have been very nice to have the show's contributors talk about their reasoning behind the animated sequences after each episode.  Apparently, this was the original plan, but the network caved and decided to throw the interviews randomly in during the show itself.  Like the narration, these segments just interrupt the dinosaurs we're here to see.

There's also that damned strange ending.  Spoilertext: You cry for the mother Troodon desperately trying to save her last egg. But then, there is flash-forward to modern times with some incredibly sh*ttily animated birds to show that all is well and some Maniraptors made it! Man, if they had just stopped there it'd be fine. But they end on a very, very different note - and you cry again.

The other big point of contention people had with "Dinosaur Revolution" has to do with the tone.  Discovery shot itself in the foot advertising this as a straight, serious documentary.  Indeed, it feels as though they took the animated segments, which are as a whole essentially like a more rigorously accurate original "The Land Before Time", and tried to force them into a dead-serious science documentary by adding the narration and interview segments.  The end result is jarring, to say the least.

So, basically, the main criticisms I have with "Dinosaur Revolution" have to do with what it isn't, and what the networks tried to force it to be.  Ignoring all that, there is a lot to love in the miniseries.

First off, these animated dinosaurs look absolutely fantastic.  I dare say they may be the most believable CGI creatures this side of "District 9" - when the animation is at it's best, at least.  I love how they're allowed to look and behave much stranger then we're used to seeing in this kind of CGI dinosaur series.  It's not always realistic but it's believable, and that's what counts.

Most significantly, in many ways, "Dinosaur Revolution" reminded me of the "a paleoartist is going to inevitably be wrong about what dinosaurs really looked like anyway, so why be wrong and boring?" philosophy of Brian Engh's astonishing Sauroposeidon illustration.  Or the illustrations in All Yesterdays, come to think of it.  It's mind-blowing at times, and I hope the re-edit of the miniseries (with the facepalm-worthy title, "Dinotasia") is closer to the original vision for the series.

Overall, what I liked in "Dinosaur Revolution", I liked a lot.  I'll try to ignore the rest. 

-----

Sketch of the Day!  The very first entry in Sketch of the Day 2013!  A pretty Troll bride-to-be and the difference between the "Jurassic Park" and "Dinosaur Revolution" T. rexes.

1.1.13 Sketchbook Page

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

"We were the victims of ourselves!" - Thoughts on "John Carter"

"John Carter" is every bit as good as "Avatar", for good and for ill.  Indeed, it is better in some respects.  It is definitely worth watching if you are in any way curious about it or have enjoyed any works of science fiction/fantasy/adventure created in the past one hundred years.  For indeed, this film is based as reverently as possible the root of nearly all such fiction.  And it had the good luck to be made by people who genuinely love the hell out of the source material.

Right.  So let me try and talk about "John Carter" without screaming and swearing at Disney's almost impressively sh**ty marketing department.

("Cheep, cheep, cheep," go the crickets.)

Yeah, I really can't.  Let me regale you with anecdotal evidence of how impressively sh**ty a job Disney did in promoting "John Carter":

My sister and our best friend are both big fans of "Friday Night Lights".  Tim Riggins is their favorite character, if for no other reason than the fact that he is pretty hot.  Got all that?  Good, because NEITHER OF THEM WERE EVEN AWARE THAT THERE IS A MOVIE WHERE TAYLOR KITSCH GOES TO MARS AND KICKS EVERYONE'S ASS WHILE WEARING ALMOST NOTHING BUT A LOINCLOTH AND A SMILE FOR TWO HOURS! 

Furthermore, our friend loves "Avatar".  A lot.  She isn't one of those "I was a Na'vi in another life; I cry at night because Earth is too boring; I'm going to move to Pandora Landora in Disney when it opens" types, but surely her curiosity might have been piqued if something along the lines of, oh, "From the classic stories that inspired one hundred years of epic sci-fi/fantasy" had been in the trailers.  Maybe more emphasis on the really alien aliens and exotic landscapes.  Maybe mention that the story involves an Earthling going to another planet and falling in love with an alien princess.  You know, like the book's title does.

That's at least two butts that could have been in seats right there.  And they are instead looking forward to "Battleship".

This one's for you, Disney marketing peoples.

(Okay, to be fair, so far they have been doing an awesome job promoting "Wreck-It Ralph".  Though this may be the broken clock being right twice a day.)

So as far as "John Carter" as a movie, it is, as I said, every bit as good as "Avatar".  The beginning drags like crazy, there are a fair number of corny moments, and the ending could most generously be described as abrupt.  However, Barsoom looks fabulous with the production design taking inspiration from all the many and varied fantasy illustrators who ever interpreted Edgar Rice Burrough's imaginary worlds.  The various animated characters are well-realized and -perhaps this is Andrew Stanton being true to his roots- are by far more interesting than any of the humans.  Mad props to whomever decided that Woola shouldn't just be a dog with extra legs but should instead resemble something ugly-cute out of the Permian.  The main antagonists are pretty interesting as they are God-tier beings who long ago decided to use their eternal, all-powerful lives to basically screw with mortals.  This isn't spelled out much, though, hence the abrupt ending.  All in all, this is a movie that did not deserve the fate it got, and hopefully it will gain a cult audience.

-----

Sketch of the Day!  Who wouldn't want to ride a Chocobo?

Minnie Sketchbook 4


Thursday, June 3, 2010

My artwork will be in an art exhibit!

In July.

In St. Louis, Missouri.

(Pregnant pause...)

It's called Drawgasmic.

(Awkward pause.)

I can assure you that it's not what it sounds like.

More info at their website.

----

Sketch of the day!
This isn't the drawing I entered, but it's sort of kind of tangentially related (not really). It's rather large so click the thumbnail to see the whole thing:

An Important Warning