|
Post by fldsmdfrfox on Oct 22, 2013 20:22:44 GMT -5
btw a note I noticed (went and saw three times XD) there is one part where this is said: Sam: I can't believe your machine re-programmed itself to create this entire ecosystem of living food... How is that even possible? Flint: I have no idea....
is it me or does this scream either third movie (doubt it sadly) TV series, or animated short to be released with the dvd and blueray?
|
|
|
Post by cloudyfan on Oct 23, 2013 14:47:22 GMT -5
Actually, it was stated in the 1st movie that the was already developing sentient food. What created the 'ecosystem of living food' is probably an evouliton of this.
|
|
|
Post by fldsmdfrfox on Oct 24, 2013 6:05:07 GMT -5
I guess it's my thick head that I can;t wrap my mind around how it reprogrammed itself. Yes the food was mutating but that was caused by overuse and residual radiation, meaning the was still making normal food according to it's programming but since there was so much radiation flying about it the water was getting extra pumped with radiation. I'm just trying to understand how it went from making giant living food to small more complex creatures and was actually making them without excessive radiation. then again I'm trying to argue with animated movie non-physics.... so hehe
|
|
|
Post by Gemstone108 on Oct 24, 2013 14:15:45 GMT -5
Yeah, the whole idea of it is kind of confusing. I'm just gonna go with the whole 'evolution of the sentient food' theory. Of course, as Flint said in the movie; "It's best we don't think about it to much."
|
|
|
Post by battybydesign on Oct 24, 2013 16:17:41 GMT -5
This movie, honestly, makes me want to think really hard as to how all the ends which were so tightly tied could've led to the sequel. It was awesome, yes, the entire movie I was sitting with my feet bouncing and trying not to squee because COLORS! and DESIGN!, but I feel the story could've been a little more... hmm... it was missing something that the first one had. Maybe not, though, I did end up crying at the part with the marshmallows... just like I cried at the end scene with Flint and his dad with the first movie. But since I made a bet with my boyfriend that Flint would have a foodimal mount, I was more than a little peeved when everyone BUT Flint got to ride a foodimal (although that was pretty awesome). Of course, he thought that was hilarious.
|
|
|
Post by Yellow Dragon on Oct 27, 2013 17:20:36 GMT -5
I have seen the second movie only once by now, so I cannot say much about it, as I am still usure what to think about it. It is really much different than the first one. It is very kind and positive, but seems somehow shallow. The plot missed something, the characters missed something. And the jokes were far not so smart and original as in the first movie. However, the plot had some brilliant points too. But still, in general, the movie looks more childish than the prequel. And also I disliked two things in it: 1. Alternate beginning (comparing to the end of the first movie). The events differed between movies and why Flint's hair are intact after the explosion in the second movie? 2. Chester V died in the end, as probably did some people from Live Corp. who he sent to the island. Isn't it too dark for such kind of movie? I do not remember any deaths in the first one. Even mayor Shelbourne survived it, as it was shown in the end titles of CWACOM.
Anyway, it was nice to see Flint and the crew again, despite of all strangeness of the movie. And I definitely will watch it again.
|
|
|
Post by argionember on Oct 28, 2013 15:56:21 GMT -5
I do not think that Mayor Shelbourne survived, because you can see him sinking at the very end.
Chester V's wasn't a (sad) death, it was presented in a very good way, he was always kind of off.
|
|
|
Post by Yellow Dragon on Oct 28, 2013 16:12:21 GMT -5
I do not think that Mayor Shelbourne survived, because you can see him sinking at the very end. Chester V's wasn't a (sad) death, it was presented in a very good way, he was always kind of off. I'm sorry, but death is death. It doesn't matter if character was good or bad. If movie contains one, it loses much in its kindness, so to say. And it is even worse if death of a villain presented as a good thing. Defeated villain is one thing and killed one is way another.
|
|
|
Post by flintssister5 on Oct 28, 2013 16:20:36 GMT -5
I actually am a little confused about what I feel about his death. I didn't really like how they first went with him about to be killed by the machine. Let's just say it seemed a bit...off... I know he's a little crazy, but the way he was acting seemed a little too crazy. It also probably didn't fit in the film's context, since it did seem a little more family friendly. Maybe if Chester V was presented as more crazy or the movie was a little less light-hearted, it would fit. However, I was a little ok with him dieing via Cheesespider. I was a little off, but it was a little better than what they were first going for.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2013 16:24:22 GMT -5
I was surprised at the death myself. Unexpected, really. And Flint's hair was supposed to be burned, and the characters messier. If they make a third movie and/or tv series, it needs to be by the original directors.
|
|
|
Post by vhills on Nov 4, 2013 9:04:26 GMT -5
i finally managed to watch the movie yesterday, and i agree with YD. i'm still deciding wether it was good or not so good ... but one thing for sure, nothing tops the first movie! but i won't decide until i've watched it with the original voice actors. they changed sam's german voice actor which kind of made my skin crawl. but i love the animation and colorful cwacom-world! and i don't want to analyze too much, because it might ruin the movie, for me at least! i'm wondering how foodimals eat, though. i mean what happens after they actually swallow. i simply can't picture them with an actual digestive system ...? i was really expecting the lost/eaten characters would re-appear somewhere at the end of the movie, sad that they didn't.
definitely going to re-watch it, mainly because i want to know what flint said at his pep talk. he lost me as soon as barry (called "bärchen" in germany) started "translating". i laughed and cried and simply couldn't get a hold of myself anymore. IT WAS TOO MUCH. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Yellow Dragon on Nov 4, 2013 16:30:04 GMT -5
I have re-watched CWACOM 2 some days ago and still I have a dual impression of it. I liked the plot (despite of lots of similar moves with the first movie one), even scenario in general, but I still have issues with the movie: - Characters' behaviour became more childish, simplified, random and less-believable. Not to mention that they all were kind of "high" in the second movie (except for Barb and Brent, maybe); - The action in general was too rushed, I just couldn't feel the moment, so to say; - Most of the jokes were weak (it was sad to see so much of "potty" ones too). Overall, it seems that the second movie was made mostly for little kids, while the first one had really serious moments and smart jokes that only teens or adults could understand. Also, kids do not take death so seriously, and maybe precisely because of this creators decided to kill Chester V and lots of his employees, not to mention real threat to life of main characters from the hand of man. For me it ruined kind and warm atmosphere of CWACOM world. They made CWACOM 2 kind of darker this way. Do not think that I didn't like the second movie at all, though. Of course, some things were disappointing, but there were some ingenious moves and I really liked the fact that was pictured as a "nice guy" in the end. i finally managed to watch the movie yesterday, and i agree with YD. i'm still deciding wether it was good or not so good ... but one thing for sure, nothing tops the first movie! but i won't decide until i've watched it with the original voice actors. they changed sam's german voice actor which kind of made my skin crawl. but i love the animation and colorful cwacom-world! and i don't want to analyze too much, because it might ruin the movie, for me at least! i'm wondering how foodimals eat, though. i mean what happens after they actually swallow. i simply can't picture them with an actual digestive system ...? i was really expecting the lost/eaten characters would re-appear somewhere at the end of the movie, sad that they didn't. definitely going to re-watch it, mainly because i want to know what flint said at his pep talk. he lost me as soon as barry (called "bärchen" in germany) started "translating". i laughed and cried and simply couldn't get a hold of myself anymore. IT WAS TOO MUCH. ;D Oh! Speaking of voice actors, I was happy to know that Flint had the same voice in the second movie in Russian version. His voice actor works on TV and does not usually give his voice to animated movie characters. I do really like that person, by the way. One time he even was an anchorman of scientific show on TV. And I thought of how foodimals eat. I suppose, their bodies consist not out of organs, but out of cooperated synthetic cells, like mushrooms' fruiting bodies, for example. Such structure would allow them to take any form, however this theory has its problem poitns too from scientific point of view.
|
|
|
Post by cloudyfan on Nov 4, 2013 16:51:50 GMT -5
YD, what a good point you made.
When I saw the movie, I could clearly see what was going on. It's like the new production team superseded the original directors and said 'Wait, this moment could appeal to everyone. This is a kids movie, so let's make it one'. Which could explain the altered characterisations and plot-running. This could be attributed to the new direction the movies had.
Apart from the flat jokes, the two wrong-keys the movie hit for me was ret-conning Flint's origins to make the new character work, and immediatley establishing Chester V as a villain. Don't get me wrong, the movie was still good. But, if I had a hand at directing it, I would've at least made an effort at concealing Chester V as a villain, using him as an allegory for Apple, both Steve Jobs and Tim Cook eras. With the era switch being made when Flint refuses to use the BS-USB (Which could've been established later, with the proper kill-code being carried and lost halfway. Besides, as long as Chester V had the machine and the man who made it, he could use him to recode it). That way, he would go from being an innocent 'We always look to innovate' figure to the 'If you do something different, expect no mercy' figure. As well as making him innocently blind to the consequences to his actions (He would genuinely believe the Foodimals to be evil, thus deciding to get rid of them via Food Bar 8.0)
|
|
|
Post by Yellow Dragon on Nov 4, 2013 17:31:25 GMT -5
YD, what a good point you made. When I saw the movie, I could clearly see what was going on. It's like the new production team superseded the original directors and said 'Wait, this moment could appeal to everyone. This is a kids movie, so let's make it one'. Which could explain the altered characterisations and plot-running. This could be attributed to the new direction the movies had. Apart from the flat jokes, the two wrong-keys the movie hit for me was ret-conning Flint's origins to make the new character work, and immediatley establishing Chester V as a villain. Don't get me wrong, the movie was still good. But, if I had a hand at directing it, I would've at least made an effort at concealing Chester V as a villain, using him as an allegory for Apple, both Steve Jobs and Tim Cook eras. With the era switch being made when Flint refuses to use the BS-USB (Which could've been established later, with the proper kill-code being carried and lost halfway. Besides, as long as Chester V had the machine and the man who made it, he could use him to recode it). That way, he would go from being an innocent 'We always look to innovate' figure to the 'If you do something different, expect no mercy' figure. As well as making him innocently blind to the consequences to his actions (He would genuinely believe the Foodimals to be evil, thus deciding to get rid of them via Food Bar 8.0) Well, altered flashback from Flint's childhood was unpleasant indeed, however, knowing from the first artbook that Chester V character was originally created for the first movie and cancelled later (as the Invisible Coffee Table), it wasn't so much of surprise for me. As for Chester V villainous nature revealing at the beginning, it was really a strange move. Though, without this, his behaviour during the movie would has been left without explanation. I like your thoughts on Chester V character development. As for me, I think that he was an odd villain and, following original plot, I would like him to be pictured differently. Such kind of villainy as deliberate intention to kill somebody didn't quite fit him. He looked more like eccentric villain from old cartoons or comic books, whose evil plans were so goofy so it was easy to ruin them (someone Megamind-like), and such an image would fit Chester V much more in CWACOM universe. I do not say that Chester V, as he was in the movie, was badly-written. Such villainy was just too "cold blooded" and didn't fit for this movie, in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by vhills on Nov 11, 2013 11:33:25 GMT -5
guy guys guys! lookit what i found: it's an earl scout short!
in 2D! with barry and pickle! and earl! ... it's ... odd. xD is this the right thread for this though? sorry if it isn't~.^^u i think it's the short ral was talking about a few days earlier?
|
|