anastasia--good movie or not???
11-11-99, 07:21 PM
#2
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Orange
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I enjoyed it immensly when I rented it on the loathed VHS format. If you want to read my full review (written quite a while ago, click below). I'd recommend renting it first.
Blake Kunisch |
| 
| 
<small>Special Editions Thread | DVD Reviews</small>
In Theaters Now Forum Moderator
Blake Kunisch |
| | <small>Special Editions Thread | DVD Reviews</small>
In Theaters Now Forum Moderator
11-12-99, 05:22 PM
#4
DVD Talk Legend
i saw it on the big screen & again recently on hbo or showtime. it is not a bad movie by any means. the animation is really nice but the movies itself does drag slightly. the music is okay but nothing special. definitely rent it first. if you have kids, they should like it.
------------------
http://www.dvdtracker.com/~brianluvdvd
------------------
http://www.dvdtracker.com/~brianluvdvd
11-13-99, 11:13 AM
#5
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 2,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice colours, charming story and voice acting. Unusual for animation, this one was done in a 2.35:1 aspect ratio, so some sequences achieve that sweeping epic look quite well.
Now for the bad: This movie was made (relatively) on the cheap and fast, so corners were cut. The CG elements are very poorly integrated with the traditional animation. It doesn't look like a lot of time was spent trying to match the look of CG & regular. However, this is pretty easy to overlook as the CG is only used occasionally.
Second bad aspect: (DO NOT READ ANY FURTHER IF YOU DON'T WANT YOUR ENJOYMENT OF THE MOVIE FOREVER RUINED FOR YOU!)
They used a technique called rotoscoping heavily in this picture. Basically, it means they filmed a live person doing the movements and drew directly over those movements. I used to think the results of this looked very cool. The movement seemed very nuanced and human-like to me. However, someone then 'enlightened' me by saying it sucks due to how intensely jerky rotoscoped movements looked. Now, when I watch the movie, I REALLY notice it. Compare Anastasia or the John Cusack character (which are rotoscoped) to Cusack's big moustached friend voiced by TV's Frasier or to the villain (who are animated 'traditionally' I believe). The former two look like they're animated with with half the amount of frames as the latter. The latter seem to move far more smoothly and fluidly, though more exaggerated as well since they aren't copied from real people. When I watch it now, I find it very hard not to notice this. It's annoying.
Now for the bad: This movie was made (relatively) on the cheap and fast, so corners were cut. The CG elements are very poorly integrated with the traditional animation. It doesn't look like a lot of time was spent trying to match the look of CG & regular. However, this is pretty easy to overlook as the CG is only used occasionally.
Second bad aspect: (DO NOT READ ANY FURTHER IF YOU DON'T WANT YOUR ENJOYMENT OF THE MOVIE FOREVER RUINED FOR YOU!)
They used a technique called rotoscoping heavily in this picture. Basically, it means they filmed a live person doing the movements and drew directly over those movements. I used to think the results of this looked very cool. The movement seemed very nuanced and human-like to me. However, someone then 'enlightened' me by saying it sucks due to how intensely jerky rotoscoped movements looked. Now, when I watch the movie, I REALLY notice it. Compare Anastasia or the John Cusack character (which are rotoscoped) to Cusack's big moustached friend voiced by TV's Frasier or to the villain (who are animated 'traditionally' I believe). The former two look like they're animated with with half the amount of frames as the latter. The latter seem to move far more smoothly and fluidly, though more exaggerated as well since they aren't copied from real people. When I watch it now, I find it very hard not to notice this. It's annoying.
