The Fantastic Mr. Fox

[Bourne101]

http://l.yimg.com/k/omg/us/img/79/6c/7522_5902097260.jpg?y=660&x=616&q=75&n=0&sig=j.bBadGAiObC8IHF4KoFpg--

Directed by Wes Anderson

Written by Wes Anderson and Noah Baumbach

Genre: Comedy

Plot Outline: Mr. and Mrs. Fox live an idyllic home life with their son Ash and visiting young nephew Kristopherson. But after 12 years, the bucolic existence proves too much for Mr. Fox's wild animal instincts. Soon he slips back into his old ways as a sneaky chicken thief and in doing so, endangers not only his beloved family, but the whole animal community. Trapped underground and with not enough food to go around, the animals band together to fight against the evil Farmers -- Boggis, Bunce and Bean -- who are determined to capture the audacious, fantastic Mr. Fox at any cost.

Starring: George Clooney, Meryl Streep, Jason Schwartzman, Bill Murray, Wallace Wolodarsky

Rated PG for action, smoking and slang humor.

Runtime: 88 minutes

This looks great and the reviews have been great. I'm a big Wes Anderson fan and this looks like classic Wes. I doubt kids will like it though.

[Reigh Kaufman]

It is great.

One of the top ten movies of the year.

Also Clooney's best work since South Park.

[cloneofkelso]

Anything with Jason Schwartzman is good.

[TeeRay]

I didn't really give this any thought until I saw the trailer. It looks so cool. Can't wait for a theater around here to get it.

[SAI]

Mini-review from my blog (www.24framez.blogspot.com)

Fantastic Mr Fox
Dir: Wes Anderson
http://therealmtoys.com/wordpressorg/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/the_fantastic_mr_fox_movie1-500x269.jpg
Catastrophic Mr Fox. Wes Anderson’s Roald Dahl adaptation feels nothing like its source. The very peculiarly English wit of Dahl’s prose is stripped out, as is the way that Dahl spoke to both children and adults. What we get instead is a Wes Anderson film with stop motion animated animals. The characters all talk like they are in The Royal Tenenbaums and, while that style is fine for The Royal Tenenbaums, it just doesn’t work with Fantastic Mr Fox.

Adding to the pain is the animation. It’s supposed to be charmingly lo-fi, but it just looks slapdash and inexpert. George Clooney’s Mr Fox is one of the most exquisitely punchable characters in film this year. Clooney is just unbearably smug in the role, and his trademark ‘whistle, click click’ made me want to write to my MP and get the ban on fox hunting repealed. Anderson never caters to Dahl’s core audience of children. The animation, the tone of the jokes and the soundtrack (Beach Boys, Rolling Stones and a painfully self-conscious Jarvis Cocker cameo that stops the film dead) are all clearly aimed at an audience of adult Wes Anderson fans.

Fantastic Mr Fox is an insult to a great book and a great writer, and I very nearly walked out.

[legato]

So you hate it for being an Anderson movie? (and the english thing is such a terrible strawman)

[overwatch]

What we get instead is a Wes Anderson film with stop motion animated animals.
WHAT.

[Strider]

An animated film based on a famous children's book directed by Wes Anderson featuring the voices of Clooney, Streep, Murray, Schwartzman, and Owen Wilson?

Count me in!

Strider

[SAI]

So you hate it for being an Anderson movie? (and the english thing is such a terrible strawman)
To be fair, I gave more reasons for disliking it than that. I do actually like most of Anderson's other films, but his style so totally overwhelmed the story for me that it didn't feel like Fantastic Mr Fox.

[The Postmaster General]

It’s supposed to be charmingly lo-fi...


No it's not. In the making of feature on Apple.com, they spent the entire thing talking about how much pain-staking time they put into it in order to make it look as perfect as possible, and not just in looks how they went to great efforts in the sound production. They put a lot of stock in making it look as real as possible, even having artists craft individual hairs for each character. The film was supposed to be done prior to Darjeeling, but because of they were running into so much trouble trying to make it look so good that the film was heavily delayed in the production process.

Generally I don't say that someone didn't get something because I think it's overused and patronizing, but when one person is saying that something is supposed to look "lo-fi" and the filmmakers say that they wanted it to look perfect, it's a hard phrase to avoid.

And, really, I didn't realize that my 3 year old isn't supposed to like The Rolling Stones or the Beach Boys. Clearly he is confused.

[Frank the Tank]

Clooney's been on fire the past five years or so (Syriana, Good Night And Good Luck, Burn After Reading, Michael Clayton, Men Who Stare At Goats and I guess Up In The Air based on early reports) and this looks like more of the same

[Ron34]

When I first saw the poster I thought Star Fox (video game) was going to be released in theaters.

[The Postmaster General]

Not getting my hopes up, and it's still early, but this sucka is running a 100% cream of the crop rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

[SpikeDurden]

I absolutely adored this film. It might be the most painstakingly perfect film I've seen all year. That is to say, that, the composition of the film was clearly of such a concern to the filmmakers and it reads as such. Each lovingly designed set, creature, prop is beautifully rendered into some of the most charming and delightful and eye popping animation I've ever seen. The story is witty and charming, the characters well drawn and beautifully voiced with unique personalities. Somehow in 80 minutes Anderson and his team is able to both do justice to Dahl's terrific story and also make another Wes Anderson film, but indeed the best Wes Anderson film since The Royal Tenenbaums. The shot composition, the color schemes, and the music - the signatures of Anderson's filmmaking - are all present, but perhaps work even better with the stop motion animation. He also manages to cover some of the emotional issues that have been the staple of his films, most notably "daddy issues," but they never overshadow or violate the core story. I had a huge smile on my face the entire time, I was wrapped up into the characters and the story, emotionally invested, and in awe of the animation and filmmaking. I could go on and on about the little tidbits I loved in this film, the cussing, the animal behavior, the surprising dialogue. But I'll just say that I loved this kids film with an indie sensibility far more than Where the Wild Things Are, and that I did not see coming. This is one of my favorite and one of the most delightful and enjoyable films of the year. See it when you cussing can.

[bigred760]

I have very little interest in seeing this film. The animation didn't look appealing, the story doesn't grab me, I know nothing of the book, and I'm not a big Wes Anderson fan.

Will most likely pass on this one.

[Conz]

I have very little interest in seeing this film. The animation didn't look appealing, the story doesn't grab me, I know nothing of the book, and I'm not a big Wes Anderson fan.

Will most likely pass on this one.

amen brother.

[The Postmaster General]

But you hafta admit, this thread is really appealing, isn't it?

[Mr.HyDe807]

I'm defintiely gonna check this out. I've never really checked out Anderson's films, mostly because I got a shitload of other movies that i need to see. Still, it's got the feel of those PG kids movies that's for both kids and adults.

[EDsoulsurvive*]

pumped for this movie, although the stop motion in coraline looks alot smoother/better. and another hyperbolic 9/10 review from joblo.com. c'mon.

[LordSimen]

Words cannot describe how bad this movie looks.

[Sigur509]

Only if bad means amazing.

[Reigh Kaufman]

Words cannot describe how bad this movie looks.

Use interpretive dance.

[Cop No. 633]

This movie is a first class trip to having a blast at the theater. I loved the hell out of it. Anderson's always sharp as a director but it definitely helped a lot that he partnered back with Noah Baumbach on the writing. This is entertaining from beginning to end.

It's easily one of my favorite films of the year. This would be a great double-bill with Where the Wild Things Are (with that film playing first).

I also love Anderson's nod to Heat. Given that this is a heist film done in animation style, I thought it was an awesome touch.

[sbunn10]

Use interpretive dance.

hahahaa :D


I love Wes Anderson, and the positive reviews have only increased my excitement for this film. I'm going to see it this week sometime... I've actually convinced most of my family to go, except for my dad, who said, "What, that cartoon?" :rolleyes: He said the same thing about UP.

[corran horn]

I had a chance to see this yesterday, and I really liked it. I have a hard time describing Wes Anderson's style, but this story suited it perfectly. SpikeDurden has it right. This is Anderson's best since The Royal Tenenbaums.

Props to an excellent voice cast, especially Clooney, Streep, and Murray. I hope this encourages Anderson and Clooney to do more work together, as I think they're a perfect fit for each other. I also wouldn't mind more Anderson stop-motion animation.


CosmicPuppet: You're absolutely right. This would be the perfect double-bill with WTWTA. I can't help but think that the release of both films in the same year was simply met to be.

8/10

PS: If there is one complaint I have, it is with the parade of atrocious trailers that preceded this slice of wonder: Tooth Fairy, Chipmunks....blarg! What did I do to deserve that?!

[Z_oasis]

I agree with the attatched trailers. I was kinda rolling my eyes all the way. But i digress...

I pretty much love ALL Wes Anderson movies yet i am the one of few who have Royal Tenenbaums on the bottom of my list (Life Aquatic for me!) but this one did remind me of the RT but even BETTER. The story of course flows perfectly, and the voice acting connecting with the characters wit was great. I was smiling all the way through. Loved the soundtrack (Wes always uses fantastic unknown songs by known bands in a lot of movies, ie "Heroes & Villans" by the BEach Boys)

It looked amazing through out the movie. My eyes kept wandering and i always crack up when the possom does his confused look. Got me every time.

4/5

[Sigur509]

Seeing this later on today. A new Wes Anderson is really something to be thankful for today.

[JCPhoenix]

I saw this on Wed and loved it. I flip-flop on Wes Anderson but this is my favorite of his films so far. The stop-motion work is absolutely stunning (best stop-motion I've seen yet I think) and the off-kilter humor of the film is spot-on for Roald Dahl. This year has been shaping up to be somewhat disappointing (apart from some films at TIFF) but leave it to the kids' films (this and Where the Wild Things Are) to salvage the year for me.

And wow, this year is going to be a surprisingly intense year for Best Animated Feature with Coraline, Up, Fantastic Mr. Fox, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, Ponyo, A Town Called Panic, Mary and Max, The Princess & the Frog (which I haven't seen)...some pretty great choices...There's a strong possibility I could end up with 3+ animated films on my top 10 at this point...

[The Postmaster General]

This movie was really great. I loved the sound design, animation, voice actors, and the story was a real surprise. There were a couple technical parts, like the fire extinguisher, that I thought was especially cool, and when Clooney was talking at the bottom of the stairs - You could really tell how much time was spent in making this look and sound perfect.

I thought it was funny that one of the most intensely action packed movies of the year was stop motion.

Everyone who is comparing it to Coraline - it's a different style of animation all together, and don't worry, after maybe 10 seconds you'll stop noticing. To me Coraline feels fake, like it's computer generated and too glossy. There's way to many movies out there going for that look, and Fantastic Mr. Fox stands out. It is more in a direction of Svankmajer's than Pixar. Of course there will be people who get hung up on it, and not look past.

As an aside, I thought it was funny that all the animals had American accents and all the humans were British. The comedy in this movie is probably what surprised me the most-most. There were quite a few times I had pretty heavy laughs. "That's just bad song writing..."

I took my son and he was really engrossed by it, and this was what made me happiest of all. Part of my worry was that the humor would be too dry, but it wasn't. Everything had a very classic sense of humor, and I appreciated that the movie wasn't patronizing to children, as I feel that's a big problem with animated movies now-a-days. At any given time they feel like they are throwing either an adult or a kid a bone, but never at once feeling like they are just aiming to appeal toward universal truths. I'm actually aghast at myself, though, for listening to all the people who said this wouldn't appeal to my kid - these are the same people who said my kid wouldn't like Wall-E.

All-in-all, probably the best film I've seen this year. Cosmic made a good point about the love-letter to Michael Mann - there were actually a lot of cinema references, I think notably the music of Ennio Morricone, especially in the climax with it's hushed chanting of "Boggis... Bunst... Bean... Boggis... Bunst... Bean..." I had pretty low expectations for this movie, aiming only to have a good time. Instead of just having fun, I got tenderness, humanity, wit with a mix of thrills and enough heartwarming to last for Strangelove generations to come.

If this doesn't become a classic, it will at least be in my household. What a great cussing movie!!

Fantastic Mr. Fox
my rating - (10/10)
Jr.s rating - (10/10 *whistle, click, point*)

[someguy]

No it's not. In the making of feature on Apple.com, they spent the entire thing talking about how much pain-staking time they put into it in order to make it look as perfect as possible, and not just in looks how they went to great efforts in the sound production. They put a lot of stock in making it look as real as possible, even having artists craft individual hairs for each character. The film was supposed to be done prior to Darjeeling, but because of they were running into so much trouble trying to make it look so good that the film was heavily delayed in the production process.

Generally I don't say that someone didn't get something because I think it's overused and patronizing, but when one person is saying that something is supposed to look "lo-fi" and the filmmakers say that they wanted it to look perfect, it's a hard phrase to avoid.

This term 'retro' might have been more appropriate instead of 'lo-fi.' Based on the trailers it's understandable why someone would use the lo-fi term instead though. It's obvious that Wes Anderson wanted to go for an older 'rough around the edges' look for the stop motion animation. I believe that the person who was in charge of animation on the movie also did the old California Raisins ads so it's obvious that Wes Anderson is going for a nostalgic style. I also saw that featurette and thought it was funny how much intense work went into creating a movie that looks like it's done in an older style. Maybe we could call it perfectly imperfect?

It looked like all signs were pointing to the movie being a disaster beforehand. I remember some less than stellar reviews coming out before its release, plus the LA Times article that showed how Wes Anderson rarely went on set, overworked the crew and mostly sent e-mails from France on what he wanted. The widespread praise is good news, I'll try to see if I can catch it in theatres now instead of waiting for a download/DVD.

I am curious about one thing, what does everyone think about the movie's shot at taking the Best Animated Picture category at the Oscars? Is the movie good enough to topple the monster that is Pixar? With this, Ponyo, Up, Mary and Max, Coraline and a few others which I'm sure I've forgotten this looks like a great year for animation in general.

[sbunn10]

I saw this the other day and absolutely loved it. The animation was unique and beautiful, and the script was as witty as any of Anderson's. I'd even say that the script was nearly perfect... never was a line stuck in as filler, there was always some comical or character-building significance. The voice acting was also fantastic, to such an extent that I didn't even think about who the voices belonged to, but rather the characters.

I had a grin on my face for the entire film, and it flew by. I could have blisfully sat there for another hour with the 'wild animals'. At first I gave it an 8.5/10, but as time passes, I'm leaning towards a 9. It's ever so slightly behind my favorite of Anderson's films, the Royal Tenenbaums and the Life Aquatic.

I think it deserves the Oscar for best Animated picture, but I doubt it'll beat UP, as basically every critic gave UP a positive review.

[Corndizl]

Was fantastic. I loved every bit of the flick, but for me, Anderson's best remains Life Aquatic

[The Postmaster General]

I see what you're saying someguy, but the thing is that the style was done, IMO, in the style of illustrations done for the book. I'd say "old fashioned" though it's hard to avoid retro, being familiar with Anderson's style.

From what I've gathered, the stories about e-mails from France were sarcastic jokes taken at face value -- I haven't looked too much into it due to my vow to try and avoid learning about movies before seeing them (oddly enough a vow I made after Tenenbaums). Seeing the making of for The Royal Tenenbaums, it's hard to imagine Anderson not being over-involved with something like this. During that movie, when designing Margot's (?) room, a set designer all but threw up their hands and said, "Why don't you just do it?" because of his over-involvement with the look -- and this film is all look. Maybe he's taken some therapy or something though.

I didn't know that about the California Raisins - that's funny!

I'm not sure that it has a chance at the Oscars. It's a pretty low key movie, much more understated and brisk compared to other films, especially anything that Pixar puts out. If Pixar is a feeling of getting bashed in the head, this is getting kicked in the shin. There's been a lot of heavy animated films this year, and in the past the Academy has only thrown Anderson films bones. Who knows, though... I will say that if this doesn't get a nom for sound design, that's pretty fucked - between this and Wall-E, animated films are pretty much leading the pack in how sound is done in movies. (for different reasons)

[VitamanMan8]

Yeah, this movie rocked! Wes Anderson still hasn't let me down. I hope his next film won't be a clustercuss.

[APzombie]

Saw it today. I liked it quite a lot as a Wes Anderson animated film, though as a Roald Dahl adaptation of the book, the apple falls very far from the tree.

Wes Anderson's failed father figure/dysfunctional family display is getting a bit redundant. He doesn't seem to be growing as a storyteller. I still enjoyed the film because of the animation and a lot of the humor worked for me. Though i have to admit that while the coat of paint might have changed, it's still the same old engine for Wes. And because it's a "family film", he gets away with characters that aren't as defined as his usual crop. Meryl Streeps Mrs. Fox character is a waste of her talent and time. She is much more void of personality compared to Anjelica Houston's rich motherly roles in his previous films.

It's also not a family film, at least not a successful family film. Certainly not in the way the brilliant Wallace and Gromit films are. Family films work best when the both the children and the adults appreciate the same things. When they are laughing at the same jokes and being moved by the same drama. This film will definitely draw a line in the sand between parents and kids. I'm sure kids will be amused during it's short running time for it's animation and bits, but the film is incredibly talky. Too talky for it's own good. While i always enjoy Wes' dialogue, i was hoping he'd utilize the animation to show more then to tell. Unfortunately, there are long bits about existentialism, and the whole "cuss" thing seemed a bit pretentious- like Noah Baumbach (who Wes should let go) and Wes are "above childrens movies".

Though, like i said, i like it enough as a Wes Anderson film, i can't say i wasn't smiling a lot of the time.

7/10

[The Postmaster General]

This film will definitely draw a line in the sand between parents and kids.


My kid and I didn't experience this, but then again, my kid is pretty pretentious. All the other preschoolers say so. ;)

[someguy]

I see what you're saying someguy, but the thing is that the style was done, IMO, in the style of illustrations done for the book. I'd say "old fashioned" though it's hard to avoid retro, being familiar with Anderson's style.

From what I've gathered, the stories about e-mails from France were sarcastic jokes taken at face value -- I haven't looked too much into it due to my vow to try and avoid learning about movies before seeing them (oddly enough a vow I made after Tenenbaums).

If you're curious about it here's the LA Times article.

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/11/entertainment/ca-mrfox11

It sounds like the people who actually did the hard work on it are unhappy about Wes Anderson. Notice that the only person who really came to his defense is the producer. I'd like to point out two things in that article though for no reason other than to be a bastard:

To hear it from the Houston native, a self-described "novice" in stop-motion, he ignored the majority viewpoint in pursuit of something specific: a cool-looking, detail-saturated, retro-leaning stop-motion movie. Even if that meant bucking conventional animation wisdom by avoiding the modern technology that pervades the genre these days.

In keeping with the stylized nostalgia that looms large in almost all his films, Anderson knew he was after a particular lo-fi aesthetic. And despite giant leaps forward in computer-generated imagery in recent years, he put CGI and green screen off-limits for "Mr. Fox's" animators. Materials such as plastic kitchen wrap would stand-in for water, cotton balls would be puffs of smoke and green terry cloth, grass.

Points for me and SAI!

[sbunn10]

Well, you could tell they didn't use as much technology as, say, Coraline. I don't know why the people are unhappy, it gave the film a unique look.

[The Postmaster General]

If you're curious about it here's the LA Times article.

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/11/entertainment/ca-mrfox11

It sounds like the people who actually did the hard work on it are unhappy about Wes Anderson. Notice that the only person who really came to his defense is the producer. I'd like to point out two things in that article though for no reason other than to be a bastard:

Points for me and SAI!

I agreed with the retro description, but have never heard "lo-fi" used in that context, which you agreed with until quoting that article. Regardless of who says it, I still think "old fashioned" is more suiting, and that terms like lo-fi and retro have a more specific meaning, and have become sort of buzz words for writers who are trying to avoid pointing out the obvious. (No offense to SAI, who is an excellent writer that's been stuck in the middle of a discussion he doesn't want to have, which I respect immensely -- I only disagreed with him on the grounds that it didn't seem like Anderson intentionally tried to make the movie look of poor quality, which I took his statement to mean. It really wasn't a big deal, and has been dragged out by someone looking to talk about a movie they haven't even seen.)

The only reason I agree with retro is because of some of the props used by characters, like a transistor radio, or the 70s-styled costumes. Lo-fi, no matter who uses it, still describes something that is intentionally meant to appear as poor quality, and it's hard description to except when it's well documented how much effort was put into details. I don't think Anderson said, "Let's make this look like shit!"

But kudos to you in the eyes of everyone who is keeping score. It's especially meaningful that your description is based of the writings of other people. Semantics used by people talking about the film: glad you got that going for your appreciation of film. *whistle, click, point*

Thanks for the article. Now go watch the movie, and stop reading about it, you self-desribed bastard (though as with the descriptions used by a random writer from the LA Times, I could think of a better, less fashionable word...) ;)

Well, you could tell they didn't use as much technology as, say, Coraline. I don't know why the people are unhappy, it gave the film a unique look.

I don't think that many people who saw the movie are unhappy. I'm not surprised people who worked on the movie are. I got pissed off watching The Royal Tenenbaum production clips, and I wasn't even there. Anderson comes off like a kid who's pissed off because someone moved one of his army figures our of order. (see Bottle Rocket)

Another thing I saw that this movie reminds me of is Pingu, these 80s stop motion shorts about a penguin family. I'd caught these on Netflix Watch Now some time back, and like Mr. Fox, they have a sort of unpatronizing storytelling thing going, where perhaps the only thing kiddie about them is the animal characters being anthropomorphic. I think these kinds of things are nice, as it's more in line with my style of parenting that often makes me want to slap other parents who talk to their children like they are babies.

[WresBill]

Wow, I a good fan of Anderson's work, and Mr. Fox was simply great ! I liked how we can see the writing (even if it's from Dahl, and Anderson was not always on the set...) of the director in this movie. The same humour noir that I saw in his other work, the same broken home/family themes. Wonderful !

8.5/10

[poopontheshoes7]

My favorite Anderson film after Life Aquatic.

Fantastic Mr. Fox is an incredibly delightful movie. The animation is jaw dropping and beautiful, the humor is corky an witty, and the it features a great set of characters. It also manages to be pretty touching.

One of the best movies of the year.

And wow, has this been an amazing year for family films? From Coraline, Up, Monsters Vs. Aliens, Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs, Where the Wild Things Are and now Fox, this was one awesome year for family films.

[BakeTheMooCow]

I couldn't even say that this film is his best since whatever, since I love all of Wes Anderson's works and each movie of his is unique and brilliant in its own way.

The animation in this one, a combination of miniatures and stop-motion, is stunning and it's amazing that he gets more expression and emotion out of puppets than Robert Zemeckis gets with hundreds of millions of dollars in motion-capture. The look of tears on fox fur is especially beautiful.

Anderson's trademark wide angle shots are perfectly suited for capturing the shots of three farms from a distance or when he zooms out, an entire maze of fox holes. He also uses cross-sections a lot, just like with the Belafonte in The Life Aquatic and it's a wonderful technique. Music plays a key role as in all his films, and the songs and score are perfect, particularly when there is devious plotting or digging to be done.

The characters are charming creations and Anderson infuses them with life, thanks to the attention to detail in the animation and remarkable voice work. There is talk of existentialism and the struggle between staying civilized and succumbing to animal instincts, but I felt this movie was really about how we often settle for mediocrity and each of us can bring something different to this world. Roald Dahl would be proud.

9/10

[drc5145]

I wasn't really excited for this movie but I must say all the positive reviews from critics and the schmoes here have got me really interested in checking it out. I may see this next weekend so here's to hoping.

It also helps I saw my 1st Anderson movie recently, The Life Aquatic, which I dug.

[The Postmaster General]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGhQGmUHfJI

Awesome song.

[Moviefreek]

This film was fantastic for sure. Gonna keep it short.

It's a shame this film did not perform well at the box office. The animation is really good and easily some of the best of the year. The film has a very subtle humor that works really well, which is no stranger to Andersons films. The story is very humorous as well as all of the characters. The voice acting is also top notch and very enjoyable and of course the soundtrack rocks.

9/10

[InvaderZim]

I've never seen a Wes Anderson movie before because he always seems like a hipster director. And Fu#+ hipsters.

I love this movie. It's easily in my top 5 of the year. It's funny and charming as hell. Clooney gives a great performance and I believe if there is justice to the world that this should absolutley beat Up for best animated picture. This was far better than up

9/10

[Puck Bond]

Fantastic Mr. Fox(2009)-8/10...fun, lively and offbeat animated comedy from director Wes Anderson is as delightful as it is strange and wild. Based on the children's book by Roald Dahl its the story of a confident and sly fox(voiced by George Clooney), who enjoys stealing chickens amongst other things and upsetting the local farmers...the evil Boggis, Bunce and Bean. When these farmers decide to fight back with guns, bulldozers and bombs, Mr. Fox, his family and friends must burrow and dig further into the ground to seek shelter. To say this is like nothing I have never seen before would be an understatement...the stop-motion animation style is far from the bright and dynamic style of Disney's Pixar studios. In fact the pallet itself is rather washed out, but in this film it has a sort of beauty that's all its own. It's also nice to see an animated film rely on character and story rather than gimmicks like 3D or frenetic action scenes where everything is in motion. The subject matter is also more mature than most kids fare these days. Thats not to say that children won't enjoy it, but the sense of humor of the film has something for adults too. I think this is due to its director Anderson, known for his offbeat and deadpan humor...and using the same actors in a lot of his films, some of his regulars are used in this film. It is different from his other live-action work, but you can see and tell that it comes from the same sensibility. Groundbreaking? Maybe...maybe not, but certainly different and enjoyable to say the least. Voice cast also includes Meryl Streep, Jason Schwartzman, Bill Murray, Eric Chase Anderson, Willem Dafoe, Owen Wilson and Michael Gambon.

[The Heart Collector]

I've never seen a Wes Anderson movie before because he always seems like a hipster director. And Fu#+ hipsters.

he's not really a hipster director

[The Postmaster General]

It's like saying Mr Rogers was a hipster TV show host.

[The Heart Collector]

This movie was very enjoyable to me. It was also more consistent than most of Wes Anderson's movies, which tend to have a lot of 'down time' and poor climaxes. The art design was great as usual and the voice acting was good though a little distracting, because of the recognizable voices. I don't really watch animated movies that often so I'm not used to that. Anyway it was certainly better than I expected it to be since I found the idea of Anderson making an animated movie risky (I guess financially it was) but it fits well with his other movies and is maybe a gateway for kids to watch his adult stuff in the future. 8/10.

[phelonious]

Bump

[deftdelivery]

Saw this last night and loved it.

Wes Anderson makes a movie without SLOWMOTION!??!?! WHAT HAPPENED?!?!?

8/10 perfect blend of comedy and universal truth.

[Briare Rabbit]

Catastrophic Mr Fox. Wes Anderson’s Roald Dahl adaptation feels nothing like its source. The very peculiarly English wit of Dahl’s prose is stripped out, as is the way that Dahl spoke to both children and adults. What we get instead is a Wes Anderson film with stop motion animated animals. The characters all talk like they are in The Royal Tenenbaums and, while that style is fine for The Royal Tenenbaums, it just doesn’t work with Fantastic Mr Fox.

Adding to the pain is the animation. It’s supposed to be charmingly lo-fi, but it just looks slapdash and inexpert. George Clooney’s Mr Fox is one of the most exquisitely punchable characters in film this year. Clooney is just unbearably smug in the role, and his trademark ‘whistle, click click’ made me want to write to my MP and get the ban on fox hunting repealed. Anderson never caters to Dahl’s core audience of children. The animation, the tone of the jokes and the soundtrack (Beach Boys, Rolling Stones and a painfully self-conscious Jarvis Cocker cameo that stops the film dead) are all clearly aimed at an audience of adult Wes Anderson fans.

Fantastic Mr Fox is an insult to a great book and a great writer, and I very nearly walked out.

Yes, how dare a film maker take familiar material and give it his own creative twist? You seem to be attacking the film because it um doesn't follow the intent of Dahl's book? You know that Anderson only based his film on the book, he even made up half the plot. Also faulting the film because it isn't particularly aimed at children is just a little ridiculous, its got enough in it for kids, even if some of the humor is a little more adult. There is Beach Boys on the soundtrack but its also sprinkled with songs from Disney movies [Robin Hood, Davy Crockett etc] and hey, didn't Alvin and the Chipmunks cover the Beach Boys too?

Maybe you should've spent the cash you spent at the theatre at the book store instead.

This is the best film of the year currently, really the only thing to super impress me from 2009 as of yet.

[Monotreme]

A couple of years ago, I complained that, although he was one of my favorite directors and still remains as such, I was kind of getting tired of the old Wes Anderson schtick that worked so well on Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums, got to its zaniest in The Life Aquatic, but then kind of lost its steam in Darjeeling Limited. Back then, I wrote a review about that film, hoping and urging that Anderson would show some signs of an evolution in his style, just like his contemporaries PT Anderson and David Fincher did with their respective 2007 films. So while the style remains more or less the same, Fantastic Mr. Fox is still the next best thing – a change of medium. Sure, it still features Anderson’s trademark offbeat humor, deadpan delivery, hilariously odd sight gags, aesthetic compositions and heightened sense of style, except this time it’s all in stop-motion animation, and a wonderfully crude and low-tech version of it at that – compare this film’s constantly-shifting textures (due to hand manipulation), simple camera set-ups and practical effects to, say, Coraline’s beautifully high-tech, very advanced stop-motion techniques and the difference is immediately noticeable. Anderson also employed a unique sound recording doctrine in which, not only did he record all the actors together and interacting with one another – which is rarely done in animated films – but he also actually put them out in the field, had them run around and act out the scenes on practical locations. The dynamic urgency and immediacy of the voice work is more than apparent in the final product. And the results are hilarious and wonderfully brilliant, each actor bringing their own unique style to their characters, from Clooney’s confidence and charm to Streep’s restrained but powerful motherhood, from Jason Schwartzman’s childish angst to Bill Murray’s melancholic deadpan, all the voice work is great. The script is great: the story itself is wonderful to watch unfold, the character dramas and interactions are surprisingly poignant (Ash’s rebellious nature stemmed from frustration at the lack of his dad’s respect which is instead funneled towards his perfect cousin, for example, or the dynamic between Mr. Fox and his wife), the use of “cuss” instead of actual swear words is a stroke of genius. It’s gorgeous to look at and the color palette is vivid and lively, the soundtrack, both the indie rock songs and the original score by Alexandre Desplat is, well, fantastic, the whole movie is ingeniously weird and in all, this is probably one of the oddest (and most brilliant) films I’ve ever seen that was aimed at children. I’m sure a few enjoyed it.