Dinosaur (2000)

Again, this came from <a href=http://pub4.ezboard.com/bnicktheshadow>my board</a>.

PROS

This film is best described as being akin to that stunning, beautiful girl in your class who you simply can't take your eyes off. She's simply stunning in terms of looks. You can't help but notice her fine features - her flowing hair, her glowing eyes, and that charming smile that just melts you.

Hey, good lookin'.

In other words, this film is a technical marvel. Dinosaurs have been done over and over again since 3D computer art went mainstream in the first place. Short after short, we have seen them increase in detail over the years. The peak was of course in the CG/model blending of Jurassic Park... but in terms of a true animated feature, Dinosaur is paramount. From a modelling standpoint, the dinosaurs in Dinosaur are spectacular. From an animation standpoint, it goes even further beyond that. The texturing is magnificent. The movements are lifelike. Even the backgrounds, the scenery - they are all spectacularly rendered. In addition, there were many scenes where the dinosaur objects are mapped and edited onto pre-shot aerial footage, and the blend was certainly well done. I speak, of course, of the scenes involving water, which always seems to be one of the decisive factors in animation.

That said... this film is just photorealistic. In fact, the cinematography goes beyond simple interpolation of footage and animated objects. It gets to the point where they even add motion blur to some scenes to give it a dramatic slow-motion effect. This is used in all the right places and evokes some images that are, to say the least, memorable.

The musical score has a very nice exotic quality to it. Although the main theme is not utilized enough or on a great enough scale to linger in my mind for days on end, the music in general captures the "natural" style and the environment of the film.

Finally, the use of Carnotaurs instead of Tyrannosaurs was fairly original, although this step in originality seems a little on the deliberate side.

CONS

Well, just like that pretty girl in your class you can't take your eyes off of - she may be good-looking, but she really doesn't have all that much substance to her. Once you get to know her, you lose all interest in her because she's really just a ditz.

This film can best be compared to Titanic. Art design? Beautiful. Direction? Quite commendable, I must say. But then you have the issue of the screenplay - and I can say with confidence, the guy who wrote this should be shot. The flaws of this film can be traced directly back to him. He is responsible for destroying an otherwise brilliant cinematic work of art. Checking on the IMDB, the script and story were put together by seven different people, each of whom only have a small fistful of credits to his or her name, of which none are significant. "Tales of the Crypt"? Out to Sea? Oh, please. What the hell kind of credentials are those?

Supposedly, Dinosaur was originally a film with no dialogue, but that idiot of an executive Michael Eisner declared that it had to have some dialogue to a) reduce a classic film into a kids film, because everybody knows animation's for children, right? and b) profit off increased sales of McDonald's Happy Meals. What an idiot. They threw together that chicken@#%$ script for the sake of having some dialogue? Don't they know that the beauty of film is showing, not telling? If you aren't going to have anything useful to say, why say anything at all?

The screenplay is just terrible. It is wretched. It's kind of like the actors doing the voices were reading off a piece of toilet paper they just wiped their asses with. At some points, it sinks below Titanic, though that comparison is already very harsh. In fact, it's on the level of the direct-to-video sequels to The Land Before Time - the same videos that completely tainted the original film and turned the name from a work of art to a kiddy franchise. The screenplay is utterly unquotable. It doesn't even have lines that are memorable because they are bad, Ã* la "I'm flying, Jack!" Unless you count that infamous "love monkey" line which you've all undoubtedly seen from the trailer. If you haven't, count yourself lucky.

Speaking of the "love monkey", which is actually a lemur (by the way, all lemurs in this film are referred to as "monkeys" presumably to avoid confusing the kids), all the rumors you heard about him are true. So you could take Jar Jar Binks, eh? Well, try this little critter on for size! And if you hated Jar Jar... don't see Dinosaur. You'll be pulling your hair out every time something comes out of that furball's trap. And if you're bald... well, let's not think about that.

The story itself lacked substance and meaning. It seems to have a subliminal anti-Darwinist sentiment to it, making the semi-villain of the story the advocate of the "survival of the fittest" principle. But isn't that contradictory, since we're dealing with dinosaurs here in the first place?

Also, you tell me how the dinosaurs survived the meteorite strike at the beginning of the movie (no real spoiler there). At least in The Land Before Time it was just mass earthquakes in a concentrated locale.

OVERALL

Like I said - this film is the stunningly attractive chick that turns out to be a ditz once you get to know her. She looks so good, she's one to dream about. But she lacks substance. The Land Before Time is a deeper, more meaningful film. Dinosaur is essentially another Titanic - all visuals. I wouldn't say Dinosaur is a bad film, but it is shameful compared to what it could have been.