Since it's being filmed in Texas, I wonder how many of their kids will see the film and go out to make friends with the fire ants in their back yard?

One does get tired of films which start from the premise of sapient animals verses arrogant humans. Bambi - often imitated, never improved on.

I presume "Open Season" will be next on your animation hit parade?

I presume "Open Season" will be next on your animation hit parade?
---
At this point, guarantee it--
Not only does Jim go gaga for anything in View-Master glasses, we'll probably get a half-dozen behind-the-scenes sagas about Roger Allers "bringing his Disney magic" to the Martin Lawrence/Ashton Kutcher epic.
(As for the rest of the post...let's just pretend you didn't go for the easy stuff and move on, 'kay?)

"And in the next installment of this series, I'll be doing just that as I--"
Yeah, yeah, Jim, the next.  And the next.  AND the next...

(And am I the first yet to point out that those Antz look awfully darn familiar?...With all old associated Disney/Pixar grudges implied?  :/ )

Sorry, not on my list of go-sees at all.  Rehashed Antz designs, Over the Hedge characters, HISTK plot, Jimmy Neutron rendering style.  Icch.

From the comments so far, I think folks are missing out on what has the potential to be a really good film. Not all good films come from just Burbank or Emeryville for a start. For myself, Antz and A Bugs Life were...so so. The Ant Bully has a better story behind it. As for upcoming films, from what I have seen and heard Barnyard looks to be a real yawner, could be wrong on that, but ya never know. All I can say is, keep an open mind on this film. I think you'll be suprised.

DerekJ said
"And in the next installment of this series, I'll be doing just that as I--"
Yeah, yeah, Jim, the next.  And the next.  AND the next...

Hey jackass.  Check the byline.  Roger wrote this article, not Jim.  

Dear lord.
Why do big actors have to be cast? Can't we learn from Antz, Ice Age 2, and Sinbad? Casting big names for the sake of casting big names is always a let down.

The previews don't seem so good. I am not a fan of Paul or Nicholas or Meryl, and espically Julia. I guess I'll pass this up this year and pass up Charlotte's Web when it comes out too.

and let's not forget, no matter how entertaining it may be, if it grosses less than Space Jam, it will be considered a failure by WB

And, considering that Warner has never yet MADE a good animated film, except for The One By the Guy Who Went to Pixar (unless you still actually *liked* The One By The Guy Who Made 'Chicken Little'), this is not always a bad thing...  :)

If there's a movie I'm less interested in seeing than Ant Bully, I'd be hard pressed to come up with what it is ...

Well probably against my better judgement but...

Just what is it about this film that is turning all you folks off?

I for one can say because it just looks bad. I saw the trailer and I barely laughed. It creeped me out and at times just felt like Antz rebooted. The voice acting just did not have any charisma whatsoever. And the whole thing smacks of being a big vanity piece with its four Oscar-worth actors touted right up front. I at least laughed at Over the Hedge previews and I later heard that that movie wasn't great.

But really...in all seriousnes...unbiased answer to your question: The trailer turned me off...almost immediately.

It's funny... I found the trailers to be interesting enough to want to see Ant Bully, but the information in this piece has turned me off completely.

Why is it when anyone else releases an animated film Jim and his cohorts raise it up onto thier shoulders and cheer and when Disney releases something he writes a venom filled diatribe on why the movie will fail?

By the way...where's my tour CD?

Well probably against my better judgement but...
Just what is it about this film that is turning all you folks off?
---
Well, let's see:
- The low-quality animation,
- The general Hollywood steamrollering of clever children's books with flat formula, because they want to "sitcom" their way through to cover their hinders with an adult audience they're convinced would be "bored silly" by good children's entertainment,
- The lack of attention to detail or entertainment usually displayed by companies who think that doing a few for-hire FX work assignment entitles them to produce Pixar-wannabe movies of wonder and whimsy,
- Oh, yes, and I checked out a few of the excerpt clips on YahooMovies:  Dear GODS, they're not funny!  >_<

We have seen in the past that there is only one thing in the world worse than CGI companies that want to be Pixar....
Companies that want to be -Dreamworks- wanting to be Pixar.

See, it's stuff like this that's going to kill audience's appetites for toons  - similar-looking CGI animation filling out a bland, flimsy story. It's really starting to worry me. I think the toon bubble is about to burst, and then it'll be hard times in Toontown. If I were a CGI animator I'd start saving my money for the rainy day that IMO is just on the horizon.

The movie does look like it might be entertaining but i wonder if anyone knows why they couldn't come up with some ants that do not look almost exactly like the ants in the Dreamworks production "ANTZ".


Its almost as if i am seeing trailers to a sequal for that animated movie.  I almost do not want to go see it because i hated the Dreamworks movie so much.

<<Why is it when anyone else releases an animated film Jim and his cohorts raise it up onto thier shoulders and cheer and when Disney releases something he writes a venom filled diatribe on why the movie will fail?>>

Because on the smaller movies, they can get press interviews with the creative team, wheras on the Disney ones, not as much.

<<Well, let's see:
- The low-quality animation

Low quality...really...interesting since so many animators who worked on this film are now working at Pixar....but I guess you are a better judge of quality animation....


<<- The lack of attention to detail or entertainment usually displayed by companies who think that doing a few for-hire FX work assignment entitles them to produce Pixar-wannabe movies of wonder and whimsy

Wow the film hasn't even opened yet and you have already seen it.....oh wait...that's right... you haven't seen it yet have you....ah yes I forget...we like to bash films without seeing them only to then see said film and then reverse our thoughts.....oh and by the way, I am sure you are already aware since your so smart and all...but before Pixar made movies of wonder and whimsy they did a few for hire FX work assignments.... that information can be found on the 1st page of your Pixar-fan boy handbook...
 

Why is it when anyone else releases an animated film Jim and his cohorts raise it up onto thier shoulders and cheer and when Disney releases something he writes a venom filled diatribe on why the movie will fail?>>

Real good point here. Jim Hill loves to rip into Disney, justifying it by saying he has to retain his credibilty as a reporter.  But when these smaller films come along, its all peaches and cream.  

Voice Characters!!!! Actually, check out "Over the Hedge", I thought it had one of the best set of voice characters of any animated film in a long time.
Gary Shandling, Bruce Willis, Steve Carrel, Wanda Sykes  and  William Shatner were as fun to listen to as they were to watch. Much better than the cast from "Cars".  Overall not a bad film.

PingBack from http://flyingant.deletepests.com/2006/07/29/flying-ant-the-ant-bully-will-draw-audiences-into-the-story-in-ways/

PingBack from http://anthill.deletepests.com/2006/07/29/ant-hill-the-ant-bully-will-draw-audiences-into-the-story-in-ways/

&lt;i&gt;Tired of stories about Disney films that are supposedly unperforming? Well, Roger Colton turns your attention toward Warner Bros. Studios. Which has had such a long cold streak at the box office this year, you'd think that their corporate headquarters