web counter
 

The Fantastic Mr. Fox Trailer

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Trailers | Comments (30)

_1248422845.jpg

Below we have the trailer for Wes Anderson’s upcoming film, The Fantastic Mr. Fox, based on the Roald Dahl book. And it’s weirdly predictable, I must say. It’s a throwback to old-school stop motion, and it looks so authentic, it feels like I found something on late-night Spout TV (that’s a channel for the kiddies). But it’s also merged with Anderson’s style of conversational pitter patter. It’s actually kind of jarring — as though I were watching a series of stop-motion animals performing Anderson’s Bottle Rocket script. It doesn’t help, either, that the voice cast is distracting — it’s hard — at least in this trailer — to get into the Mr. Fox character because he’s so obviously George Clooney. I just picture a guy in a sound booth with a martini and two women in short dresses draped around his arms. I don’t think that’s what Anderson was going for.

With Bill Murray and Jason Schwartzman also providing voices — and the script obviously 17 cuts above your average kiddie flick — it’s actually kind of difficult to tell who this film is marketed toward: Anderson’s hipster audience (me! me! me!) or kids with parents who are trying to steer them clear of CGI monstrosities.

It’s a really weird vibe, folks. And I don’t quite get it.







← Eloquent Eloquence 07/30/09 | Humpday Review →













Comments

That opening image terrified me more than anything I've ever seen on Pajiba. I really hope I have a normal sleep tonight.

Posted by: Kate at July 30, 2009 2:59 PM

Yeah. I'm not sure how I feel about this either. I mean, the pieces are all there, but it doesn't seem like it's supposed to be animated. Maybe it's the stop-motion, or Clooney being Clooney. I might have to pass on this one.

Posted by: Macafee at July 30, 2009 3:02 PM

I normally love stop motion, but this really creeped me out. I agree, the voice work is distracting.

Do you suppose Mr. and Mrs. Fox do it doggy style? Fantastic.

Posted by: BWeaves at July 30, 2009 3:06 PM

Based on the book by the author of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

Does this irritate the shit out of anyone else? It's just such a measure of how little kids read any more because, hell, if there's a good book out there, someone'll just make a damn movie out of it! Why would you know Roald Dahl as the author of some of the most gloriously twisted children's stories ever when you can know his as "that guy who wrote that thing that they made a Johnny Depp movie from!" Bleeeeeh.

Posted by: Shay at July 30, 2009 3:21 PM

They made them American.....

Posted by: Sarah Woolley at July 30, 2009 3:29 PM

Yeeaaahh... I dunno. I think I'm saying, 'Nay,' for now. Too many prat falls. It's just...weird.

Posted by: Sapphiar at July 30, 2009 3:30 PM

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was a Gene Wilder movie. I refuse to acknowledge the remake. Not because of Johnny Depp who was good, but because of the family redemption storyline that was clumsily tacked on.

I liked this trailer. It's got more than a little of that Rankin-Bass weirdness. It reminded me of a Richard Scarry book. Throw Lowly Worm in there driving like a mainiac (voiced by Paul Reubens) and I'd be pretty happy. Is it too late for a punch up?

Posted by: Mrcreosote at July 30, 2009 3:31 PM

why the hell are you so eager to identify as a hipster? BAD. Bad Dustin!

Posted by: snarla at July 30, 2009 3:35 PM

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was a Gene Wilder movie.

Actually, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory was a Gene Wilder movie. Something to do with licensing rights and the virulent hatred Dahl had for the first movie. That said, it's still a much better film, and infinitely more iconic.

Posted by: Shay at July 30, 2009 3:39 PM

Gotta agree Shay that whole from the author who wrote Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was insulting as anything. But I dont think its indicative of how little kids read just how dumb the film companies feel their audience are. Theres barely a kid below four years old that doesnt idolise Dahl especially here in the UK. We'd start off in schools (and my mum still does with kids at her school) getting read the story of the pelican, giraffe and monkey window cleaners and then second would be fantastic Mr Fox.

Still the animation looked beautiful and Im gonna hold out hope that it will be good. I mean george clooney is pretty perfect casting as long as his voice doesnt spoil the illusion. Fantastic Mr Fox as a funnier version of Ocean's 11 would be pretty good methinks.

Posted by: jim of the lower case at July 30, 2009 3:54 PM

Please, please stop posting that horrific picture of the rat... thing... because I nearly cry everytime it sneaks up on me.
It's looking at me like it wants to kill me and wear my skin in order to finally infiltrate the human world, where it will then procede to go on a killing spree in order to make the house made from human bones that it has always dreamt of having.
I think what I'm trying to say is: I will not be seeing Fantastic Mr Fox.

Posted by: Squeeziee at July 30, 2009 4:03 PM

Terrifying. Do not want.

Is it just me, or does some of Clooney's voice work sound like it was recorded in a different space? Like, noticeably different than the other characters in the same scene? I only caught it twice, when he says "Should we dance?" and in the scene with all the jars. Apt that it's jarring, I suppose.

Posted by: Amanda at July 30, 2009 4:59 PM

Siding with Shay on this one. Seriously, who the hell DOESN'T know Roald Dahl? Just SAY Roald Dahl! GYAH!

Posted by: Jeremy Feist at July 30, 2009 5:47 PM

I was totally psyched for this and now it looks like ass....like,I love the stop motion-it looks great, but the voice work is completely absurd and it seems like they bastardized the book. Hard.

I thought it was called Willy Wonka because they didn't want "Charlie" to be in the title of a movie during Vietnam...? In any case, why adapt a book if you change it entirely? Coraline is excellent, but why ADD characters to a story? Nonsensical...

Posted by: Leanne at July 30, 2009 5:49 PM

I'm hoping for a little of the magic we saw in Bottle Rocket. Same kind of kooky caper, maybe? This really has potential, I think.

Posted by: Optimus Rhyme at July 30, 2009 5:55 PM

This looks horrible. I mean horrible.

It's worse than that awful dead-eyed Zemeckis Polar Express/Christmas Carol animation. I'm actually a little nauseated.

Never in a million years will I watch this thing.

Posted by: Jerce at July 30, 2009 6:19 PM

Oh wow, I just don't know what to think of this. It reminds me of the James and Giant Peach film, different, maybe intentionally bad animation.

But I agree with Shay, it was hard to watch the rest of the trailer after that horrible 'from author who wrote Charlie and the Chocolate Factory' shit.

Posted by: Temet Nosce at July 30, 2009 6:59 PM

Well they got my 12 bucks.

But is it just me, or does Clooney sound...farther away than the other guys? Maybe he just doesn't have a voice for VA, but it sounds like he was on the phone or something.

Posted by: John Darc at July 30, 2009 6:59 PM

Oh John Darc, we're cut from the same soundwhore cloth.

Posted by: Amanda at July 30, 2009 7:05 PM

I, for one, am welcoming it.

Look, it's not going to be what you imagined. You know why? Cause you're a sexually active white female lawyer with seven tats. You don't make Wes Anderson filums. Wes Anderson makes Wes Anderson filums.

It's the same thing everytime another one of his movies comes out. You all get disappointed cause it's not Rushmore and it's not what you imagined it would be. But then you watch it again, 9 months later, without all the expectations, you've forgotten the initial disappointment, and you finally realize it's another lovely, lovely movie.

I want it.

Posted by: Angus at July 30, 2009 8:16 PM

The trailer is quite different than what I thought it would be after getting a gander at the still shots of the characters. The movement is very stylized, and the characters look 2D in the wide angle group shot...they actually remind me of the illustrations that Anderson's brother did for the Rushmore inserts.

Posted by: slim at July 30, 2009 8:56 PM

Angus, thank you.

I actually was expecting to be disappointed by the trailer, but I was pleasantly amused by it. George Clooney as a fox? Genius! Why didn't I think of that before? And Bill Murray as a badger? The only way they could have made that better is if he was a groundhog. A GROUNDHOG!

And why do people want or expect perfect book to movie translations? One, they usually translate terribly. Two, I'm still trying to wash the terribleness that was the Harry Potter movies (except for the third one, god bless that third movie) out of my mouth. It was essentially like listening to a book on tape, except with sanitized CGI and a director who lacks vision and a complete lack of imagination. (I hate Chris Columbus.) Three, look at all the movies that took liberties with the source material and turned out well: Adaptation, The Devil Wears Prada (well, every part with Meryl Streep--the rest was bleah), Brokeback Mountain, etc.

That said, meh about the Schwartz and the Wilson brother. And, AND I'm going to be terribly disappointed if I ever see this because there's going to be a grand total of 3 minutes of Meryl Streep Time. She's the sun. You have to bask in her light periodically or you'll DIE.

Posted by: noah at July 30, 2009 11:38 PM

yeah, some nice bits but clooney is definitely creeping up the place.

actual voice actors: better, stronger, faster, cheaper.

Posted by: trippdup at July 30, 2009 11:39 PM

I will eat this movie up like cake and then lick my fingers.


Even if it sucks as bad as The Life Aquatic....

Posted by: gforcetwo at July 31, 2009 1:02 AM

And Bill Murray as a badger? The only way they could have made that better is if he was a groundhog. A GROUNDHOG!

no. he needs to be the Gopher.

Posted by: ed newman at July 31, 2009 10:09 AM

It's like Ocean's 11. With clay animals.

Posted by: Bailey at July 31, 2009 2:50 PM

Oh wow, this really just doesn't work. It just seems incredibly uninteresting. Yet another Wes Anderson film for me to ignore.

Posted by: Caspar at August 1, 2009 2:56 AM

Wow Dustin you took the words right out of my subconcious, where from I had yet to peice them together.
I'm kind of bothered by the Ocean's Fur effect the film is clearly taking on. More over I knew the story was too simple to make a feature length film, and I waited for the butchering. Honestly I think maybe without Clooney it would workout. But yeah, I don't see how you can take Anderson with his incestuous cult of actors and sardonic wit and make a kids film. I'm simultaneously afraid and excited to see how this movie will actually turn out. I love Roald Dahl, and Anderson, and would like to see them play nice.

Posted by: Sprocket at August 5, 2009 12:06 PM

Umm..


Okay, I really like this trailer. I chuckled a couple times.

So, I dislike the Where the Wild Things Are trailer, but I am quite amused with this one?

I'm so weird.

Posted by: kayla at August 7, 2009 11:46 AM

Umm..


Okay, I really like this trailer. I chuckled a couple times.

So, I dislike the Where the Wild Things Are trailer, but I am quite amused with this one?

I'm so weird.

Posted by: kayla at August 7, 2009 11:52 AM

















mindholeblowers.gif viral_hits.gif
>> Pajiba Movie Posters

>> Pop Culture's 20 Greatest Dancing GIFs

>> The 100 Greatest Insults of All Time

>> The "Other" 100 Greatest Movie Quotes

>> The 100 Greatest Movie Threats of All Time

>> The Sean Bean Death Reel

>> Chicks Dig Beards: It's Science

>> The Coolest TV Show Title Sequences

>> The Most Rewatchable Movies

>> The Most Expensive Movies of All Time