Robot Dreams is the kind of movie that will really re-affirm my love for the animation medium. What sets it apart for me is the storytelling style is more like an actual piece of cinema than most animations. Pablo Berger's directing chops are on full display here.
There is also a very impressive amount of detail in nearly every shot. There's obviously the city shots which have detailed backgrounds, but what really caught me off guard is a scene which depicts electronic repair. I'm no expert on that subject, but I do know enough to see that the animation team carefully studied reference material and I wouldn't be surprised if we got a true to life display of it. They didn't need to do that, the movie would've carried on just fine had they cut some corners, but they didn't. That is just one of the many ways Robot Dreams tells me that it was a labor of love.
I have to agree with many reviews that the ending has a lot of weight, and is unexpected for a movie like this.
I'm glad this got nominated for Best Animated Feature, and I do think it should've won as well, but that's how the Academy tends to be. Regardless, this is easily my favorite movie of 2024 so far, and I hope Pablo Berger considers doing more animated projects like this, I think his presence in the genre would be very valuable.
I have a lot of thoughts about this movie and it's pretty much all positive. Mutant Mayhem is a winner.
First, hats off to the entire animation department. This is even more proof that we're in a new age of 3D/CGI animated movies. I know a lot of people are going to compare this to Spider-verse, which in essence is fair because this is yet another "on two's" style animated movie. That said, I don't think they are very similar stylistically other than that. Mutant Mayhem employs thicker, bolder textures and looks almost claymated, whereas Spider-verse uses thinner, sharper lines and lends a lot more inspiration from comics.
Voice cast killed it, including Rogen. The turtles feel like they're actual teenagers in this movie which is refreshing. Superfly (Ice Cube) was a great villain with plenty of range. Mondo Gecko (Paul Rudd) also deserves a special shoutout for being a very likable character.
Went in without knowing Trent Reznor made the soundtrack but it immediately stood out to me as a high point for the movie, the licensed tracks especially never felt out of place, quite the opposite.
I think the only thing I would criticize this movie for would be the storyline, it's not remarkable or new, even for the turtles. This being said it's hard for me to put fault on that when the movie is casually self-aware about this. It's also not annoying or self-referential like I was expecting, since many movies like this are.
If you're a Tutrtles fan you're already watching this, but for those who are fairly unfamiliar with the franchise (like me), this is an origin story and you won't feel out of place watching it. I'm stoked for any potential sequel!
"Five Nights at Freddy's (2023)" (henceforth referred to as "FNAF" in the review) walks a fine line, but still manages to entertain.
I want to get one of the most common critiques of this movie squared away before I get into it; no, FNAF is not scary, because it couldn't be.
The main demographic of the FNAF franchise are young children. This makes it not impossible, but a terrible business move to make it R-rated. Firstly, parents would be outraged (despite the fact that it's entirely on them which movie they bring their children to watch). Kids would also use any method they could to watch it despite such a rating. These reasons would create a lot of bad press for the movie, causing it to lose sales. With that, the final and probably main reason it doesn't have a higher age rating is that the movie would lose a ton of potential sales by excluding its largest demographic. Aiming for a "medium" age rating like PG-13 subjects the film to limitations in terms of how violent and scary it can be, but Universal (rightly in my opinion) deemed it necessary to maximize viewership.
I was fully aware of this being the case when I went to watch the film, and while I would have loved to see an R-rated version of FNAF, I completely understand the reasoning behind it not being so. That is the foundation I'm writing this review on.
FNAF is both cheesy and silly, but finds time to ground itself. The cinematography is average, but the props are excellent. They follow the source material very well and look sufficiently realistic.
The writing and acting are the main things stopping FNAF from completely surpassing my expectations. Sometimes these factors make the film stumble.
I find the most redeeming quality of FNAF is its entertainment value. I had so much fun watching it, especially with my friends, who were both able to provide important context for the lore, and provide lots of laughs at the most bizarre parts.
I'm only a passive enjoyer of the source material in that I've watched some people play the games on YouTube and the like. Without any prior context I think this film might be a miss for most people, because it can be hard to follow the reasoning for certain characters decisions without understanding the lore behind the franchise first. On the other hand, I think it was appropriate to go this route as many if not most of the viewers will likely be familiar with the source material, and going the other way might leave them disappointed instead.
I couldn't imagine the challenge of abiding to all the necessary limitations of making this film, and I have a lot of respect for the crew for doing what they did with what they could. It could be a lot better, even with these limitations, but it surpassed my expectations well.
