[sirens blaring] so i think... ...there's really... ...really... ...st-... they're stories that resonate with all different types of people, and... and, um... what i think differentiates this from other animated movies
is, it's funny, there are great songs, it looks beautiful, but weirdly i find, emotionally it works on, like, a very deep level and - and that's what i think really sets the movie apart from other animated movies that i've seen. yeah, yeah, that's me!
yeah, the two of us together! you're joking me, we're going to be spicy, no?- come on, let's take off our clothes! [laughs] [intro theme] illumination are one of the worst companies in big budget animation. i'm really fed up with people defending them by saying that they just make "harmless" movies that are not worth getting annoyed over. but the fact of the matter is,
out of their entire catalogue of films, not a single one of them reaches anything above "serviceable" or "mediocre". they prey on the gullible general audience who don't bother to demand anything from their entertainment. with utterly offensive garbage like 2011's "hop", obnoxious and forgettable movies like "the secret life of pets", (which is just a remake of toy story combined with
every funny animal video you've ever seen on youtube) and of course, my arch-nemesis... the minions, who were created in illumination's first film, "despicable me". which continued into the awful "despicable me 2", and the even awfuler-er "minions" movie.
there is something about this company that really irks me, that really gets under my skin. and after watching "sing", their latest movie, i've finally figured out what it is. illumination, like most companies who produce film, are ultimately a business who are worried about one thing when it really comes down to it. and that thing is making as much money ashumanly possible. usually, you hope for a nice balance in film;
the artists and creatives get to make their movie, and tell the story they want to, as long as they stick to budget and time schedules. and if the movie is good and gels with audiences, that usually means a nice, fat profit can be made, so everyone is happy. but the difference here between illumination and another company such as pixar or dreamworks, (whispering) which, uh, by the way
was acquired in april 2016 by nbcuniversal, who also owns illumination, and are now both being overseen by the same person... ...so that's good for them... is that they're not interested in the artistic and creative side. they don't care about releasing films of quality such as toy story or how to train your dragon; that's not part of their agenda. all they care about...
...is that sweet, sweet... ...dough. now, i have no problem with a company wanting to make money, like, whatever, that's nothing new. but what i'm scared of... is the possible trend illumination might set because of the success they get from their vapid and meaningless movies. animated movies traditionally have incredibly high budgets, but illumination's founder and owner,
chris meledandri, (why can't you just have a name like john smith that's easy to pronounce?) specifically runs his company with the lowest cost model possible, adopting cost-conscious animation techniques that lower the expenses and render times... that most people never even notice because they're too busy xd-ing at minions. and then the ultimate result, the ultimate product, is something like...
"sing". which i know is supposed to be the main subject of this video, but i simply had to explain my hate... for illumination first. [dramatic sting] an admittedly glossy, but shallow... heartless, empty, and pandering mess of cinema, "sing" is the seventh hit in a row for illumination. because, remember, with budgets as low as these, they'd really have to fuck up to somehow not make their money back and then some.
i realise i'm starting off in a weaker position because, while minions are such a meme who are inherently fucking annoying, and most people are on my side with hating them, "sing" seems to actually be somewhat liked by audiences. who these people are, i have... i have no idea. but the imdb and rt scores do indicate that plenty of people do very much enjoy the film. so, without further ado, let me try and explain to you why i think "sing" is actually an awful, terrible, manipulative piece of shit.
or do i need to sing it to you so you pay attention? let me ask you a question: have you ever seen "the x factor"? let me ask you another question: have you ever seen an animal? if yes to both of these questions, then you've seen "sing". structurally, it has a very bizarre setup, because there isn't really a single main character
as there is... an ensemble of different characters who are all given just about the same amount of screentime, each with their own little side-plots that offer nothing more than vague stereotypes that all fit into the most trite movie clichã©s... you could every possibly fucking imagine. you have the koala, whose business is struggling and desperately wants to succeed at his dreams of producing a popular show, because his dead father worked hard to get him to where he is now; there's the piggy, who's a dedicated mother of 24,
who never got to live her dreams of becoming a pop star because she had to look after her kids. also, her husband works so hard; he basically ignores her. there's the arrogant mouse, who's played by family guy.(lois) - peter? who's undeniably talented, but is just kind of an asshole... whose motivation is purely monetary. ironic coming from the family guy... guy.
(lois) - peter? there's the edgy teenager... punk rebel rock... porcupine... archetype... who has dreams of becoming a singer and producing her own music, and then there's the shy elephant who dreams of being a singer but can't get over her stage fright, which keeps holding her back.
from being a singer. [feedback] [explosion] then, finally, there's my personal favourite: the gorilla. who dreams of being a singer... but is held back by his dad... who's in a gang... who robs banks...
and is a wanted criminal. yes, those are all words i just said. and no, i know what you're thinking... i'm not gonna say it. now, apart from them all having the exact same dream of wanting to become a famous singer, because movie has to happen, what do you notice about all of these main characters? apart from they're just fucking horrible.
well, if you pull back the curtain, you'll notice that every one of these characters represents a demographic with a stereotype. young children have the stupid fat pig character who's just funny and 'randem', the mothers have the other pig character, who's a relatable mother, and, wow, isn't it really hard being a mother? i really relate to that... pig.
that disgusting, smelly, fucking pig. edgy teenage girls can relate to the porcupine who's having boyfriend troubles, and hates wearing anything with colour, edgy teenage boys can relate to the gorilla who has father issues and also appeals to those who want to rebel against what your parents say, and no, i'm still not gonna fucking say it; shy, reserved people have the elephant character
who also happens to have a really stereotypicalblack family? so that right there checks two demographics in one. - so she's a little shy. so what?! if i had a voice like mina's, i'd be a superstar by now! just singing "♬ooh yeah, i said 'ooh yeah'♬"- sure you would, grandpa. now blow out your candles. ...then the remaining characters appeal to everyone else,
purely because they're cute or because they have vague, relatable motivations such as: aww, i love my parents. i love koalas! i love mice. i wish i could fuck a mouse that hot. point is, everyone is covered, i don't think there's a single type of person who's missing a blatant, simplistic, unsubtle representation.
illumination must have mastered the act of cost-effective focus testing, because they've nailed it. they've absolutely nailed it. they've figured out exactly what attracts the biggest audience possible, by doing... ...the least amount of work required. have celebrities everyone loves in the cast, and have animals or simplistic, cute creatures as the main characters, and that's about it, that's all you need to make a hit animated movie.
and this movie takes it to the next level, as well, by applying this concept to the very plot itself. everyone dreams of being a pop star, it's why the x-factor was so popular. so adapting that idea into a movie makes a lot of sense if you want to capture the most... simplistic... predictable... general audience... possible. so, the majority of the movie isdedicated to animating a bunch of trendy pop songs
that everyone is guaranteed to know at least one of. the segment most people know from this movie is probably the... funny and hilarious audition scene which was in every trailer. [horrifying shout] honestly, come to think of it, this film is basically an hour and forty-seven minute long trailer. it has about as much plot and character progression... as your average trailer does, so... and you can tell that certain scenes were specifically designed to be workable into a trailer.
all right, so basically, the koala character comes up with a totally original idea of a singing contest... - a singing competition. ...competition. ...as a last-ditch effort to save his business. but, because of a typing error when making the posters to advertise this contest, everyone is lead to believe that the prize money for the contest is actually much bigger than it really is. so half of the movie is you waiting for the "you lied to us!" moment. - he lied!
moon lied to us all! ...and you do get to that moment, once a contrived plot where the mouse is hunted down by russian mobster bears... and that whole thing comes to a head... and then the koala has to come clean... i know i'm being vague, but the details really do not matter. it doesn't happen because it aids the story or plot, it simply happens because this is the part of the movie where this is supposed to happen. this is the conflict; we need something to be bad for the characters,
so then we can bring it back and make everyone happy at the end. in fact, just about every character has their own falling action and mini-arcs. but they're so trite and played out that it's truly exhausting to see it happen over and over again... with each and every character. finally, once the ridiculous scene where the entire theatre gets flooded with water and destroyed... is over... ...all of the animals just kind of forgive the koala for lying to them and wasting their time, and they decide to put on one last show just to prove that they can all do it, and then everyone thinks they're the greatest and they all live happily ever after.
i remember, when i first sat down to watch this movie, my biggest question was: "okay, so, for such a shallow movie with so many sympathetic characters, with no main protagonist, who is going to win this contest, then?" because the concept of winning or losing is too complex for "sing". everyone has to win or everyone has to lose at the same time, because no one can be left at the curb. because, remember, this film has to appeal to everyone, and we can't make an audience feel any other emotion other than
"lol." ...or... "aw, that's nice." i hope they get there in the end." the only moral lessons i can find in "sing" are such vague, pointless concepts, like "don't lie", or "don't give up".
you know, these are the kind of moral quandaries we really need teaching our kids, because it's not like those two things are basically... two of the most intrinsic human qualities most people automatically know, or are taught by everyone from a very young age anyway. all and all, the movie is very much likea season of the x-factor; it's overly long, contrived, emotionally manipulative, and just incredibly fucking annoying.
what you see is what you get with "sing"; nothing is left up to the imagination, nothing is very creative or visually interesting, it really is just the x-factor with animals. which leads to the question... no reason. no reason is the answer to that question. there is absolutely no reason at all as to why the characters in "sing" are animals. they could have been literally anything,
and the story would remain exactly the same. humans, aliens, bugs, grey goo people... the fact that they are animals is so unimportant to the story, and was so clearly done out of a lack of creativity and unoriginality, that it actually just strikes me as embarrassing. there's literally... one joke...
in the entire movie... that revolves around what animal the character is. and that's when the porcupine randomly starts shooting quills out everywhere. which isn't even something... real life porcupines are able to fucking do. one of the characters is a sheep. he's not an important character; he's about as about as minor a supporting role as you can get. but i distinctly remember finding it extremely strange...
...that there's an entire scene dedicated to him going swimming, with goggles and speedos and all the swimming gear on. so, why is he a sheep? what purpose to the visual storytelling is there... that he's a sheep? if he's just going to act exactly like a human, and just do things that humans do. ...but he's a sheep. because funny?
i just don't understand why they didn't utilise the endless possibilities the premise of having animals as your characters can add to the presentation of your animated children's movie. think about some other animated movies where the characters are animals. a recent example is disney's "zootopia". the fact that everyone in that movie is an animal... is the entire point of the movie. if you made all of the animals in that movie into grey goo people, the actual narrative would make no sense.
and there are absolutely endless character-full and funny jokes that fully took advantage of the characteristics of the animal character designs. both for sight gags, and for literal personality traits because it made sense to the greater theme of the movie. in other words, the people who made "zootopia"... actually had an idea for a movie. another great example is "bojack horseman". an absurdist netflix cartoon that has... no reason being as good as it is.
but also, similarly to "sing", the show exists in a world where animal people are just a thing that exist, and you're not supposed to question it, but what "bojack horseman" does differently to "sing" is that, again, the fact that certain characters are animals actually does work itself naturally into endless sight gags and hilarious character traits that reflect what the real animal is like in reality. it makes the absurdist idea grounded and sensical in its story and world. whereas, in "sing", the only reason that they're all animals...
is so they can have a funny fucking thumbnail... for a trailer on youtube. it reminds me of early youtube where everything was crazy frog, or that bird that would sing, and other various shitty, annoying animated animals. there are a bunch of dreamworks movies that have this exact same problem, and are fucking awful as of the result. the best example of this is "shark tale", one of dreamworks' absolute worst movies in their entire catalog.
the fact that the characters are fish is kinda secondary to everything else. they mostly just do things humans would do, like work at a car wash... or bet on horse racing. that movie also had fucking horrendous character design. but that's a movie for another day. oh, wait, hang on, i'm getting ahead of myself here. [ominous sting] illumination must have an atrocious art design team,
because they are absolutely horrendous at character design. anyone who approved and greenlit... this... has absolutely no idea what they're fucking doing. they have no flair, they don't pop, they're straight up horrible to look at, and their design does not reflect their character whatsoever. okay, all but the elephant character, who is... the animal rip-off of violet from "the incredibles".
that's really creative, guys, keep it up. you should be able to instantly understand what the character is all about from a simple glance. and nothing about any of "sing's"characters reflects that. illumination has had... fucking awful character designs since their very first movie. here's a clip of ralphthemoviemaker explaining what is so bad about them, from his "why 'minions' sucks" video. ...which you should definitely check out. - the most important element of an animated film besides the humor are the characters. this is something pixar and dreamworks excel at.
even if their films aren't that good, they still manage to make some iconic characters. that's 'cuz they want to sell toys, i know, but they're good characters nonetheless. all of them have a unique look, a unique voice, a unique personality... a character like randall willalways stick in my head, not just 'cuz of the performance,
but because of the way he looks. just by looking at an image of him,you can tell what he's all about. that's the wonder of animation. i can show you any number of images from these movies, and you can tell me what their character is just by looking at them. you don't even have to see the movie to understand the character. you know everything about james p. sullivanjust by looking at this image of him. i don't know if you can do that with minions. minions are too simple of a design to do anything with,
and it's hard to tell them apart! what can you tell me about this minion? how 'bout this one? how 'bout him? what can you tell me about this girl? or this guy? not a damn thing! - thanks for that one, ralph, i couldn't have said it better myself. that's why i literally stole your video, and put it in my video.
i mentioned earlier that illumination are all aboutcost-effective animation, which probably explains whythroughout "sing" you can see the same dozen or so character designs on repeat throughout the entire running time. if you take a shot every time you see the same crocodile, bison, giraffe, or sheep character model... you'll probably be dead in about 10 minutes. they don't even play around with the colours or any discernible features,
it's literally... ...the exact... ...same... ...model. [jaunty tune] [fart noise] you might say that this is unimportant, but, to me, a lot of the fun with animation is that you can pack every single frame full of character. and animators will often hide little secrets and gags for the people with a sharp eye who notice them.
so when i look in the background to look for anything interesting, because the main focus of the scene is completely fucking boring and uninteresting, and i spot the same character models that were used in the previous scene, and the scene before that, it leads to a visually tiring and horrifically bland experience. and this goes far beyond the character models too. every location in the movie is reused over and over again. constantly, throughout the movie. it's like they wrote the movie around, like, three or four locations.
and whenever any new ones show up, they're always horrifically dull anduninteresting to look at. they're just places. they're just places humans go! why are they animals?! why is it necessary?! what else is there to even say about "sing"? it's pretty self-explanatory that it's fucking awful. even youtube user tim arsen...neau...ault
says that "i haven't even seen the movie yet, but this was pretty #cringe if i do say so myself!" and tim is right! it is #cringe, what illumination is doing. it is #cringe that they can make enough money to buy over two million rep packs in halo 5, with the amount of money this film made.
that no one seems to realise or even care about how they're being manipulated by this fucking film. how far are illumination willing to gowith these focus-tested, budget-friendly, asset-reusing, lowest-common-denominator, anemically bare, and empty products. how long's it gonna be until one of these companies design an algorithm that detects the latest trends,
write a script, and animates the entire movie for you, with the sole intent of appealing to the biggest market possible, and manipulating idiots to make money off them. that might sound ridiculous, but at the current rate we're going, can you really not see companies attempting something like this in the future? i like movies being art, - ♬ever had-a one of those days?♬ i like the stories and expression
and lessons that can be learned from them. "sing" and every illumination product goes against everything i value about the art form. demand more from entertainment. don't make every movie become either a "transformers", or a "despicable me", or "fifty shades of grey". okay, i'm gonna say it now... conehead harambe. [outro theme]
allowfullscreen>