Is 'The Angry Birds Movie' Any Good?
It's been a few years since Angry Birds dominated the mobile gaming world, but nevertheless, "The Angry Birds Movie" is now arriving in theaters.
After the surprise success that was the "Lego Movie," it wouldn't be wrong to hope that "The Angry Birds Movie" might be, you know, a good movie. But alas, that doesn't seem to be the case — the critics break down into two camps: 1) It's not so bad; 2) No, it's definitely bad.
It's Not So Bad!
Considering its source material — a.k.a. the app located somewhere to the right of realtime weather and Candy Crush Saga on your smartphone — "Angry Birds" could be a whole lot worse.
The movie's story, by John Cohen, is pretty thin gruel, but Jon Vitti's smart-aleck script can be quite funny, and the brightly colored animation is appealing… In all, "The Angry Birds Movie" is a lot like the game: not thematically rich or emotionally resonant, but it'll pass the time.
[Newsday]
It's hard to hide the fact that "Angry Birds" has been repackaged way past the time when the game was a peak obsession. Still, there's no denying the movie's high spirits or its irresistible invitation to shake your sillies out.
It looks really good, at any rate.
For first-time feature directors Clay Katis and Fergal Reilly, both longtime studio animators with major Disney and Warner Bros. credits to their names, it's an impressive step up to the plate: From the reach-out-and-touch-the-screen plushness of the eponymous creatures' plumage to the carefully considered 3D design, the film is a frequently dazzling feat of craftsmanship, saturated in tropical oil-pastel shades.
[Variety]
Nope, Definitely Bad
Here's an exercise after watching "The Angry Birds Movie": Try to think of something in the world that might be worse source material for a film than this popular video game.
[L]et's be clear, then: "The Angry Birds Movie" isn't pointless because it's based on an app. It's pointless because it's pointless.
[The Wrap]
Hollywood is so hungry for movie franchises that it will seek inspiration from almost any source. That's the only conceivable explanation for "The Angry Birds Movie."
And there are some weird political undertones?
I shall not wax too indignant over the fact that this ostensible children's entertainment, in this summer of all summers, could easily be taken as an anti-immigration fable. Instead, I shall note that once past its pleasant echoes of cartoon classics… the movie… settles into the current default mode of animation humor. That is, a DreamWorks-inflected, pop-culture "savvy," far-side-of-smarm (not too) smart-aleckness, replete with bodily function jokes. The kids of today deserve better. So do I, come to think of it.
Smartphone apps don't particularly lend themselves well to political allegory or satire. But that's precisely what the makers of this fitfully amusing animated adaptation of the once-popular game seem to be fruitlessly attempting… [Main character] Red is the only one who's suspicious when a band of seemingly friendly singing-and-dancing green pigs (immigrants!) led by Leonard (Bill Hader) come ashore. And, sure enough, Red's proven right when they steal the birds' eggs (the unborn!), and set sail for home to feast on them.
Your Enjoyment Might Depend On Your Tolerance For Sight Gags
On the one hand:
[T]he animation punches well above its weight with properly Looney Tunes-standard sight gags; polished, highly expressive character design; and rendering so intensely computed nearly every barbule and rachis on each individual feather is visible.
On the other:
It's a shame, though, that so many of these new recurring gags are barely gags at all — just a series of hacky reflexes that viewers, particularly kids, have been trained to find funny. For example, a lot of animated movies break into ultra-slow-motion for moments of slapstick, complete with slowed-down vocals. This happens no fewer than four times during The Angry Birds Movie, including twice in the first 10 minutes. Why is this supposed to be funny?
[AV Club]
Watch The Trailer
