Chicken Little in digital 3D (no spoilers in OP)

Cafe Society
1

I’ve just come back from a preview screening, and I’m sorry to say I’m a little disappointed. Maybe my expectations were a little too high, but it just isn’t as great a film as I was hoping, and the 3D wasn’t great either. (FYI: it’s only showing in digital 3D in 85 theaters nationwide, so check your local listings, as they say.)

The story. Okay, but not as consistently funny or exciting as, say, Wallace and Gromit. The premise is interesting, and there were some good gags, but it’s no Toy Story, The Incredibles, or Finding Nemo. The characters are not quite as well drawn as I’d have liked, and the story is a little heavy on the heart-warming father-and-son “closure” bit. It was also notably devoid of the funny little background details and pop culture references that have made other animated films like Shrek more interesting and funny. (And perhaps not coincidentally, popular.)

The 3D. Not as good as I expected. Technically, it’s fine, although not as good as IMAX 3D, mainly because it’s on a normal sized screen. But the film doesn’t take as much advantage of it as might have been expected. Except for a few scenes, the 3D is pretty subtle and by the end of the film you pretty much forget it’s 3D.

There are two cool things about the 3D: one is that, unlike IMAX, they use circular polarizers, so there’s no ghosting, and you can tilt your head without losing the 3D effect. This is a dramatic improvement. The other is that the 3D glasses you get look just like Chicken Little’s glasses.

The digital cinema technology is terrific. These are the new 2K projectors, and the image looks great. Unlike early digital cinema, no pixels are visible, the dynamic range is great. Unfortunately, the silver screen needed for 3D creates a noticeable (to me, at least) hot spot in the middle of the screen, and obvious drop-off on the edges.

I hope Chicken Little does well, but I’ve heard recently that Disney has been working to lower expectations for its performance. Now that I’ve seen it, I think I can see why.

2

That’s odd – most of the reviews I’ve read so far have complained about CL’s overuse of pop-culture references and songs.

3

Songs, yes. Some original, some covers. None really wonderful.

I saw the reports referring to pop culture details, and I don’t know what they’re talking about. For intance, there are no shops on Oakey Oaks’ main street with punning references to real brands and companies, as there were in Shrek 2 or Shark Tale, and no funny little details you almost have to watch on DVD to catch, like the book titles in Wallace and Gromit. It made Chicken Little seem rather palid in comparison to animated films of the past ten years. (Maybe the references are there, and I’m just too much of an old f*rt to recognize them. Naaahhh, couldn’t be.)

IIRC, Lilo and Stitch also lacked those little touches, but its story was much more engaging and funny in an almost subversive (by Disney standards) way. Chicken Little just doesn’t seem as imaginative and rich in detail as the latest generation of animated films. Of course, that’s not all it takes. Robots was overloaded with all that stuff, but it still didn’t add up to a satisfying whole.

Still, Chicken Little has some good points. I really liked the sky-is-falling visuals. (Saying more would give stuff away, but you’ll know what I’m talking about when you see it.)

But there’s some elusive quality that makes a hit, and IMHO, Chicken Little gets close but doesn’t quite make it. But I could be wrong. Don’t take my word for it. Go see for yourself.

4

i saw it over the weekend and really enjoyed it. the animation looks incredible…down to the smallest detail…and braff had the perfect voice for chicken little. everyone was laughing and clapping in the theater when i saw it. I’d recommend it…definitely.