冰河世纪3观后感英语作文参考
冰河世纪3观后感英语作文参考精选篇1
UP, Pixars latest animated feature, is just delightful. But how do you go about extolling the movies virtues without giving away its surpris? Like the kid at the beginning of the movie, you dont try to conquer the immovable force; you work around it.
台风风眼
The one clue I can give away – becau its the movies heavily hyped premi – is that Carl Fredrickson, a gruffy old widower (voiced with gruffy old charm by Ed Asner), miraculously inflates enough balloons to u his hou as an aircraft. Soon, he finds himlf reluctantly sharing his ride with a short-attention-spanned kid named Rusll.
席慕蓉青春 Ill also mention a couple of other items that can gauge your potential interest in the movie. One is a gag that is a take-off on a famous painting – perhaps too inside of an inside joke, but typical of Pixars cheery attempts to appeal to viewers of all ages.
Also, part of the plot involves Carls long-held wish to meet a Lindbergh-type adventurer na
med Charles Muntz (Christopher Plummer!). This is another in-joke thats even vaguer than the first one. Cartoon historians know that Walt Disney started in the cartoon biz by creating Oswald the Rabbit for producer Charles Mintz, who then greedily stole the rights to Disneys creation. This gives you a pretty good idea where the ostensible hero Muntz stands in the scheme of things.
Beyond that, I can only offer you some enticing clues about the characters. Theres a dog whos the leader of his pack and in menacing beyond measure, until he opens his mouth and gets one of the movies biggest laughs. Theres a huge, awkward bird that is a big laugh-getter at first. Then she becomes a real enough character that – at least in the audience I was in – when shes injured, she elicits screams of fright worthy of Bambis late mother.钢铁侠3剧情
Theres surprising, heartfelt emotion, vivid imagery (you can almost touch the landscapes and skies), and a music score by Michael Giacchino thats practically a character in the movie – particularly in a thoughtful montage that takes Carl from childhood to widowhood.
There arent many (or at least not enough) live-action movies that are engrossing as this cartoon. Pixar Studios has gotten to be one of tho movie icons that shouldnt even have to deliver a premi to get funded anymore. The moneymen should just shut up, hand over the money, and trust theyll get a product that will appeal to everyone.
UP is only the cond Pixar feature to get a PG rating, only for mildly inten imagery and action – nothing off-color in the least. Again, if you can handle "Bambi," this film should be a breeze.
梦见大火
冰河世纪3观后感英语作文参考精选篇2
It’s not particularly surprising to be disappointed by any computer-animated film not bearing the Pixar logo. In fact, until Shrek, 2001’s rollicking success, I wouldn’t have even believed it could happen. What is surprising, is that Ice Age doesn’t even ATTEMPT to reach Pixar’s Toy Story heights, apparently content to revel in its status as Monster’s, Inc.s cond rate, half wit cousin.
Ice Age is yet another “extinction for kids” movie, one of many in a long line of baby dinosaurs, pterodactyl eggs, and sympathetic cavemen. This time, it’s the ice age, and wooly mammoths roam the earth alongside primitive man. Strangely enough, in this early world, animals can talk, and humans cannot. But when a group of would-be-enemies discover a lost human baby, wooly mammoth (Ray Romano), saber-toothed tiger (Dennis Leary), and giant sloth (John Leguizamo) must work along side each other in a journey to return the child to its home.
茄汁鲈鱼
Visually, Ice Age is perhaps the poorest bit of CGI I have ever en. Contrasted to the beautiful constructs of Monsters, Inc.; or even the gooey, gloppy creativity of Shrek; Ice Age is nothing but badly rendered polygons and Acme animated characters. No hint of photo-realism here. It’s like comparing a Bugs Bunny Cartoon to The Lion King. Actually, I suspect that is exactly what the folks at Ice Age were going for.
Ice Age is really little more than a collection of silly animal gags and Leguizamo one liners. Some of them are even quite funny. If that is all that we’re going for here, then I su
ppo I’m all for it. But then there are the strange attempts at gut wrenching sappiness, which fall painfully flat amidst sub-video game animation. Frankly, I’m not even sure the CGI they u here is up to the task of displaying the kinds of emotions the people are trying to illicit from their characters. The humans more cloly remble totem poles than they do living, breathing, creatures. It’s laughable watching their polygon-limited faces trying to emote in respon to the story’s attempts at heartfelt, soft touches.
草房子的手抄报
