Ark

I watched this film specifically because I saw that James Woods was in it. I was not aware that it was an animated feature before hand. The art and design of the film is quite good. The animation is reminiscent of Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. The character design is like watching a cinematic on a really good video game. The problem with this film is the story. The story is silly and doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. There is enough action to keep me engaged while watching, but the story lacks originality and coherence. I also found that I didn't care about the characters. They all seemed thin and lacking humanity. I would have liked to see this film as a live action piece. I think that that might have improved it.

There have been scores of Asian animation movies that had good looks, good stories and good directing, but I didn't start up watching Ark by having those kind of expectations. When I saw that the animation was all 3D computer generated I winced, but I said I should give the movie a chance, maybe the story is good. I even forgave the idiotic pseudo-scientific talk that meant nothing. But what I can't forgive is how stupid the story was.

OK, ignore the fact that the faces of the animated figures had the expressivity of a dead cow. That has nothing to do with it. No situation was actually emotionally powerful. Watching this film is like playing with dolls. Even worse, it's like watching a 4 years girl play with dolls and expecting you to feel and see what she does.

Therefore this movie might be nice for people under the age of 5, maybe lobotomized children of 10, but that's how far this goes.

I was Surprise about the movie have not heard anything nor I knew it was out there. the story is very similar to Final Fantasy also the CGI is very close the quality of Final Fantasy. It does have a better plot but like any of these types of movies it could be better. it does have some great movement on the camera simulation shoots also the only voice that is known is that of James Woods. Hope that this is the start of more movies using this type of animation. it say that it was produce on the USA but it seems that it was really put together in Korea. not bad for a DVD movie due to the story line. Overall if you like the CGI of Final Fantasy I really recommend this one.

First of all I need to say that considering the budget of Ark it looks really fugging ugly, I mean seriously it was made in 2005 there is no excuse. Its like a cross between the childrens tv series Reeboot (1994) and a 90's Resident Evil cut scene.

Despite this the story initially is sound, it tells a convoluted sci-fi trope filled tale that I found myself engaged in. Sadly the further into the movie you go the worse it gets and it builds to a finale that on paper should have been great but in reality was rather underwhelming.

Regardless Ark is a watchable piece and I believe it will really appeal to many especially those into their sci-fi. In many places it reminded me of several Final Fantasy universes and their villians, just not enough.

Starring James Woods this is a harmless sci-fi fluff piece that by all rights should have been better and looked considerably better.

The Good:

James Woods

Interesting concept

The Bad:

Shoddy animation

Trails off a bit the further in it goes

To understand why Disney animation became so legendary, you just need to look at a single still frame from this movie. Pause the action at any point and take in what you see. It looks fine, doesn't it? The expressions look realistic, the composition looks good... Then, unpause it, and you'll understand: Animation is about movement. It's about taking the physics of our real world and recreating them to convey emotion: Excitement, sadness, urgency, rage.

Pixar understands this; it's why they hired so many classical animators. And even their best efforts only match the standard of what Disney and Warner Brothers produced in their prime. Movies like Ark, on the other hand, make another fact painfully clear: Good animators are hard to find, and modelers and programmers are a poor substitute. In fact, there may not even be any animators alive right now who can convey what the artists at Disney did with only a desk, a pencil, and a stack of loose-leaf paper, though some of the people at Studio Ghibli come close.

So any still frame looks fine. But the movement, the changes of expressions, even the inanimate objects - stilted. And with Ark in particular, the problems are worse. The plot is derivative and stagebound, and the pacing is thrown off kilter by tedious exposition, hammering the plot into your ears just in case your eyes didn't pick it up. Frankly, the backstory conveyed in the opening narration sounds more interesting than the film that follows.

Some animation never enters US theaters because of bad luck - take Akira, for example. Then, there are films like Ark - missing them, you miss nothing.