स्टोर्क्स

I hadn't watched this movie at first because I thought it looked super corny but i actually really enjoyed and have a watched it a handful of times now.

There's definitely moments in this movie that resonated deeply with me and I'm sure it did with other parents as well especially the interaction between the stork and Tulip when the baby is up all night.

I could have gone without the Trump haired bird character completely and I think representation of different families other families such as LGBT+ And people with different body types Would have been nice at the end during the quick shots.

Overall I really enjoyed and the main young character other than the baby is a bit mature for his age but the reasons are valid and I think many kids in his situation would relate to this as well. I grew up with three older sister and still could relate to that feeling.

People rate kids movies too harshly. Tbh kids really can't relate to what's on the screen for quite some time and even when they do start reaching an age where they can start grasping that information (three) they loose interests very quickly because their attentions spans are much shorter than ours. There are definitely lots of movies that are hot stinkers but this one is very cute and my daughter and I will be watching it again soon.

Storks wasn't specifically on my watch list. I had seen ads here and there, but it seemed to get overshadowed with the release of other movies. When i got the chance to watch it on a flight, i took it. Mostly because there was nothing else to watch. I ended up laughing out loud a couple of times and being charmed by some of the characters.

The movie was cute and a little awkward at times, and had a fun and not too serious premise. The awkwardness is especially what drew me in. This movie might not be for everyone, the comedy might be a bit too obvious and cringy, and kids might not understand the humor at times. I personally don't think those are bad things, since i enjoy that type of humor. The voice acting was okay. I mean Andy Samberg was Andy Samberg and Ty Burell was Ty Burell. I enjoy both actors very much, but it made it hard for me to get into their characters. Stephen Kramer Glickman, Kelsey Grammar and Danny Trejo were outstanding in their performance.

Overall this movie was a fun ride, and took me by surprise. I got a little lost in the storytelling sometimes, and wasn't sure what 'message' they were trying to convey. But overall it was enjoyable and cute, and not every movie needs a 'message'. I'm not sure if every kid will enjoy this movie, but i think adults who like awkward humor and great animation (I forgot to mention that) will enjoy this movie. This movie is definitely underrated and got drowned out by other (hyped) animated movies that got released around the same time.

7,5

Watching this movie in the earlier parts, I could not help to feel that the funny scenes were a little bit forced, but as the movie continues, the funny scenes becoming more and more fluid. The funny moments became more natural. And since the baby girl was "produced", the movie became much more alive. I think the star of the movie was really the baby. The animation of this baby was soooo cute and adorable that you would really want to hug and play with the baby.

You would also be enjoying the very colorful scenes and the funny moments during the chase by the wolves. Those were some of the most enjoyable moments. But the moment that I laughed the hardest was during the scene involving penguins (and the fork). It was priceless!

I also loved that the trailer shown many times in the theaters was only showing some brief introduction about Storks and baby making machine. This helped us to be enjoying the movie without knowing there were so many plots inside this one. For parents who want to bring their children to watch this, I believe they would be able to enjoy it. For teenagers & adults, this movie would also be enjoyable to watch. However, please do not expect logic or the making sense of the story of Storks delivering babies. If you can only enjoy movie when logic is very much a great factor, then I do not think this movie is right for you. If you are looking for some fun and good laughter, then you can definitely watch this one!

By the way, this movie was produced by Warner Bros Animation Group (WAG) which also produced The Lego Movie. Hence, it was not a surprise to see there was a short funny animated Lego movie of a Chinese Kung Fu Master and a chicken before the start of the movie. I guess WAG also wanted to follow the success of such pattern used by Disney, Pixar and even Illuminati (remember those cute minions in The Secret Life of Pets ?). It did give us a nice thing to enjoy before the start of the actual movie. So when you already bought the tickets for this film, please make sure you are not late to be able to watch this short fun movie.

please read my full review in michaelnontonmulu.blogspot.co.id

Storks is undoubtedly funny and keeps up with the audience attention just enough in spite of an at par performance in pretty much all departments. The movie doesn't have any wow factor, except for the "baby cuteness", but I didn't find it bad either.

Story (7/10): I've heard about this concept for the first time, but apparently, storks, in some mythologies, are associated with baby delivery and that's what the story is about. In the modern times, though, they have moved away from baby delivery to cell phones. However, in a dramatic turn of events, one of the soon-to-be-boss storks, Junior, is unable to prevent the restart of a baby-making machine by Tulip - the only human at the facility, which creates a baby. Along with Tulip, he has to not just hide it from the rest of the storks at the facility, but also deliver the baby. And in that process, he has to prevent the babies from external enemies as well. I didn't find the story so exciting but what I liked about it was the screenplay that had good punches - although inexplicable on some occasions. What I also loved the most was some of the innovative stuff with wolves and penguins, which was innovative and great to watch. The characterization of Tulip and establishing her chemistry with Junior was a little tricky but the writer managed to do it pretty much smoothly without making it looked forced. Overall, a pretty neat job by Nicholas Stoller.

Animation (8/10): The animation is really good, especially the ones on creating various baby faces and expressions. It was pretty much like they poured in all of their energy into that. Also, the work around landscaping and making the entire visual very colorful is great.

Direction (7/10): The combination of Nicholas Stoller and Doug Sweetland has pulled out quite well. While the former hasn't had a great run with the movies yet, Doug's experience with the animation movies seems to have come handy, even though it was a first time for him. The idea of getting wolves creating amazing shapes - totally fitting into the context of the story - and the silent fight with the penguins was great. However, the direction could have improved in the beginning of the movie, which was a little slow and low on momentum.

Overall (7/10): A well-made movie with good animation and super score on cuteness factor!

I found STORKS in the way that you're supposed to find underrated/cult classics: by accident. When it was released, I bought into the collective sigh of underwhelm that most critics expressed and that was my mistake. It's easy to understand why the critical community didn't like it: in an era where Pixar, Disney and even Dreamworks keep churning out magnificently multi-layered heart-warmers that set the bar stratospherically high, STORKS doesn't register all that well. We've been spoiled by excellence. As a result, we've lost the ability to enjoy the simple pleasures of pure entertainment.

And that's what STORKS delivers better than babies or packages: entertainment.

You might have noticed people commenting on how forced and thin the storyline is and how uneven it feels, and those complaints are accurate. The plot is extremely thin (virtually an extended sitcom-sized premise stretched into an epic road-trip format), and the story moves so quickly that it goes too far too fast with nary any breathing room to savor the experience or give the characters the tension or time to build any real catharsis or change. But the characters are so authentic to themselves that you know just about everything you need to know about them from their first scenes.

I think the main reason STORKS gets such middling reviews in print and here on IMDb is because it's an old-fashioned type of comedy: a screwball-slapstick hybrid. The emphasis on sight gags, pain-humor, and wackiness has generally been avoided in animated films as passe and vulgar--low comedy. The rapid-fire snark between the main characters of Tulip and Junior hearken back to the old Howard Hawks workplace comedies of the 1930s, which is definitely an acquired taste in the post-narrative style of humor found in kids entertainment today--where non-sequiturs and punchlines exist in a vacuum and visual comedy is derived from abstraction rather than plasticity. But the comedic energy and the variety of jokes from modern "Office"-style cringe (Pigeon Toady) to the machine-gun-speed HIS GIRL FRIDAYy-style verbal sparring (Tulip & Junior), absurdism (the wolves), post-modern meta-humor (the boy and his parents) to classical WB slapstick of yesteryear, and the film is riotously funny because of it. At the end of the day, that's what STORKS wants to be: FUNNY.

STORKS is not a great film. It's not a masterpiece like TOY STORY or UP. It won't win any Oscars and it won't be everyone's cup of tea. But there's an excellent chance that it will live on as a multi-generational favorite for the same reasons as dumb-fun-with-a-heart-of-gold treasures like SPACEBALLS, DUMB & DUMBER, THE NAKED GUN, and NATIONAL LAMPOONS CHRISTMASs VACATION:

Because you can watch it 1,000 times and it will NEVER stop being funny.

So try it out. There's a 50-50 chance you'll be among the ones who can't stop watching it.