Cryptozoo

Cryptozoo is an interesting look at the relationship between idealism, the utopian vision, and the alluring power of controlling dreams by government forces.

The animation can go from being really good to mediocre. I have no word in for animation but I do give the artist one hell of a prop for hand drawing every scene. I really think the backdrops are incredible looking especially towards the end. As for the voice acting, it's very good. Love the acting and story. It's very unique and creative. My biggest complaint is the pacing and I can't tell if it's the animation or the editing. It goes slow, fast, slow, fast....you get it.

If you loved Dash's work from before, you'll most certainly find this film to be an improvement over the last.

Cryptozoo is a zoo where cryptids are being secretly held. Lauren Grey is one of the cryptozoologists. It's 60's San Francisco. A young couple stumbles upon the zoo. The guy Mathew is killed by an unicorn. Amber is forced to kill the unicorn.

This adult animation is unlike anything in the mainstream. It very much reminds me of the outsider art of the 70's. It is a bit chaotic to the point of overwhelming the audience. This is not animation for the kids. It is the best aspect of this film. I would suggest a more cleaner and clearer story. It may be the effect of the visuals which is discombobulating my brain.

When it comes to animation, far too many people have been lulled into the high budget, near perfect beauty of computer animated film. While it is certainly a spectacle of hard work and computer know-how, it tends to overpower all other forms of animation. Several great films with far more complex narratives have been overshadowed by films about talking toys and sentient cars. If anything, a lot of people miss out on what animation can provide.

Cryptozoo isn't necessarily an award worthy film, but it is one that is worth a watch. The narrative is pretty interesting. During the onset of the 1970s California, people are seeking to save unusual, mythical animals that they have labeled "cryptids." Due to the rare and unusual nature of these creatures, plenty of bad actors are seeking these creatures for nefarious means. From a political standpoint, the thought of the military as a stand-in bad guy is okay, but the usual reasoning is pretty basic. They want these creatures for military applications, even though many of the creatures would be hard to utilize in this manner. I get the fact the military is a great defacto bad guy, but I think something else would have worked better. Either way, our two main characters Lauren and Phoebe are racing to find a rare and unusual cryptid known as a Baku, which feasts off dreams regardless if they are good or bad. The military application would be a little far fetched, as in the Baku's power could be harnessed to steal the dreams of rabble rousers and counter culture extremists.

Personally, this is the only aspect of the story I kind of roll my eyes at. It sounds reasonable, but let's face it. Societal change and declarations are massive concepts, and it would take a lot of kidnapping to even make this an effective tool. It's also a bit suspect they would even be able to develop a way to turn this ability into a weapon before the societal movement shifts. Nixon pretty much proved that all you need is racism and well timed pandering to crush a political upheaval.

Since we are on the subject of politics, the film accidentally (or intentionally?) takes a collective pimp slap against the subject of feminism, or more directly white feminism. Essentially, this means the white perspective believes they have some form of moral authority over all other spectrums of the feminist movement. It's fully on display in the film when the protagonists believe a "zoo" and giving disenfranchised populations "jobs" would ease the acceptance of the said group. This has been pretty much debunked, especially when it comes to creating a subservient class of people to the dominant class. Anyway, it was interesting to see their rose colored perspective blow up in their faces, though the initial challenges to that perspective were a bit non-existent in the story.

Anyway, aside from the weird political takes, the ending was honestly the weakest part of the film. Amidst the conflict and build-up, it just ends. Of course, you can't really push this story too much further but it feels like it was cut short, and maybe that is the crux of the story. Lauren takes on a less self righteous position in society, but it is clear she is haunted by the failure. Either way, the story is interesting and the animation is pretty artistic. Its not the worst thing you can do with an hour and a half of your time.

Cryptozoo is one that fascinated me even before watching. Cryptozookeepers try to capture a Baku, a dream-eating hybrid creature of legend, and start wondering if they should display these beasts or keep them hidden and unknown. The movie is entirely animated in an interesting style in a way the story couldn't be told any other way. As creative as an idea Crytozoo may be, the final product didn't always work out the way it should. Of course, the animation is the stand-out of it all. It's very unique and has moments that are just beautiful. Specifically the end of the second act and most of the third happen to be the most interesting visually and story-wise. Most of the movie is based on how strange it is so we lose the characters and why the stakes are so high. One character named Phoebe is the only one that I really connected with. She's a cryptid so we get her point of view on the subject. There are many themes of zoos and animal cruelty which is a good aspect to think about. Also, symbolism and ideas from well know stories - like Adam and Eve - are prevalent throughout. Even though the most striking aspect of the movie is animation, I wonder if the animation were "better animated" the effect would be different in some cases, but that really isn't an issue. This is quite an entertaining watch solely based on curiosity of it all. Most people are divided on this, but it seems they like it more than they didn't like it. I will revisit this in the future to see if the feeling is still the same. Overall, it's alright but should've been better.

A veterinarian and her friend decide to save cryptids from the depredations of the world. For those of you unfamiliar with the term, a cryptid is a beast which science hasn't proven exists, but which is believed to exist by many people: the yeti is one; the chupacabra is another. For the purposes of this movie, cryptids include a variety of fabulous creatures like fauns, dragons, medusas and will-o-the-wisps. The plans of these women is to start an exhibition park, where people will pay to see these creatures; once familiar with them, acceptance will be the next step.

You can't have a story without a villain -- actually you can -- and here the villain is a fellow who wants to weaponize these creatures for the military, and who has plenty of soldiers with guns, tanks, and poorly drawn helicopters to enforce his scheme. In the end, both plans fail, and the best course of action, it turns out, is to leave these beings alone; they've been doing fine for a long time without these geniuses. Or, as I heard the Einstein quote beautifully mangled, "If there weren't so many people trying to solve problems, we wouldn't have so many problems to solve."

This movie, despite its good intentions, annoyed me on many levels. The first was the easy choice of making the military the villain. The second was the general idiocy, the going 'round Robin Hood's barn to conclude that the best thing to have done at the end would have been nothing in the first place. Finally, I did not enjoy the unpolished nature of the images, the quarter animation. I understand that this was an independent production, and that the producers wrought miracles to raise enough money to make this unfortunately crude cartoon, the most expensive type of movie making. Given my dissatisfaction with the story, however, this just added to my general impression.