When the very first preview of this movie came out, both my brother and I remember it being pronounced “Ant Z”. Much later when the movie came out I heard reviews that said “Ants”.
The movie is about an ant named Z, and of course the title is spelled with a Z instead of an S.
Are we remembering the name wrong? How is it really supposed to be pronounced?
A Bug’s Life was much better than Antz… if you happen to be six years old.
Antz at least tried to say something about insect psychology, and had some great morbid humor, and got the number of legs right. Bug’s Life was just yet another glossy Disney movie with an anthropomorphic cast. Or arthropomorphic, as the case may be.
I really didn’t like A Bugs life for the above mentioned reasons. A boss of mine at the last company I worked for loved it. This was a source of irritation for him, the fact I thought AntZ was better, far better, then A bugs life. I never liked that guy. He was in charge of the creative direction for a few games. They sucked. I suppose it might make a good interview question for any job that requires taste and/or a creative side; Which movie was better?
yep. That little battle hymm as the columns march off… “the ants go marching two by two hurrah, hurrah.” Gave me chills.
The gang-of-misfits-working-together-to-overcome-the-bullies (a la mighty ducks) of Bug’s Life was a lot more trite than the more serious social commentary of Antz. It was also a lot funnier, hence its’ greater popularity.
The last time I listened to people telling me that the shitty one of a set of similar movies wasn’t that bad, I ended up gouging my eyes out as Frodo outran a tsunami on a moped.
To clarify, I don’t think A Bug’s Life is a bad movie. I just think it’s intended for children, where Antz is written toward an adult level. About the only thing they have in common is that they’re CGI, and about ants. This superficial coincidence has led to a lot of people futiley attempting to determine which is the better of two fundamentally different films.
Nah, I think it was more popular because it played better for kids. Antz was a movie for adults, which means that it was lost on most kids because the humor was over their heads and they had no hope of getting any of the social commentary. But it was also animated, which means that it was lost on most adults because so many adults (in the US anyway) have this retarded bias against animation as a medium, and will only permit themselves to enjoy an animated film if it’s for kids, but throws in some stuff to keep the 'rents occupied as well.
Those two movies were both shitty (and if my friend vacationing in Thailand could outrun a Tsunami on foot, I bet it was easier on a moped).
A Bugs Life is the better animation accomplishment and has more outright jokes - everybody expected Antz to suck or at least look bad compared to a Pixar movie, but it had a better story and a more adult focus. I liked both (and of all the Pixar movies in my house, the five year old never asks for A Bugs Life, which kinda sets it in its place in the Pixar pantheon)
Glad to hear your friend made it, but as you’ll recall, Deep Impact’s tsunami was several orders of magnitude larger.
No they didn’t. A Bug’s Life was Pixar’s second movie, they didn’t have the reputation they do now. I remember a lot more hype for Antz because it had the all star cast.