Romeo & Juliet: Sealed with a Kiss

You may ask, "If Romeo & Juliet: Sealed with a Kiss broke 'good' and 'bad', why did you rate it a 6/10?" Well, after much thought, I have come to the conclusion that this movie defies the exercise of judging a movie- completely. We have all known that rating movies has been wishywashy opinions colored by our individual contexts- and that is at its very best. It's not a science by any means. That being said, I still think this movie dives even deeper into how little: ratings, "good", "bad", stars ,and various meters do not matter.

I have grown accustomed to putting heavy stock into two things which rarely lead me astray. The first, asking myself what the creator of the movie attempted to do. This is necessary because one would not count it a negative for a romance if it could not scare you, but you would certainly judge a horror movie poorly if it were purely benign.

Secondly, and less importantly, I bring my own taste to the movie. I ask myself if it speaks to me. If I could bring another person's taste to a screening then I would most definitely make the switch- but until that great day this is the only way I can judge. It may speak to someone else more profoundly than myself and that is wonderful, but I could only feel what I personally feel with any accuracy. I am the audience. And art, to some extent, is about swaying the audience into feeling something.

So, I try to do my best in weighing the former more heavily than the latter while performing this exercise with every movie. And there are many more considerations as you very well know.

That is fine and dandy- until you watch Romeo & Juliet: Sealed with a Kiss. It all goes out the window. The Godfather is easy to judge. The much maligned Cat in the Hat (2003) is easy to judge. But why is this movie so difficult?

It has its flaws: jittery animation, plot logic, inconsistencies, dialogue mistakes and the like. All correctly judged. Many people on this very platform have pointed those out. But the main question arises once more doesn't it? What did the creator intend?

If you did not know, this movie had one creative voice- Phil Nibbelink. He did the directing on this movie-and the writing -and was the entire editing department- and the art department- and the animation department- and did some of the acting.

And after years of hard work he did the best with the little resources he had and put out this movie. What did he intend? I believe he intended to make an emotional story. I believe he wanted to make something for children. I believe he wanted to make a sentimental movie that would shine brighter than its limitations.

And did he achieve that goal? Did he sway me to feel what was intended?

Absolutely- without a doubt. Could the animation have been better? Sure. The dialogue? Yeah. Was some dialogue muddled? Oh yeah. Could they have stuck closer to Shakespeare's original vision? Sure.

And because of that, if I'm pressed, I cannot possibly score this very highly. But let us not forget to ask, "Did the creator make what he intended?" Yes. Did he make me feel something? Yes, by design.

And though it might make people fume in rage and though it might break the hearts of Shakespeare's die hard fans- It's a laugh. Sometimes I laughed at it. Sometimes I laughed with it. The joke where the Friar is literally frying different things in his spare time is just the most hilarious thing to me. The backgrounds were moody and pure emotion (by necessity.) The characters were emotive and relatable.

Yes, critics, you can see where the animation took shortcuts. Yes, it's incredibly dated. Yes, I looked at my watch a few times during this movie. Yes, I have no idea how some things were resolved. But it was all intentional- by golly! And it made me-feel things.

seriously, the singing and voices are really annoying! what's the point on letting young children watch a film about two seals that fall in love and talk stuff, it is REALLY annoying, i just wish i forgot about this film forever, that and 'time bandits (1981)' there's also a fish that talks like a baby and a fat seal for an antagonist, why concern these things when nobody understands that awkward films aren't my number one! i hated it, IT'S THE WORST FILM EVER EXISTING ON THIS TURNING PLANET OF Africa, ASIA, AND FREAKIN' America!!!!!!!! as for the director, he doesn't care, all he cares is his arctic drama ideas that everyone hates, spread the word, kids: SEALS ARE BAD FILMMAKERS!!

While William Shakespeare's Romeo & Juliet is one of the writer's most popular works of art, the film adaptations have varied in quality over the years. Arguably one of the most infamous takes on the source would have to be the arctic seal focused Romeo & Juliet: Sealed with a Kiss. Directed and entirely animated by former Disney animator Phil Nibbelink through his own independent company, the film has been heavily criticized over the years for being a poor take on the source material and has more so been cherished amongst the internet as something to poke fun at. In regards to how it was made, one can see why.

The film follows two star-crossed seals, Romeo and Juliet who fall in love in spite of the warring hatred their families face against each other. With that basic theme of love triumphing over blind sighted prejudice, the story has little to no engagement going on beyond its basic storyline. Despite a lot of tension between the two seal families against each other, there is hardly much development on either side to gain sympathy or genuine resentment towards. Even the presumably tyrannical prince elephant seal isn't fully realized enough to determine if he is a genuine threat to our leads or if he's a blubbering buffoon. To make matters worse, the attempts at comedy are annoying with Romeo's trouble making friend Mercutio, who never shuts up in his depressing attempts at yucking up the scenery. You know your characters range from annoyingly bland to downright annoying when whatever stakes that do pop up feel more like a blessing than something to feel concerned about. One has to wonder why any of the characters are seals when the whole setting could have taken place anywhere in the first place.

Now to give credit where credit is due, considering that this entire movie was made by Nibbelink himself, it is impressive how he was able to craft the whole feature from scratch. Despite some unappealing cutesy character designs and some occasionally dated compositing, the character animation is highly expressive and full of energy around the arctic environments. Even some of the color choices are appropriately chosen to fit the tonal shifts, complete with some well drawn backgrounds and creative effects animation. That being said, one can tell when the animation switches from frame by frame to rigged in the blink of an eye. Outside of that, that's where the positives end, as even the best animation can't save this snoozefest of a Shakespearre tale. On top of stereotypically generic voice acting that feels more like cartoon impressions than genuine performances, it is often painfully obvious whenever you hear stock production music throughout the background. I understand utilizing the most of your resources, but people will forgive bad visuals long before they'll forgive bad audio.

In summary, Romeo & Juliet: Sealed with a Kiss fails as both an alternative take on the Shakespeare tragedy and a stand alone introduction to the material thanks to its paper thin story, cloying characters and obvious small production values. However, it might be best to acknowledge this feature as an early footnote to independent animation produced by industry veterans when we are seeing more and more personal projects coming to light. No matter how poorly made a first attempt may be in that regard, products like this are worth appreciating for the good they do in the long run.

I was shocked and surprised by the negative reviews I saw on the web. I thought this film by Phil Nibbelink (director of An American Tail: Fievel Goes West) was marvellous from the moment I saw the trailer. I also love seals.

I have always been a fan of William Shakespeare's works, ever since I first studied them in my high school English classes. Also, I wholeheartedly agree with Laura Tiffany of "Home Media Magazine" and Rick Bentley of "Fresno Bee" that "Sealed with a Kiss" is an impressive and heartwarming film that is sure to delight audiences of all ages. Overall, I give this film a big A+ for great backgrounds, excellent color styling, and very good music. Overall, I give this film a big A+ for great backgrounds, excellent color styling, and very good music.

Before I went into watching this film I read a bit about it from other viewers and based on what they said I had pretty low expectations for it. But after viewing the whole thing I've come to the realization... it's not that bad. The animation is really well done and the story is filled with Shakespeare jokes that any thespian or theater buff will get a good chuckle out of. Not that there aren't problems with it though. The voice acting and singing can often range from good, mediocre, or just plain bad. The characters themselves are all moderately enjoyable except for one in particular... a fish called Kissy(you'll know her when you see her and you'll either love or hate her).

If you're looking for a movie to entertain your kids or to just kill some time I'd recommend this to you but be forewarned, this is the kind of movie you'll either hate or like.

I give Romeo & Juliet: Sealed with a Kiss a 6.5/10 leaning towards a 7.