A Fox's Tale

...and now, something completely different: the same nightmare with English voices: "A Fox's Tale (2008)" = "Kis Vuk (2008)" -> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0830861/ This so-called CG-movie is just not what it seems. Lets take a closer look (careful!), at first glance it looks like a CG-movie, with some cartoon animals and stuff. However, it is substandard by all means. A grand insult against the Hungarian CG- and cartoon industry. Quality is not amateurish - it would put a shame on most of the amateurs who ever tried to make a coloured teapot in 3dsmax. A clear show-off that nobody gave a fox about how it would be a movie. It was just business. And they had the money before they done anything with it. A flagship of the money laundering system, where politicians and producers steal from the citizens on every level of life. This is not a cartoon-film for children. This is a triumph of corruption.

Kis Vuk is probably the worst animation sequel ever made. The first episode was a classic cartoon created by Attila Dargay in 1981. It had a remarkable Hungarian and international career, and a whole generation grown up on it.

In spite of the new project had enough money, the quality of graphic is ridiculous in 2008. Not just the scenes and characters are obsolete, but the animation of characters is unnatural and amateurish. This sequel is a mockery of the original movie and it is a shame for the creators.

The Hungarian animation industry has a lot of talents and qualitative products, Kis Vuk is an exception.

First of all, this movie is at the bottom 100 at IMDb already, but with the Hungarian name ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0830861/ ).

So, the director saw, what a piece of .... he made, and try to re-distribute it under an English title. You can see the comments on the other one, this is what I can say here too. The original Vuk was an all time classic, this one is a waste of money. Early 90's level animation, no storyline. Strange as it is, they had 1.6 billion Forints (10 mils USD) for this project, so they used it for something, but in a very eastern-European, non-professional way.

So, avoid it at all cost!! The only reason you'd be watching this is to get a good taste of how a movie can be awful!!

Back in 1984, the folks who went on to create Pixar brought out their first short film, "André and Wally B. ". Its use of CGI was amazing for its day and it led to great things...at least for Pixar. In contrast, "A Fox's Tale" came out in 2008...and looked pretty similar in CGI quality to "André and Wally B."--which is appalling, as by 2008 CGI had improved exponentially and films like "Ratatouille" and "WALL-E" were the new norm. Yet, inexplicably, "A Fox's Tale" looks decades old and is just an incredibly cheap and ugly film.

This cheapness and ugliness of "A Fox's Tale" is exactly why it ended up on IMDB's old Bottom 100 list--the 100 lowest rated films on the website. However, the criteria for the list recently changed...and films required at least 10,000 votes to make the list....and "A Fox's Tale" only currently has about 8300 votes. Now a few years ago, I tried to find this film because I was trying to see as many of the old Bottom 100 as I could...and only recently has the film come to YouTube...so better late than never. Or, perhaps not.

So despite having very dated CGI, is the film worth seeing? No. The main problem is that the CGI is so ugly that watching it is a real chore. An ugly short film is bad enough...but in this case you have 85 minutes of eye-bleedingly ugly animation. Frankly, stick figures or sock puppets would have looked better! Then, when you add insipid songs, a story that is terrible and dead-looking humans that move like robots, it's a recipe for disaster...both for kids as well as adults. In fact, if I ever bought a copy of the film, it would be to use as punishment if my kids were bad...very, very, VERY bad!!

So is this the ugliest and most worthless CGI film I've ever seen? Well, that's tough call, as the standard of pure ugliness and awfulness is very low with films like "Foodfight!" also making this old Bottom 100 list. Suffice to say that it's about as bad as "Foodfight!" and is worthless in every possible way. An abysmal mess of a film that is so bad you have to see it to believe it! I score it 1 simply because IMDB doesn't allow 0.Pretty good computer animation for 1984...but it came out in 2008!

It is exactly the same movie as "Kis Vuk" (http://www.IMDb.com/title/tt0830861/) The only difference is, it's with English dubbing. Doesn't make the "story" and the "quality" of the "animation" any better.

Sad thing is, that the original piece, "Vuk" is a wonderful tale from 1981 and the creators of this new thing only used the original title for marketing purposes. Same reason why they have it up on IMDb under a new title for the English dubbing. It's a shame that they can do it!

I definitely don't recommend watching it, unless you wanna feel the pain each and every one of us had to suffer when we tried to watch it. My 5 years old niece almost cried by the end of it, she was terrified by the fox and some of the other animals too. The fox's eyes look evil! How can that happen to a movie supposedly made for children?

The old Vuk is a classic piece, I'd watch it anytime, but this one? Thanks, but no thanks!