I came back from the movie excited and full of theories and ideas, like a usual knee-jerk reaction to something I found 'really cool!' and 'awesome!' I scribbled the main character everywhere and wrote down blurbs about his history and stuff to keep track of it, tried to mimic some of the worlds and lands I got from the movie. I just especially loved the idea of Jack Frost, and the way the movie was animated- super flowy and dynamic. Expressions were amazing.
Then I read some internet reviews. Nothing kills enthusiasm quite as quickly as some snarky critic giving something you genuinely enjoyed a 0/4 on rotten tomatoes. It wasn't even good snark. Just a lot of things about 'cliches' and 'empty stories' and 'very shallow lessons' and 'i don't know who the sandman is kids dont either.'
Wow. I just have to agree to disagree. The amount of backstory and worldbuilding effort that was apparent just from one watch through indicates at least some level of depth, and the final line 'believe in the guardians' doesn't exactly mean cruelly commanding innocent tykes to put faith in imaginary badass russian santa claus. Because it is a story and not an aesop, there does not have to be an aesop, this does not mean it is consumerism. Objectively, (give me a break here, ok) the story could have been told better, and I didn't think this was the most amazing movie I'd seen, but it was solid, and plenty fascinating. I just wanted to start a bit of a discussion. Was it because I was imagining a couple of scenarios at any given time as soon as I started getting a grip on the direction of the story? I genuinely don't know, but I feel like all the official critics missed something essential, especially if they got no enjoyment at all. At what point does cynicism become blinding? Also objectively: they should have focused more on character development instead of frenetically jumping scenes and places, but I just didn't care. This has been a review. <— mild facepalm