Could Be One Of The Worst Films Ever Made!

Agreed. This film was badly made, poorly acted, terribly directed and misconceived on many levels. It was, however, visually amazing in places. As the first scenes played out before the credits I thought that perhaps this film was going to live up to the hype of the cover – a dream movie, free from plot, combining the best of French and Japanese animation.

Unfortunately the director’s decision to combine actors with poorly rendered CGI characters was mystifying at best, incredibly distracting at worst. It was ugly and jarring. Perhaps with a lot more money it could have been better, but the plot was so ridiculously convoluted and boring I just gave up caring at about the point the main character starts ruminating over his need to rape the character of Jill. Ok, so comic strips and crap CGI movies like this are generally tasteless, but there was so little to justify such crass ugliness I wondered what on earth the director thought he was doing.

This film deserved to go straight to DVD where it will die a justified death.

If you thought *this* lowered your IQ, i'd hate to think what the TRULY bad ones would to do you. Go watch Manos, the Hands of Fate. I suspect you might melt.

Although I didn't get the full story and all before reading comments and explanations, when I saw the movie for the first time - and I had no idea about it, except from the cover- I found the story interesting, teh acting not bad and the animated city amazing plus I liked Jills whole styling, it just looked amazing. I like most movies, so maybe I am easy to please, but I liked it a lot.

Ha, I wasn't suprised reading some of the comments here. Some people obviously need their film experience to be 'spoon fed' to them, preferably in very mushy Apple Pie flavour if you get my meaning!

You shouldn't take offence at certain peoples reaction to this very fine example of offbeat Sci-fi, you should find it VERY reassuring that they are flabberghasted by what it's all about, and their only critisism seems to be pointless nit-picking about certain elements of the film.

It's A cult classic in my book! :-)

After reading much of this thread, I can say that the most consistent complaint about this movie is that it leaves a lot unexplained.

That, to me, was the best part.

The best stories don't hand you everything in a neat, shiny plastic container, like cell phone accessories come in. Neat delineations, "this is the story, this is the whole story, this is nothing but the story", that leave nothing for the mind of the audience to contribute, are the signs of the McDonald's of storytelling. Sure, they'll fill you up, and you'll go away with that satisfied feeling that enough MSG and fat can give you, but talk about unhealthy!

Personally, I liked the incompleteness of the story. The jarring contrast of CGI and real people. The lack of background for the characters.

It's like stretching exercises for the mind.

I don't expect many people to understand that, much less agree with it.

im not one to force my opinions on others, and i hardly ever consider a movie "Bad" because its all subjective. But this movie was one that was seriously flawed in so many aspects, and it amazes me that some people actually stick up for this rotten apple, rationalizing and justifying some of the most glaring flaws...

the one thing i can't get around is how people can say the CG characters were passable. Had this been a fully CG movie, it would have failed miserably amongst other movies of its kind. The full CGI characters were badly rendered and animated. The least they could have done was motion capture. The CG characters looked incredibly stiff. Final Fantasy: Spirits Within, flawed but still enjoyable, was amazing and that was made years EARLIER!! Then there is Advent Children (which was god awful in my opinion) where the CG, though spotchy and inconsistent, achieved greater believabilty. And that Tom Hanks movie, the Polar Express? At least the CG was consistant. Same goes with the CG short in the Animatrix. There is absolutely NO excuse for putting POORLY rendered AND animated human characters alongside human actors. It breaks the continuity of the world it sets and looks like a badly put together collage. And no one should be arguing budget constraints like "they couldn't afford to pay actors" either because it costs more to create, render, and animate full CG humanoids. The makeup route or partial CG route would have been much cheaper.

On the otherside of things, the CG for the backgrounds and the design of the world was amazing. Its a shame they did not apply the same amount of Love and Care into the CG characters.

The plot had such an interesting concept, but failed to go anywhere interesting, and the screenplay left a lot of things unanswered or brought the viewers to several dead ends. "Leaving things to the imagination of the Audience" is no excuse for poor writing. Open ends should be scarce and not detract from the flow of the storytelling. There were pointless charactarizations, such as the senator and his assistant Liang... The inspector with the mutilated face... They merely show up as means of exposition, if even for that at all!

all said and done, i have taken into consideration the fact that it was based off a comic which had a more fleshed out world. This movie would have been better off as a TV series or a serial. As it is, this is one serious mess of a movie.

I thought it was a great movie! For many reasons.

The thing about this movie is that it is non-linear.
From the posted comments, it appears as if most of the people who didn't like it are linear thinkers - they like a beginning, a middle, and an end.
To appreciate this film you have to think outside the conventional structure.
Why can't a movie start in the middle and go nowhere?
Rimbaud was writing non-linear prose poetry back in the nineteenth century.
French writers and artists and philosophers have given us a lot of original thought - Surrealism and Existentialism started in France. (Some people say Existentialism started with Nietschze, but the real action was in France.)
Sorry for rambling, but to appreciate this film you have to throw out all your conventional expectations about what a film should be and what it should do.
We need linear thought, we can't live without it.
But it is a great adventure when we can step outside it.