You will be redirected back to your article in seconds
Back to IndieWire



Like many other recent animated features, Epic leaves the viewer shaking his
head, saddened at the thought of the many artists who worked so hard to create
something ultimately unworthy of their talents. It’s not a disaster or an
embarrassment like Hoodwinked or Barnyard, but given the experience and
abilities of Chris Wedge and Blue Sky artists, it should be better.

Mary “M.K.” Katherine (Amanda Seyfried) joins her eccentric
father Professor Bomba in his laboratory-home after the death of her mother,
who’s mentioned only as a plot contrivance. Bomba has dedicated his life to
proving that miniature civilizations exist in nearby forest. When M.K. chases her
three-legged pug into the woods, she learns her father is right: There are two
mini-cultures. Queen Tara (Beyonce Knowles) of the Leafmen has just chosen the
mysterious pod that will bloom under the full moon of the solstice and continue
the Spirit of the Forest. Until then, the comics Mub the slug (Aziz Ansari) and
Grub the snail (Chris O’Dowd) must keep it most. When members of the nasty Boggans
tribe mortally wound the Queen, she somehow shrinks M.K. to bug size and
charges her with protecting the pod.

Working with M.K. are Ronin (Colin Farrell), the Queen’s stalwart
guard; irresponsible, rowdy Nod (Josh Hutcherson); and mellowed-out
caterpillar-librarian Nim Galuu (Steven Tyler of Aerosmith, apparently trying
to channel Jeff Bridges in The Big
). King Mandrake (Christoph Waltz) leads the Boggans on an attack to
steal the pod, threatening the forest with destruction. M.K. helps recapture
the pod after the predictable reconciliation with her father. It’s hardly a
spoiler to reveal the pod opens and the new queen restores MK to her proper

The backgrounds are often striking handsome: The lush ferns
and flowers that open in patterns in the Leafman’s kingdom juxtapose nicely
with the dead trees, bolls and galls of the Boggans’ realm. Unfortunately, the
backgrounds are  often more interesting
than what’s happening in front of them.

Although six people have story and/or screenplay credit, the
plot feels like pieces of other films insecurely stitched together. The secret miniature
world and its inhabitants recall Ferngully,
Ant Bully and other bug’s eye POV movies.
M.K. is yet another feisty red-haired heroine; her father Professor Bomba is a
cliche-ed idiot savant scientist who can’t see the problem right under his
nose. Although he’s not nearly as well animated, Nod looks and talks too much
like in Flynn in Tangled–yet another
dashing, undisciplined rogue with a heart of gold.

Nor is the story particularly well told. A horde of Boggans
swarms over Ronin during a battle,  but
he re-appears several scenes later, brushing off a few scratches. How did he
get away? Comic gastropods shouldn’t trade playground insults during dramatic
scenes that are supposed to build tension. That’s Filmmaking 1A: Rosencrantz
and Guildenstern don’t interrupt Hamlet’s soliloquy.

But the biggest problem with the story is its misunderstanding
of the natural world. Except for a few throw-away lines from Mandrake at the
beginning, there’s no sense of the essential balance of nature. The Boggans and
the Leafmen aren’t irreconcilable enemies: Birth and growth can’t take place
without death and decay. Miyazaki suggested this principle succinctly in Princess Mononoke when each step of the
Deer-God’s hooves caused plants to arise, blossom and wither; The Lion King cited “the Circle of


I left Epic
shaking my head, saddened at the thought of the artists whose talents deserved
a more worthy project.

This Article is related to: Reviews and tagged , ,


Chuck Kollars

Yep, the story was a bit of a mish-mash with no consistent philosophy and heavy (perhaps _too_ heavy) reliance on stereotypes. And the comic relief seemed focussed on fourteen-year-olds (although that may be a good thing – for once it didn't make me feel like an "old fart":-)

But I for one found the animation _glorious_. The uniqueness of each plant and the level of detail were beyond anything I've seen that was still identifiable as "animation". (CGI uses like in "Life of Pi" illustrate that the technology is not what defines an animation any more – it's something else.)

I was really surprised by the end credits too. I was expecting the many many hundreds of names I've seen at the end of other recent animations. But this one didn't show nearly so many names. Are computers doing almost all the work now with fewer animators to drive them? Or did they suppress the names of the junior contributors? Or…?


just got back from seeing it. the film would have been much better with Peter Wheat.

Cathy Joritz

"But the biggest problem with the story is its misunderstanding of the natural world."

Yes, and a cliché misunderstanding of that world, at that! Just looking at the image on this page, I found it regrettable that, yet again, the crow is shown as the "bad" bird even though we know crows are remarkably intelligent (they even make and use tools!), have large extended families they keep in touch with for years, and have – natch! – great memories.

A bit of research might have prodded someone to alter at least that cliché role and, as a result, create a truly original character. I won't even start on the red-headed girl…

Aaron V Steimle

This description reminds me a lot of Quest for Camelot. It had loads of features and parts that could have made for a great (and even innovative) animated film, but it was marred by some inexplicably poor choices, including the 2-creature (head) comedy relief. It's like there might be a true treasure in there, buried under all the public/family appeal feces.


Don't forget the dark complected villains that Roger Ebert always bemoaned in children's films.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *