Score: 7

"Original"

submission: Abstract cartoon (new)

date: February 20, 2006

That was unique... good job, champ!

Score: 3

"Ranting"

submission: Service Announcement 2

date: February 16, 2006

I hope you realize why your first entry had no impact.
The ad hominem fallacies in your argument destroy the impace of your piece.

A technical note:
You spoke too fast. Slow it down.

Score: 6

"You should make more"

submission: Sniper Jeans

date: February 11, 2006

The word is fictional, not fictionary. You could have used fictitious as well.

Score: 8

"Close to being the best thing around"

submission: Neighboring Nations

date: February 10, 2006

Damn fine piece of animation. The art was flawless, wonderful use of character animation. It never felt like a "flash animation." The song was hilarious. The title wsa confusing. I didn't realize it was part of a series. The pacing in the teaser was indicative of the pacing in the entire piece, which could have been better. Everything happened too fast. It didn't seem like Peter even got a good look at the man's penis. Peter's reaction needed to established better before the dialogue could start. The ending was what really wrecked it for me. The las three shots had no meaning to me. Until that point, however, the episode was amazing.

Score: 10

"Violence that made sense"

submission: Smile!

date: February 8, 2006

It is nice to see violence work with the metaphor of the piece. Too often on this site do artists just have violence for violence's sake. I hope that the author is still alive to make more animation, because this was astounding. Everything worked, as I mentioned, the violence, the humor, the pacing, the visuals, the audio.

Score: 7

"Swapping Cliches"

submission: Days Of Our Lamps

date: February 8, 2006

Yes, the contect was cliched. It wasn't a pointless orgy of violence though. Congrats!

Score: 2

"Are you kidding me?"

submission: Bright Eyes

date: February 8, 2006

Beautiful animation. It looked like one of the shots was rotoscoped. If it was, the author did an amazing job. If it wasn't, I am even more impressed. Perfect use of techniques.
However, the message was cliche. I am shocked that the author felt this was a relevant topic. Last time I checked, the cold war had ended, and North Korea's nuclear capablities were restricted greatly by their range. If anything, I am disappointed that someone as talented enough to make a piece as beautiful as this was would waste their talent making 20-year-old social commentary.

Score: 7

"Great submission, room for improvement"

submission: Time Squad [Part 1]

date: February 8, 2006

I was very impressed with the overall procudtion quality of the submission. The only complaint I would make is that the narrative becomes repetitive when they go into the apocalyptic world. I think--this is just my opinion--that because you don't develop the evil doctor character, the viewer begins to doubt why the characters are chasing him. I thought to myself, why doesn't the doctor just jump into a new time right after he jumps into the future. Doing that, he would loose Blockhead and his friends. If you gave him a reason to stay in the future and allowed Blockhead and his friends to catch him, the story would improve greatly. Remember to justify your characters actions. Your animation style is good; your storytelling needs to catch up.