list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around James and the Giant Peach on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/James_and_the_Giant_Peach/92709/default.aspx Title: James and the Giant Peach
Year: 1996
Director: Henry Selick
Plot: A young boy's discovery of a gigantic peach triggers an eventful journey across the sea in this strikingly designed and surprisingly twisted animated adventure. A live-action framing device establishes the dark yet fanciful mood one might expect from an adaptation of a Roald Dahl story, as young British lad James (Paul Terry) is orphaned by the death of his parents and forced to live with two cruel, repulsive aunts (played by noted British character actors Miriam Margolyes and Joanna Lumley of British TV hit Absolutely Fabulous). The visit of a mysterious stranger provides a means of escape, however, through a magic bag of "crocodile tongues" that bring about the appearance of the giant peach. The curious James soon winds up inside the fruit, at which point his body changes, and the film switches to a combination of stop-motion and digital animation. The new James meets up with a group of talking, oversized insects, including a vampish spider (voiced by Susan Sarandon), a sarcastic centipede (voiced by Richard Dreyfuss), and a matronly ladybug (voiced by Jane Leeves). These creatures become his traveling companions when the peach rolls into the Atlantic Ocean, and James and his new friends must brave a variety of dangers to reach the shore. Director Henry Selick provides further proof of the visual skill he demonstrated in The Nightmare Before Christmas, creating a fascinating, often eerie alternate universe, while Randy Newman provides the upbeat musical accompaniment. Young children may be disturbed by the story's creepier overtones, but the mixture of remarkable visuals, oddball characters, and off-kilter fantasy will appeal to all other audiences. ~ Judd Blaise, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 23
Number of Lists: 18
Number of blog posts: 1
Number of discussion threads: 3
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 20:36:57 GMTJames and the Giant Peach1996Henry SelickA young boy's discovery of a gigantic peach triggers an eventful journey across the sea in this strikingly designed and surprisingly twisted animated adventure. A live-action framing device establishes the dark yet fanciful mood one might expect from an adaptation of a <a href="/players/P___159540/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Roald Dahl</a> story, as young British lad James (<a href="/players/P___113883/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Paul Terry</a>) is orphaned by the death of his parents and forced to live with two cruel, repulsive aunts (played by noted British character actors <a href="/players/P____45420/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Miriam Margolyes</a> and <a href="/players/P____43740/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Joanna Lumley</a> of British TV hit <a href=/films/202233/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Absolutely Fabulous</a>). The visit of a mysterious stranger provides a means of escape, however, through a magic bag of "crocodile tongues" that bring about the appearance of the giant peach. The curious James soon winds up inside the fruit, at which point his body changes, and the film switches to a combination of stop-motion and digital animation. The new James meets up with a group of talking, oversized insects, including a vampish spider (voiced by <a href="/players/P____63158/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Susan Sarandon</a>), a sarcastic centipede (voiced by <a href="/players/P____88268/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Richard Dreyfuss</a>), and a matronly ladybug (voiced by Jane Leeves). These creatures become his traveling companions when the peach rolls into the Atlantic Ocean, and James and his new friends must brave a variety of dangers to reach the shore. Director <a href="/players/P___110736/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Henry Selick</a> provides further proof of the visual skill he demonstrated in <a href=/films/81021/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>The Nightmare Before Christmas</a>, creating a fascinating, often eerie alternate universe, while <a href="/players/P___104393/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Randy Newman</a> provides the upbeat musical accompaniment. Young children may be disturbed by the story's creepier overtones, but the mixture of remarkable visuals, oddball characters, and off-kilter fantasy will appeal to all other audiences. ~ Judd Blaise, All Movie Guide23Tag Target (>10)18133http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t07866c6z7y.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/James_and_the_Giant_Peach/92709/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/the_mow/archive/2009/7/17/43153.aspx Post By: The_MOW
Post To: The_MOW Blog
Post Date: 7/17/2009 4:36:57 PM
Body: Based on the popular, yet sometimes controversial children's book by James Dahl, we follow "James" (Paul Terry) from his menial life with his mean aunts, the oddly named "Spiker" (Joanna Lumley) and her sister "Sponge" (Miriam Margoyles, who lends her voice to "Glowworm" in the animated segment). The young boy dreams of one day going to New York City to see the biggest building in the world, the Empire State Building. However, his aunts want to keep him in their home as nothing more than a maid. One day, "James" meets an old man (Pete Postlethwaite) who offers him a bag of what he calls "aligator tongues". These strange glowing, green animated things changes a peach in his aunts' garden, and causes it to grow to unbelievable proportions. Another one enters "James'" mouth, and changes him (into the animated version of the character) as well. "James" climbs into the now giant peach and meets a group of insects which live inside it. One of these insects, "Miss Spider" (voiced by Susan Sarandon), "James" saved from extermination when his aunts found her and her web inside the house. The young boy and his new friends free the peach from the garden, sending it rolling through the town and, eventually, into the ocean. They determine, in an unrealistic way, that the peach is on a direct route to New York City, but the trip is far from easy. If you ask me, adults will lose interest while watching this film. There really is nothing for adults in this movie. The jokes are childish, and just about everything is forgettable in this movie. While watching this film, I noticed that I was starting more attention to my computer than the film as it progressed. The one thing that adults might enjoy is the unusual look of the film. From the wardrobes of some of the major characters, to the animation, everything is pretty unique. It is painfully obvious that the entire movie was filmed on soundstages. I don't even remember seeing any shots of the actual New York City to establish that they have reached their destination. However, the fabricated scenery lends greatly to the unique look of the film. However, I would have liked to have seen the movie end up in the actual "Big Apple" for at least a few scenes. Another thing that is completely forgettable in this film is the movie's soundtrack. The songs, many of which are performed by characters in what appears to be random times, are so forgettable in fact, that I couldn't tell you one lyric in any of the songs. The performances in this movie is pretty weak as well. Just about every actor in the live-action segments seems to try to go over-the-top, but fail. Not one of the performances really stand out. What adults might like in this movie is the animation, which is done by the time-consuming stop-animation style. The movements of the animated characters is absolutely flawless and smooth. Also the style of the characters is reminiscent of "Tim Burton's The Nightmare before Christmas", which was made by the same people behind this film. In fact, there is a bit of a tribute to "Nightmare" in an underwater scene where a character wrongly references skeletons as "skellington", a reference to the lead character in "Nightmare." In fact, the ghostly remains of a pirate in this scene is actually "Jack Skellington" from "Nightmare". The voice cast does a pretty good job at bringing the animated characters to life. Each character has a fun personality. Even though their performances are not strong, the voice cast does a better job in performing than the ones in the live-action segments. For someone who has become an uncle since this movie was released to theaters, I can not see me spending the money for the DVD for my nieces. Also, based on what I saw in this movie, I can't see me purchasing the source material, the original novel, for them either.
]]>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 20:36:57 GMTThe_MOWThe_MOW Blog7/17/2009 4:36:57 PMBased on the popular, yet sometimes controversial children's book by James Dahl, we follow "James" (Paul Terry) from his menial life with his mean aunts, the oddly named "Spiker" (Joanna Lumley) and her sister "Sponge" (Miriam Margoyles, who lends her voice to "Glowworm" in the animated segment). The young boy dreams of one day going to New York City to see the biggest building in the world, the Empire State Building. However, his aunts want to keep him in their home as nothing more than a maid. One day, "James" meets an old man (Pete Postlethwaite) who offers him a bag of what he calls "aligator tongues". These strange glowing, green animated things changes a peach in his aunts' garden, and causes it to grow to unbelievable proportions. Another one enters "James'" mouth, and changes him (into the animated version of the character) as well. "James" climbs into the now giant peach and meets a group of insects which live inside it. One of these insects, "Miss Spider" (voiced by Susan Sarandon), "James" saved from extermination when his aunts found her and her web inside the house. The young boy and his new friends free the peach from the garden, sending it rolling through the town and, eventually, into the ocean. They determine, in an unrealistic way, that the peach is on a direct route to New York City, but the trip is far from easy. If you ask me, adults will lose interest while watching this film. There really is nothing for adults in this movie. The jokes are childish, and just about everything is forgettable in this movie. While watching this film, I noticed that I was starting more attention to my computer than the film as it progressed. The one thing that adults might enjoy is the unusual look of the film. From the wardrobes of some of the major characters, to the animation, everything is pretty unique. It is painfully obvious that the entire movie was filmed on soundstages. I don't even remember seeing any shots of the actual New York City to establish that they have reached their destination. However, the fabricated scenery lends greatly to the unique look of the film. However, I would have liked to have seen the movie end up in the actual "Big Apple" for at least a few scenes. Another thing that is completely forgettable in this film is the movie's soundtrack. The songs, many of which are performed by characters in what appears to be random times, are so forgettable in fact, that I couldn't tell you one lyric in any of the songs. The performances in this movie is pretty weak as well. Just about every actor in the live-action segments seems to try to go over-the-top, but fail. Not one of the performances really stand out. What adults might like in this movie is the animation, which is done by the time-consuming stop-animation style. The movements of the animated characters is absolutely flawless and smooth. Also the style of the characters is reminiscent of "Tim Burton's The Nightmare before Christmas", which was made by the same people behind this film. In fact, there is a bit of a tribute to "Nightmare" in an underwater scene where a character wrongly references skeletons as "skellington", a reference to the lead character in "Nightmare." In fact, the ghostly remains of a pirate in this scene is actually "Jack Skellington" from "Nightmare". The voice cast does a pretty good job at bringing the animated characters to life. Each character has a fun personality. Even though their performances are not strong, the voice cast does a better job in performing than the ones in the live-action segments. For someone who has become an uncle since this movie was released to theaters, I can not see me spending the money for the DVD for my nieces. Also, based on what I saw in this movie, I can't see me purchasing the source material, the original novel, for them either. http://www.spout.com/groups/I_Love_Childrens_Movies/Re_Whats_everyone_thinking_about_Coraline/372/40768/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: indieabby88
Post To: I Love Childrens Movies
Post Date: 3/1/2009 9:24:18 PM
Body: [quote user="seely"] I just saw a trailer for Coraline the other night and was pretty intrigued. I believe they said it was "hand drawn digital animation"--almost seems like a contradiction of terms but intriguing none-the-less. Anyone heard much about this or seen it? I'm hoping its not just another "visual masterpeice" with little or no substance beyond some snazzy animation. [/quote] Well, I saw the movie a couple of weeks ago, and I liked it, but I wasn't blown away. I loved the book back in high school, and I feel like a lot of what made it so effective was lost here. I'd have loved to see some of Dave McKean's influence (his illustrations are a big part of what made that book), and I feel like the animation, although it's obviously state-of-the-art, was too smooth. Part of the issue might have been the fact that I didn't see it in 3-D, so things might have looked a little flat. The reason I love stop-motion, and Henry Selick's older movies, is the evidence of human interference: slightly stilted movements, fingerprints, stuff like that. "James and the Giant Peach" remains one of my favorite movies to this day largely because of stuff like that. It looked scratchy, a tad creepy and off-kilter and wonderful. This movie had none of that. If you're going to make a stop-motion movie, make it look like a stop-motion movie. Otherwise, just go ahead and computer animate everything. That's my rant. Otherwise, I thought it was a good movie, worth seeing, and probably a better credit to Neil Gaiman's body of work than was "Stardust," although I gotta admit I did like that one.
]]>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:24:18 GMTindieabby88I Love Childrens Movies3/1/2009 9:24:18 PM[quote user="seely"] I just saw a trailer for Coraline the other night and was pretty intrigued. I believe they said it was "hand drawn digital animation"--almost seems like a contradiction of terms but intriguing none-the-less. Anyone heard much about this or seen it? I'm hoping its not just another "visual masterpeice" with little or no substance beyond some snazzy animation. [/quote] Well, I saw the movie a couple of weeks ago, and I liked it, but I wasn't blown away. I loved the book back in high school, and I feel like a lot of what made it so effective was lost here. I'd have loved to see some of Dave McKean's influence (his illustrations are a big part of what made that book), and I feel like the animation, although it's obviously state-of-the-art, was too smooth. Part of the issue might have been the fact that I didn't see it in 3-D, so things might have looked a little flat. The reason I love stop-motion, and Henry Selick's older movies, is the evidence of human interference: slightly stilted movements, fingerprints, stuff like that. "James and the Giant Peach" remains one of my favorite movies to this day largely because of stuff like that. It looked scratchy, a tad creepy and off-kilter and wonderful. This movie had none of that. If you're going to make a stop-motion movie, make it look like a stop-motion movie. Otherwise, just go ahead and computer animate everything. That's my rant. Otherwise, I thought it was a good movie, worth seeing, and probably a better credit to Neil Gaiman's body of work than was "Stardust," although I gotta admit I did like that one. http://www.spout.com/groups/Directors/Re_Directors_who_have_yet_to_make_their_masterpie/406/38195/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: seely
Post To: Directors
Post Date: 12/10/2008 2:52:15 PM
Body: I really feel that Tim Burton has yet to leave a defining mark. He definitely has a trademark style, and its easy to look at a film and say 'oh thats so Burton!', but I have yet to see one film that would stand out as a true masterpeice. Many of his numerous films are excellent, but I can't put my finger on one that is head and shoulders above the rest. There were some that weren't as good as others (Mars Attacks, Sleepy Hollow), and there were some that were truly fantastic (Big Fish, James and the Giant Peach), but I can't seem to pick one that had the criteria I consider when I think 'masterpeice'. I suppose I look for a combination of critical success (which Burton has fairly consistently had) and theatrical success (which has been rather hit or miss). I suppose I look for a masterpeice to be able to survive outside of the critical world and be accessible and popular among the hoi polloi as well. Any thoughts?
]]>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 19:52:15 GMTseelyDirectors12/10/2008 2:52:15 PMI really feel that Tim Burton has yet to leave a defining mark. He definitely has a trademark style, and its easy to look at a film and say 'oh thats so Burton!', but I have yet to see one film that would stand out as a true masterpeice. Many of his numerous films are excellent, but I can't put my finger on one that is head and shoulders above the rest. There were some that weren't as good as others (Mars Attacks, Sleepy Hollow), and there were some that were truly fantastic (Big Fish, James and the Giant Peach), but I can't seem to pick one that had the criteria I consider when I think 'masterpeice'. I suppose I look for a combination of critical success (which Burton has fairly consistently had) and theatrical success (which has been rather hit or miss). I suppose I look for a masterpeice to be able to survive outside of the critical world and be accessible and popular among the hoi polloi as well. Any thoughts? http://www.spout.com/groups/Filmgaming/Re_MADAGASCAR_2_Giveaway_Win_a_prize_pack_or_mo/563/37330/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Spout-Contests
Post To: Filmgaming
Post Date: 11/14/2008 5:33:22 PM
Body: Congrats to Mercurial, the fifth and final winner of a Madagascar 2 prize pack! We've also selected winners of the soundtrack & poster. You know who you are--you received a message from Spout-Contests by 6:00 pm EST (11/14). Here's Mercurial's list: Top 3 Talking Animal Movies (Live Action, Animation & Both): 1.) Babe - Insanely emotional film for everyone. Who doesn't love a talking piglet? 2.) Alice In Wonderland - The White Rabbit, the Dormouse and Flamingoes are my personal favorites. 3.) Who Framed Roger Rabbit? - Was Jessica Rabbit really a rabbit? Where did she hide her tail? Runner's Up: James And The Giant Peach, Robin Hood & Aladdin Thanks to everyone for participating, and we wish you luck with our other giveaways!
]]>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 22:33:22 GMTSpout-ContestsFilmgaming11/14/2008 5:33:22 PMCongrats to Mercurial, the fifth and final winner of a Madagascar 2 prize pack! We've also selected winners of the soundtrack &amp; poster. You know who you are--you received a message from Spout-Contests by 6:00 pm EST (11/14). Here's Mercurial's list: Top 3 Talking Animal Movies (Live Action, Animation &amp; Both): 1.) Babe - Insanely emotional film for everyone. Who doesn't love a talking piglet? 2.) Alice In Wonderland - The White Rabbit, the Dormouse and Flamingoes are my personal favorites. 3.) Who Framed Roger Rabbit? - Was Jessica Rabbit really a rabbit? Where did she hide her tail? Runner's Up: James And The Giant Peach, Robin Hood &amp; Aladdin Thanks to everyone for participating, and we wish you luck with our other giveaways! http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/family/MemberTagFilms.aspxfamily
Number of films tagged: 6289

Number of people who tagged: 227

Number of times used: 1140

]]>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 05:51:34 GMT62892271140Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/fantasy/MemberTagFilms.aspxfantasy
Number of films tagged: 1044

Number of people who tagged: 128

Number of times used: 480

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:54:25 GMT1044128480Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/musical/MemberTagFilms.aspxmusical
Number of films tagged: 174

Number of people who tagged: 109

Number of times used: 356

]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:03:25 GMT174109356Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/magic/MemberTagFilms.aspxmagic
Number of films tagged: 818

Number of people who tagged: 69

Number of times used: 173

]]>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:58:47 GMT81869173Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/original/MemberTagFilms.aspxoriginal
Number of films tagged: 77

Number of people who tagged: 52

Number of times used: 94

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 02:02:07 GMT775294Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/journey/MemberTagFilms.aspxjourney
Number of films tagged: 1175

Number of people who tagged: 50

Number of times used: 124

]]>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 13:02:52 GMT117550124Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/book/MemberTagFilms.aspxbook
Number of films tagged: 683

Number of people who tagged: 45

Number of times used: 114

]]>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:55:43 GMT68345114Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/pirates/MemberTagFilms.aspxpirates
Number of films tagged: 25

Number of people who tagged: 42

Number of times used: 56

]]>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 19:41:08 GMT254256Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/england/MemberTagFilms.aspxengland
Number of films tagged: 64

Number of people who tagged: 41

Number of times used: 83

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:13:04 GMT644183Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/based-on-a-book/MemberTagFilms.aspxbased-on-a-book
Number of films tagged: 173

Number of people who tagged: 37

Number of times used: 278

]]>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:52:06 GMT17337278Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/dream/MemberTagFilms.aspxdream
Number of films tagged: 414

Number of people who tagged: 35

Number of times used: 49

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:54:25 GMT4143549Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/orphan/MemberTagFilms.aspxorphan
Number of films tagged: 1157

Number of people who tagged: 25

Number of times used: 53

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT11572553Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/reality/MemberTagFilms.aspxreality
Number of films tagged: 612

Number of people who tagged: 20

Number of times used: 33

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT6122033Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/spider/MemberTagFilms.aspxspider
Number of films tagged: 81

Number of people who tagged: 20

Number of times used: 24

]]>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 01:28:56 GMT812024Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/fantasyworld/MemberTagFilms.aspxfantasyworld
Number of films tagged: 247

Number of people who tagged: 15

Number of times used: 22

]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:42:51 GMT2471522Tag