arguments regarding "AntZ"

Rating: Null/10 (30 June 1999)

Were it not for "AntZ" and "Akira", I would have completely given up on any kind of animated film. Thankfully, though, these two movies have restored my faith in cartoondom as a viable way of telling a story. I agree with pretty much all of the positive comments I've heard thus far, so I'll omit the repetitive yammering and refute the claims of the more negative commentary on "AntZ".
Bad language? The movie was rated PG. The MPAA doesn't rate these movies just for their own amusement, folks. If you don't want your kids to hear profane language, keep your moviegoing limited strictly to "G" films. Otherwise, don't blame DreamWorks because your five-year-old's favorite new word is "damn". It's not their fault. It's yours. Pay attention to the MPAA rating next time.
Sexism? I read a comment claiming that "AntZ" sucked on account of the fact that the "ant social structure" was poorly portrayed: the males outnumbered the females, and the males ran everything. If we're going to gripe about realism here, why not address the concept of talking ants (English, no less) that swing picks and wear WWII-style army helmets? I vaguely recall having owned an ant farm, and they never formed big wrecking balls out of their own bodies. Hence, realism is not an issue.
It's boring? Okay, I can understand how a child could get bored while watching this film. However, taking into account the fact that's a PG film, most people should've known that right off the bat. This is a more cerebral film. A thinking adult with even a high school education should appreciate the social implications made in the movie, and a film buff should howl at the vast number of movie references made in "AntZ". If that's too much to handle, stick to mindless drivel like "Dumb & Dumber".
Woody Allen? Damn right, Woody Allen. Who could POSSIBLY better portray a neurotic ant in a colony of millions who feels that he is insignificant than him?
An "ugly" film? Absolutely. Lots of dark browns makes a lot more sense than Disney's baby blue hexapod, wouldn't you agree? Once again, this is a PG film, which means that people should have clued into the fact that it's not a "family" movie. Being, as it is, a more "adult-oriented" film, it doesn't have to be all sunshine and rainbows. Why animate it at all, you ask? Especially in computer graphics? (a) Do YOU think you could sit and watch an hour and a half of live actors dressed up in stupid-looking ant costumes? (b) Computer animation offers unprecedented visual detail.
This concludes my tirade. You may now resume perusing the comments.