I’m wondering if Angel Studios’ baffling choice to distribute “Animal Farm” had anything to do with Andy Serkis being in this movie. “Animal Farm” had been in development hell for close to a decade, so is it possible Angel agreed to distribute it in exchange for its star and director appearing in one of their movies? Unlike Sir Ben Kingsley and Kelsey Grammer, Serkis still has some clout in Hollywood, so it makes as much sense as anything else.
It wasn’t exceptional but it was certainly entertaining and provided some insights into that part of GW’s life that I was unaware of and later researched myself to learn more.
There have been more than several movies on your list that I question as to why a Catholic should watch them…now I am wondering about your authenticity & your POV.
There’s a certain irony in employing a democratic process to create a film celebrating democracy, only for the process itself to manifest the very shortcomings inherent within democracy.
Appreciate the review. I have been at times very harsh with Angel Studios (or Christian filmmaking in general) where even if I agree with many of their moral beliefs, the standard to which we hold them for filmmaking should still be the same as any studio production. Often the criticism can be misconstrued as disagreeing with the message or morals, when in reality it has everything to do with how it is delivered or the story being told.
The generative AI was something I was afraid would be present here. Unfortunate.
This is true of course. However there are some renowned Christians from several denominations all working with the company on some of their shows and projects. So the "Christian" branding I think can still apply
The people on the commeny section who are offended that a movie critic dared to find fault in their in-group-movie tells me a lot more about the target audience than the review itself. What a sorry state for ”Christian cinema”, but I suppose it reflects the state of ”American evangelicals” well enough.
Angel Studios can't stop taking Ls this year. I never loved their work, but after the Animal Farm debacle and now this, my support for them is lower than ever.
The only movie from Angel is the Jim Caviezel movie.
The movie on Frances Cabrini was disappointing because Angel withheld the saint's Catholicity. That's when I knew the Mormon outfit could bring reality to the stage. I can imagine the "guild" has quite an anti-Catholic fellowship.
I walked out of Young GW thinking, "nice costumes, but no substance."
The scene in YGW that really ticked me off was when the chief recounted his story of the French forces "boiling and then eating his wife and kids." This was preposterous, yet never countered in the film. I do remember that the British were the most barbarous of the two, but it was the Indians themselves that enacted heinous atrocities on each other in the French and Indian War.
That night I came home and read the accounts of GW meeting Blessed Mother in the woods near Valley Forge. This was true GW.
Well, they definitely produced slop. But you don’t need AI to accomplish that. We’ve been doing it before AI was a twinkle anyone’s eye. Humans have been making mountains of slop as long as we’ve been making anything at all.
I have been a member of the Angel Studios Guild since the early days of The Chosen. Far from being some secret cabal, it is a group of people who are willing to watch shorts or concept films and give an up or down vote. If a film scores well, the studio is more likely to greenlight it. I don't see anything wrong with using focus groups to determine if investment in a film is a good idea. Don't all studios use them?
As to the use of AI, how is this different from using CGI, as is used by many (if not all) movie companies? The actors were not AI-generated so why is this a big deal?
I have not seen the movie, yet, though I plan to check it out this weekend. I have seen many other Angel movies and will say that they are enjoyable, lower budget films. They lack in story development but are better than many big budget movies. That said, "Animal Farm" looked particularly stupid so I didn't go to see it.
From my limited understanding of the Angel Studio Guild based off of what I can find online on their page, the problem isn't so much having a focus group or test screenings (which is the part you mentioned that all studios use) but rather the large amount of influence that the guild seems to have over the kind of projects that either make it or don't (with over 2 million members able to vote on projects). I find this just as troublesome as when major studios only release legacy/IP/remake movies because there's a large crowd of fans who want to see it, where creative voices are shut out because of the lack of "up votes" that a certain crowd has granted it.
Jon Erwin, the director, shares the same defense of AI as being the same as CGI, and so alright to use in the filmmaking process. My thought process with AI is this:
No matter how bad or misused CGI is, you'll never get "CGI slop" the way that you'll get "AI Slop". In the very technicalities, AI video clips are made through algorithms and prompts which only require a text prompt to make, while CGI is often handcrafted by skilled humans who know how to simulate, model, and recreate life-like imagery throughout months and months of craftsmanship. The use of AI in this particular context could only have been used and even considered as a choice due to the lack creativity and effort on part of the studio.
Yeah, great points. Anything that stifles or limits creativity is a bad thing. I liked Angel, especially in the early years, because they were a small house and had to take chances on new creators with crazy ideas. Some of their early movies were big reaches but they had a couple nice films, too.
Your point about AI vs CGI is key. In the hands of a skilled creator, any tool can produce great art. We're getting a lot of schlock now but I expect it will get much better, as tools and industry acceptance grow.
Another thing you noted in you article was the use of aging or B-list actors and that is absolutely true. I think Angel learned from Disney, who got very rich with the same trick. Johnny Depp was a fading star until Captain Jack Sparrow came along. Robert Downey Jr. was not getting a lot of big movie attention until he saved the Marvel franchise. Angel just had a movie with Kevin James, a couple with Neal McDonough, and their big hit with Jim Caviezel.
All of this is to say that Angel is a young studio. If they can get a few big hits, they will attract more talent and, with that, will come better movies.
I think those are excellent comparisons. I will say though, the bigger a studio gets the quality control can tend to dip without a strong leader at the helm. Doesn't help that the company is now trading on Wall Street, which will lead to even less creative risk-taking.
I mean, he honestly reviewed it and pointed out what he thought were flaws in the film. Thats how film reviewing works. I plan on watching the movie at some point myself, but I dont blame a movie reviewer for reviewing a movie based on tne quality of the film making. The art of film making is often list in us regular people, but film reviewers study film so they are going to review it from a different perspective, one that I argue is more important because the best kinds of reviews are from those who truly understand the medium which they are reviewing.
I lost interest in seeing Young Washington from the clearly AI generated trailer for the movie on YouTube. I also noticed that the music in the trailer was a modified “Dixie” which is certainly a …choice…
What a great review! I live in Europe so can't see the film in the theater, but when it starts streaming on Angel, I'll definitely watch it. Thanks for encouraging me to do so.
I’m wondering if Angel Studios’ baffling choice to distribute “Animal Farm” had anything to do with Andy Serkis being in this movie. “Animal Farm” had been in development hell for close to a decade, so is it possible Angel agreed to distribute it in exchange for its star and director appearing in one of their movies? Unlike Sir Ben Kingsley and Kelsey Grammer, Serkis still has some clout in Hollywood, so it makes as much sense as anything else.
I think you're probably right on the money!
Wow.
That was incredibly harsh.
And frankly, unwarranted.
It wasn’t exceptional but it was certainly entertaining and provided some insights into that part of GW’s life that I was unaware of and later researched myself to learn more.
There have been more than several movies on your list that I question as to why a Catholic should watch them…now I am wondering about your authenticity & your POV.
Time for me to move on.
Thanks.
What sort of movies should a catholic not watch?
Ones made with AI slop
Based
There’s a certain irony in employing a democratic process to create a film celebrating democracy, only for the process itself to manifest the very shortcomings inherent within democracy.
Appreciate the review. I have been at times very harsh with Angel Studios (or Christian filmmaking in general) where even if I agree with many of their moral beliefs, the standard to which we hold them for filmmaking should still be the same as any studio production. Often the criticism can be misconstrued as disagreeing with the message or morals, when in reality it has everything to do with how it is delivered or the story being told.
The generative AI was something I was afraid would be present here. Unfortunate.
Angel is Christian per se; Mormon.
This is true of course. However there are some renowned Christians from several denominations all working with the company on some of their shows and projects. So the "Christian" branding I think can still apply
The people on the commeny section who are offended that a movie critic dared to find fault in their in-group-movie tells me a lot more about the target audience than the review itself. What a sorry state for ”Christian cinema”, but I suppose it reflects the state of ”American evangelicals” well enough.
Angel Studios can't stop taking Ls this year. I never loved their work, but after the Animal Farm debacle and now this, my support for them is lower than ever.
Yes, I agree.
Ben Kingsley was not cast well.
The only movie from Angel is the Jim Caviezel movie.
The movie on Frances Cabrini was disappointing because Angel withheld the saint's Catholicity. That's when I knew the Mormon outfit could bring reality to the stage. I can imagine the "guild" has quite an anti-Catholic fellowship.
I walked out of Young GW thinking, "nice costumes, but no substance."
The scene in YGW that really ticked me off was when the chief recounted his story of the French forces "boiling and then eating his wife and kids." This was preposterous, yet never countered in the film. I do remember that the British were the most barbarous of the two, but it was the Indians themselves that enacted heinous atrocities on each other in the French and Indian War.
That night I came home and read the accounts of GW meeting Blessed Mother in the woods near Valley Forge. This was true GW.
Deo gratias
Where can I found those accounts??
Well, they definitely produced slop. But you don’t need AI to accomplish that. We’ve been doing it before AI was a twinkle anyone’s eye. Humans have been making mountains of slop as long as we’ve been making anything at all.
But AI slop is so much cheaper! More profit!
Oh great, let’s go make slop and then charge our fellow man a premium to digest it. That’s something to be proud of! Makes me so proud of my humanity…
I have been a member of the Angel Studios Guild since the early days of The Chosen. Far from being some secret cabal, it is a group of people who are willing to watch shorts or concept films and give an up or down vote. If a film scores well, the studio is more likely to greenlight it. I don't see anything wrong with using focus groups to determine if investment in a film is a good idea. Don't all studios use them?
As to the use of AI, how is this different from using CGI, as is used by many (if not all) movie companies? The actors were not AI-generated so why is this a big deal?
I have not seen the movie, yet, though I plan to check it out this weekend. I have seen many other Angel movies and will say that they are enjoyable, lower budget films. They lack in story development but are better than many big budget movies. That said, "Animal Farm" looked particularly stupid so I didn't go to see it.
From my limited understanding of the Angel Studio Guild based off of what I can find online on their page, the problem isn't so much having a focus group or test screenings (which is the part you mentioned that all studios use) but rather the large amount of influence that the guild seems to have over the kind of projects that either make it or don't (with over 2 million members able to vote on projects). I find this just as troublesome as when major studios only release legacy/IP/remake movies because there's a large crowd of fans who want to see it, where creative voices are shut out because of the lack of "up votes" that a certain crowd has granted it.
Jon Erwin, the director, shares the same defense of AI as being the same as CGI, and so alright to use in the filmmaking process. My thought process with AI is this:
No matter how bad or misused CGI is, you'll never get "CGI slop" the way that you'll get "AI Slop". In the very technicalities, AI video clips are made through algorithms and prompts which only require a text prompt to make, while CGI is often handcrafted by skilled humans who know how to simulate, model, and recreate life-like imagery throughout months and months of craftsmanship. The use of AI in this particular context could only have been used and even considered as a choice due to the lack creativity and effort on part of the studio.
Yeah, great points. Anything that stifles or limits creativity is a bad thing. I liked Angel, especially in the early years, because they were a small house and had to take chances on new creators with crazy ideas. Some of their early movies were big reaches but they had a couple nice films, too.
Your point about AI vs CGI is key. In the hands of a skilled creator, any tool can produce great art. We're getting a lot of schlock now but I expect it will get much better, as tools and industry acceptance grow.
Another thing you noted in you article was the use of aging or B-list actors and that is absolutely true. I think Angel learned from Disney, who got very rich with the same trick. Johnny Depp was a fading star until Captain Jack Sparrow came along. Robert Downey Jr. was not getting a lot of big movie attention until he saved the Marvel franchise. Angel just had a movie with Kevin James, a couple with Neal McDonough, and their big hit with Jim Caviezel.
All of this is to say that Angel is a young studio. If they can get a few big hits, they will attract more talent and, with that, will come better movies.
I think those are excellent comparisons. I will say though, the bigger a studio gets the quality control can tend to dip without a strong leader at the helm. Doesn't help that the company is now trading on Wall Street, which will lead to even less creative risk-taking.
Angel Sudios awesome. This commentary ridiculous. Young Washington was excellent. Shame on you.
It’s not a crime to dislike a movie.
I agree. The critique seems harsh though. Angel Studios gets picked on for being who they are.
I mean, he honestly reviewed it and pointed out what he thought were flaws in the film. Thats how film reviewing works. I plan on watching the movie at some point myself, but I dont blame a movie reviewer for reviewing a movie based on tne quality of the film making. The art of film making is often list in us regular people, but film reviewers study film so they are going to review it from a different perspective, one that I argue is more important because the best kinds of reviews are from those who truly understand the medium which they are reviewing.
“Being themselves” a shitty studio
I lost interest in seeing Young Washington from the clearly AI generated trailer for the movie on YouTube. I also noticed that the music in the trailer was a modified “Dixie” which is certainly a …choice…
The word slop is an AI-tell. Funny as.
What a great review! I live in Europe so can't see the film in the theater, but when it starts streaming on Angel, I'll definitely watch it. Thanks for encouraging me to do so.