RyothChatty ridiculous rating

Peereddi I was totally surprised at how great this film.You could feel your paranoia rise as the film went on and as you gradually learned the details of the real situation.

Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Sanjeev Waters A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

mherrin-43253 Cool World: Directed by Ralph Bakshi and written by Michael Grais and Mark VictorWe continue with our single digit Tomatometer rating series. This time we have Cool World made in 1992 in the shadow of Who Framed Roger Rabbit and its rating is 4%. Wow that's not good. That's downright awful. What would make me want to continue down this path of painful, agony cinema? This is a strange movie. I know, I understand that I'm being a bit generous with that description. This transcends strange into bizarro world. The first thing to remember about this movie is the plot is simple and utterly meaningless in the grand scheme of what this movie represents. It is all about building this world. It doesn't tell you specifically why some things are done the way they are until later on but it does tell you if you're paying attention. This is difficult to do because the entire time you're saying to yourself what is going on here? The attention to detail for the backgrounds and the characters you see and meet is intricate and never less than fascinating. It is wacky cartoons all over the place. The humans are just whatever for the most part. From what I read about this movie was originally meant which was a hard R live action/animation horror movie, the remnants of that is located in a lot of the DNA of this movie. The situations are designed to be crazy and a bit horrifying while maintaining their cartoon logic. I also did not realize how sexual this movie is as well. This is rated PG-13 but it is skirting the very far edges of that rating. The entire plot hinges on a doodle as they are called making it with a noid( which is what they call real people). I did love how when the noids interacted with the environment, it shows it as cardboard or 2 D. This attention to detail was the best part of this strange movie. I can not officially recommend this movie to anyone but I am glad they made it. I found it incredibly fascinating. I give this movie a B.

James Barker I gave this film an 8 out of 10. I wanted to give it a 7, and during certain parts of the film, it barely deserves a 3. The good:A lot of the animation in this film is disgusting. It's gross, it makes your skin crawl. It's deprived, and terrifying. This is what would happen if you took a lot of psychedelic mushrooms in Sin City. The style of many parts of this animation comes straight from the words of my fantasy version of Hunter S. Thompson's Fear and Loathing. And the whole thing is driven entirely by lustful sinful sex with cartoon characters. It's cheap, disgusting, and self centred, and sexy, with just a touch of class and a dash of jazz. The bad:The story is okay. I really didn't care for the second half of the film which focuses on 'doodles' being in our world. It was kinda good, a bit trashy, didn't really work.. But it depends how you view cinema in general, some people wouldn't notice it at all to be a problem, me - I've got high standards. Also I thought that Kim Basinger didn't do the best job playing Holi Would. She's the most promoted name in the film, but I thought her delivery of the role lacked the subtle elegance that cartoon Holi had. It was this very elegance that really made her character - if I had to give her a back story, I'd say she was the unloved daughter of a crime boss who ran away, finding only a home with those truly lost in life, becoming heavily involved in the crime scene herself, though not a criminal. Using her good looks and, what is very, very deep down, an innocent soul to guide her, and keep her with the respect of her peers. This film is great. Pretty awful in some parts, but it's redeeming qualities are out of this world, and have my full respect. All in all, and perhaps most importantly, it's unique. There is no other film I've seen, or could ever imagine, to be quite like this (this includes Who Framed Rodger Rabbit, which is basically this films parallel, but lacks 100% of the darkness, and sheer depravity this film brings formed). Love it or hate it, it's got balls, and at least should have some level of respect shown to it for that.

Irishchatter I thought this movie was absolutely terrible. The drawings are bad, the characters are bad and of course, the storyline itself was bad also. The cartoon characters looked obviously from a rip off of Disney & Warner Brother's Looney Tunes together. To be honest, both don't mix well for a parody like this! They should've made it look child friendly when its not or not have done with cartoons at all. Just add the beautiful Holli Would as a cartoon and then she would be transforming as a human in the end. That would be a better idea because then, this movie would be a success without any faults whatsoever!Even if i hate this movie, i do love Holli Would. She is like a bad girl with an attitude. Shes like herself in this and its just ashame that she had to be in this movie. She is so much better than it! Some people say she's a Jessica Rabbit Copycat but, she is not Jessica Rabbit. She really is different from all the sex symbols in the cartoon world. I even loved Kim Basinger when her character Holli turned into a human. She loved absolutely beautiful!This really isn't an ideal film to watch if you think its gonna be child friendly, its not. Its just a sloppy made film that really should've been shelved. I feel so sorry for Brad Pitt, Gabriel Byrne and Kim Basinger being in this film, it is not one of their best films they have ever done!

Alex Consalvos This is my review of director Ralph Bakshi's 1992 live action/animated film, "Cool World." In contrast to everyone else's opinions about this movie, I have to say that to me,"Cool World" is a half-good, half-bad film. There are elements in it that truly do rock, but there are other elements to it that truly do suck. One part about it that's awesome is the animation; sure it doesn't look 100% convincing combined with the live actors, sure there are WAY TOO MANY DOODLES that do absolutely NOTHING for the progression of the poorly-laid out plot, but I do think that all of the animated characters were drawn and colored really well, and the way they were animated is one of the good things other people DO praise this movie for because the hand-drawn visuals really do look great.About Kim Basinger's performance as Holli Would; she did a pretty good job voicing her, I have to say that I was (and still am) impressed with how good Kim's voice-acting was. Yet, when she played the noid Holli,Kim really lagged. I think she was trying to portray how an animated character that's become flesh-and-blood behaves in trying to adjust to life in the real world, but when I watched the movie, the real-Holli performance out of Kim was not convincing at all. Gabriel Byrne's character of Jack Deebs was supposed to be THE main protagonist in the movie, but he was the least developed main character in the history of main characters in film. Brad Pitt (as Frank Harris) was the only actor out of the whole cast who truly DID act. He actually did a pretty good job at portraying this man whose life turned tragic (you'll have to see the beginning of the movie to know what I mean) and how the real world didn't feel real to him anymore, but Cool World did."Cool World" has so many great storytelling/plot elements to it that are either hardly ever explained in the film or just not explained at all. One of these full-of-holes plot elements that isn't explained in full are the mechanics as to how sex between a noid and a doodle ruptures the inter-dimensional fabric between Cool World and the real world (and how noids can spontaneously turn into doodles when both worlds collide). Another one is how the "Spike of Power" artifact really works as far as opening up a portal between both worlds and how it gives noids and doodles the ability to teleport back and forth between them. One more missing plot element: Jack Deebs's whole story. We know that he's been sent to prison for a crime of passion (again, see the movie to find out what I'm talking about), but that part right there could have been elaborated on more. And how exactly DID he get visions of Cool World in order to create a comic book series about it? How exactly was Holli repeatedly bringing Jack there and misleading him to thinking that he's getting visions/dreaming about Cool World? These things really need(ed) to be explained in full, NOT in pieces.All in all, I don't think "Cool World" is a terrible movie at all. It is a good, entertaining movie, but one that's full of holes and only partially complete. Since I see things in this film that need to come out more as far as plot and character development. I seriously hope that there will be a remake of this film sometime in the (hopefully) not to distant future. A remake of a "bad" movie like "Cool World" (doesn't matter when exactly) can actually "save" the film so to speak by making the plot and characters of the original much, much better. For example, the 1986 fantasy film "Troll," directed by John Carl Buechler, opened to mostly negative critical response when it first came out, yet, Mr. Buechler IS remaking it for a theatrical release later in 2012. Another example is the 2003 live action "The Cat in the Hat," which got enormous negative response when it premiered. Now, the studio that made "The Lorax" is planning on doing a CGI remake of "The Cat in the Hat." And often, a remake of a "bad" movie fares a lot better (financially and critically) than the original. That is why "Cool World" is an excellent candidate for a remake because there are a lot of missing pieces to it that can be filled in, can be explained, the characters can still be developed in full, and that will make sense out of the story.