A copy, and that says it all. With plagiarism, you can only do this - one, and you can even look. "Kung Fu Panda" at one time was an innovative cartoon, the authors had the courage to combine two very distant genres, created a world, a plot, they took risks, but they succeeded. And then along the trodden path comes some sharashkin
more
A copy, and that says it all. With plagiarism, you can only do this - one, and you can even look. "Kung Fu Panda" at one time was an innovative cartoon, the authors had the courage to combine two very distant genres, created a world, a plot, they took risks, but they succeeded. And then along the trodden path comes some sharashkin office and shoots the same, while the graphics are orders of magnitude worse, on secondary characters, the authors did not even consider it necessary to render the wool. And in the end there is generally a clear and undisguised mockery of Panda. At first, I thought it was done to make money on recognizable images, but then another understanding came: the success, skill and fame of Hollywood does not give rest to impoverished states and malpractice studios that rave about the ideas of their national superiority, and the dream of "give our answer to Hollywood" (who asked no questions) is not unique to Russians. To catch up and overtake America - that's why this wretched cartoon was actually created. Of course it didn't work.
|