Did you sit on his glasses? . And just about the main thing: why include in the soundtrack such songs that turned out to be clearly unsuccessful? If someone thought a ridiculous song about glasses was suitable for a cartoon about fixies, then I don’t know what to think. “Fixics against work” is a work with a whole bunch of doubtful moments. What went wrong and what plot cogs screwed in the wrong place - let's try to figure out now.
The "Fixics" audience is probably family. Cognitive content and elements of dialogue are quite conducive to joint viewing by children and their parents. What about the original series, that in the first feature-length part, the writers and artists kept themselves in their hands and did not show anything superfluous. But here we are. Eureka is the central of the new characters, she is contrasted with the Genius Evgenievich and looks for a family film... too sexy. When the main external feature of the character is an outstanding bust, which in the first frame attracts all attention to itself - this is clearly not for family viewing. The same goes for some peculiar angles with Lisa. Why are they in a family cartoon? If the goal was to attract an older audience, then it needed to make something more serious than a cartoon about fixtures. The “brain transplant” scene also looks out of place because of the crankiness. How this could be approved for the final version is a big mystery to me.
Another strange feature of this cartoon was the attempt to combine the incompatible. The feeling is that the creators did not know who they most wanted to please, so they rushed from extreme to extreme. Are progressives listening to feminists? We’ll add some strong female characters, but don’t forget about kissing. Do we need Professor Chudakov's antagonist? Let them become a former, but still "juicy" love interest, and it is not a problem that in the last part of Genius Evgenyevich was a man of advanced age. Audiences want more spectacles? We use the elements "Double afterburner", "Titanic" and "Pirates of the Caribbean", because children still do not understand the references, and adults ... oh, and adults watch the cartoon, for sure ... but it is too late to redraw Eureka, so it will do. Such reasoning, apparently, accompanied the process of creation. Was there not enough time, or could not agree with each other?
Music is probably my main complaint. It’s not just the bad songs, like the ones about glasses, but the excessive abundance of scenes that look like clips. It was as if the director had barely held back from making a musical, the most controversial of all genres. Yes, there are many songs in the series about fixtures, but they do not sound at every new event, and they are not at all about glasses that someone sits on. Such a soundtrack, as well as some plot and visual moments, in the work about fixes looks very dubious and in places completely inappropriate. One can only assume that someone from the team of creators in this way healed his resentment against the Cinema Foundation, which did not approve other proposed projects.
Discussing the shortcomings left me almost no opportunity to touch on the Fixies themselves, of which there are nine, including two newcomers. The parents of Simka and Nolik, as well as the parents of Dim Dimych, did not find a place in the plot this time, but since the focus here is Professor Chudakov, then you can neglect them. Characters-fixes please the audience as before: their characters appear as they encounter difficulties, storylines are harmoniously woven into the narrative, and Verta’s quarrel with Mega over the avatar is probably the best moment for the entire film. For that, I send the creators my approving nod. Despite all my claims, “Fixics Against Crafts” is a good cartoon, but I still hope that such shoals will not be in further sequels.
7 out of 10