My Own Personal Nerdy Disney and Animation Scrutinizing Analyses: "A Bug's Life" - The Epic, Miniature and "Buggy" Pixar Feature That Has Been Neglected

Hi folks! Welcome to my My Own Personal Nerdy Disney and Animation Scrutinizing Analysis blog. A blog where I'm analyzing several Disney films, Disney or Animation in general! These entries are just meant to be my analyses. Not reviews or statements. Just fun analyses! Though I'll make some personal remarks now and then, the content of these entries are meant to be depicted objectively. They're made for entertainment purpose only and the pictures/clips are copyright Disney or other companies.

Make sure to leave a comment if you like this site! And if there's something you think could be improved, please let me know. But in a constructive way, please. And just a note; I'm not a Native English writer, so my incorrect grammar may be notable.

And finally; If you haven't seen the films, beware of spoilers! And the funny lines aren't meant to be nothing than funny. So I hope you won't find them offensive. If so, I apologize

This is the bugs way of playing hide and seek; To be obvious :)

This is Pixar's fandom
synergy, so of course they're
stuffed :)

Through their 43 years of existence (at least technically, since they've used 27 years of making full-length feature films), Pixar has managed to not only create an huge empire on it's own, but a legacy and a stamp of being perceived as flawless. Things were perhaps not as radically different in 1998, but Pixar were still a newcomer in the game. Having already set a mark for themselves. Coming off the heels of the very successful Toy Story, the very first computer animated feature (a film that was more successful than Disney’s own hand drawn animated productions at the time), the expectations were huge on their second release, A Bug's Life. Which happened to be another Thanksgiving release.

At least I'm a lady in red :)

A three year gap between both first Pixar productions could've been perceived as a neat synergy (also because both having the same directors, John Lasseter and Andrew Stanton. And the same composer, Randy Newman).

Fortunately a downfall wasn't a case with A Bug's Life, who turned out to be a huge success. Being even more successful than Disney’s own in-house release at the time, Mulan (who in turn was the most successful of the post-Pocahontas productions). Perhaps A Bug's Life didn't outgross Toy Story, but it still made $ 363,258,859 Worlwide. Bugs' was also critically acclaimed back on it's release. Made in Cinemascope and originally just called Bug's, it was an huge epic film deliberately made (despite how the creators joked about it's epic nature due to having it's wee creatures).

Behind the Scenes Information & A Bug`s Life`s Placement in the Pixar Pantheon

Yes, animation is about
directing. Just not with me :)

Find many wrongs :)

Being the follower to Toy Story was not a small task, but production on A Bug's Life began shortly after the former films release in 1995. And ironically, Bug's was a much bigger film for the creators and also more dramatic (having crowd scenes of 400).

You have too different
shapes to be here :)

Taking mostly entirely place outdoors and having no human characters (the rain sequence was a particular challenge, as was the wind, which it's scene had to be re-rendered. Which it's program was more expensive and time-consuming). The character animation was also more complex. Since the computers love geometric shapes, it was a departure. However, a concept about insects is still a perfect match for animation (and yes, bug haters, while some of the crew were repulsed by the idea of bugs, others used their childish joy to motivate themselves. As did Lasseter, who claims to love bugs).

We want seeds! :)

While the crew thought that animating bugs were going to be easier than animating toys, the designs themselves ended up being more complex (and not to mention how the bugs are completely unaware of the human world). The opening shot was complex and took the whole production and how complex the insects were up close scared the creators, unsurprisingly enough). But if we're actually going to look at A Bug's Life's placement in Pixar's Golden Age Pantheon, it's been more or less swept under the rug after it's initial release. And perceived as somewhat inferior to it’s counterparts. But we all know that it's not the only staple this movie is stuck with!

The Comparisons to Antz

The spelling was inspired
from P!nk's
Missundaztood

Don't hate this fan-blend,
purists :)

It’s needless to cite that A Bug's Life was released closely after another ant-feature. Which was simply claled Antz. Back when DreamWorks Animation were a newcomer and pioneer in animation (and frankly managed to differentiate themselves from the typical mainstream American family movie). And yes folks, of course there was a public feud between DreamWorks and Pixar back then! But besides their close release date, both movies are comparable because of same settings and species (needless to say), despite how of course both of them are radically different in tone. But the aforementioned similarities are enough for purists to compare them shallowly.

However, to truly analyze their differences, Antz was clearly made with an older, more sophisticated audience in mind. Antz also had big A-Cast list, whereas A Bug's Life had a lower list of celebrities. And last, but not least, Antz was visually darker (at least on it’s underground scenes) and at least had less caricatured designs on the bugs. While A Bug's Life was clearly the opposite (and both films does somewhat semi-antrophomorphize the insects, at least to one extent. Yet the bugs who are most anthropomorphic in Bug's Life are the Circus Gang. Who were the much needed element of comedy to the story and also making that world approachable for a anthropomorphized world).

The Purpose of This Entry: Comparisons to Other Pixar Properties

While looking at these two stamps, it would've been tempting to make this entry about why A Bug's Life is less regarded than Pixar other Golden Age films. Or even make this about the feud with Antz and take a comparison!
However, I'll rather make this entry about analyzing why Bug's stands out among it's Pixar Companions! Because it definitively has a couple of trademarks that makes it different from it's Pixar counterparts. Regardless of how those issues affects the quality of the movie itself, we could always look at those issues, shouldn`t we?

First Distinctive Component: Cuteness

First of all, there`s a certain irresistible cuteness to A Bug's Life that makes it stand out! While this statement may seem redundant since it's a certain genre and how this is practically a subjective opinion, there`s a certain doe-eyed cuteness to Bug's that other Pixar productions doesn't have.
Not that it's a bad thing, though, since it's one of the movie's sheer strengths. And frankly a reason why it has appealed to an audience (and probably something that makes it distinctive from Antz)!

Second Component: An Outcast Hero

We drew it without color, to
make it the villain ;)

Secondly, it is steeped in one of the most derivative and recycled Disney components of the nineties; The outcast hero (Flik, voiced by Dave Foley) who changes his community with his ideas (originally the crew were pinning down to several protagonists, before having to choose just one). When Pixar made Toy Story, they deliberately differentiated their film with not recycling Disney tropes. But A Bug's Life relies on that specific trope.
In fact, this could shallowly make Bug's the typical Disney production of the late 90`s, just being a non-musical (sorry Pixar purists, but that's how I see it).

Yes, I'm too close, but I'm
interested to see your
particles :)

Flik was originally going to be named Red because of his color and be a part of a circus gang, who got them in trouble. But Stanton suggested the change. Yet Lasseter was inspired by Nicolas Cage's character in The Rock (1996) from Michael Bay.
And it’s not as Pixar has shed completely away from the loner trope afterwards (Ratatouille was also somewhat about it), yet they’ve never relied on it on the same way as both Disney and A Bug's Life did.

Third Component: Appeal to a Kid Demographic

Thirdly; A Bug's Life is certainly more made for children in mind. This statement may also seem redundant, due to it facing the same conclusion as theory one. Yet while Pixar is labeled for appealing to all audiences in mind (and therefore having gained a huge adult fanbase), Bug's is definitively more shaped to a juvenile audience. Due to it’s bright pastel-colors, cute tone and funny side characters made for that demographic.

Fourth Component: A Memorable, Menacing Villain

We have the same policy as the Disney
Princesses; To not have eye contact :)

Fourthly; A Bug's Life has a truly menacing villain! Of course this is subjective and regardless of making this into a Disney vs Pixar feud, it’s legit to claim that Disney has a talent for making a truly great villain. Something that Pixar rarely does (and something that's unfortunately become diluted in the Revival-era). Yet due to Bug's being steeped in Disney's components, it would be fair to cite that Hopper could be perceived as a Disney villain.
Perhaps Hopper (voiced by Kevin Spacey, who's claimed that he's never yelled as much before and agreed to do the part at the Academy Awards Nominee Lunch for Toy Story) may not be as great as the best Disney villains, he still comes close. Despite his limited screentime, he does make a genuinely menacing presence. And does come across as fearsome and hostile (his famous "are you saying I'm stupid" line was add libbed). Malt was made Hopper's brother in order to have Hopper keeping him live and Thumper was made to not having Hopper to make all the evil doings himself (while Thumper was originally going to have a voice, the creators created animal sounds as apes to make him animalistic).

Fifth Component: A Non-Buddy Movie

Yes, I'm stunned by you,
Julia :)

Fifthly; It's not a buddy movie! It was a deliberate choice, since the creators didn't want to repeat themselves with making another buddy movie!
The buddy formula is a trope that has been heavily associated with Pixar (and with Lasseter, due to how he has influenced it). And despite how not all of Pixar's work have been buddy comedies, at least A Bug's Life serves as an example of not being it. While of course it has a slight road trip, it's not as huge and prominent as it has been with other Pixar properties (yet an initial idea was to have some random scout ants to look for help). And just to clarify this, none of these points are necessarily criticisms of mine, they are just random analyses.

The Other Components of A Bug`s Life, Source Material/Inspirations, Some Trivia, Amount of Characters & Voice Actors

Yes, it's possible to surf at the sky :)

This is all we can do :)

Whatever could be said about A Bug's Life, at least it's a quite traditional and formulaic Hero’s Journey. The same can be said about the traditional love story between Flik and Atta (Julia Louis-Dreyfus). It has been labeled as being similar to Seven Samurai (yet of course it's loosely inspired by Aesop's fable The Ant and the Grasshopper. While funny enough, Andrew Stanton and Joe Ranft joked about it not being a story to adapt for animation. Still the idea was built around to twist it and letting the grasshoppers just take the food). The Grasshoppers entrance was inspired by World War II movies and Hells Angels. The ending was also something the team struggled with, having various versions of them.
Because of it's troubled start, the team were late with the story, which meant that 27,000 drawings were delivered.

But at least Bug's has a component which Pixar are known for, with having a variety of characters (which was a challenge for the crew). Most of the characters in this movie are quite compelling and entertaining, yet the variety of characters may be a Achilles heel of this picture, in terms of having too many of them to keep up with!

Among the actors are Phyllis Diller as the Queen (who had it fairly easy with her part and joked that the Queen looked better than she did and her crown was created deliberately inspired by her head), David Hyde Pierce as Slim, Bonnie Hunt as Rosie and yes, a young Hayden Panettiere as Dot.
While the directors had the actors in mind, it was Ruth Lambert who suggested Pierce, Louis-Dreyfus and Dave Foley (Lasseter was known for just choose the actors for their voices at the time). Louis-Dreyfus' husband Brad Hall was among the voice actors of the grasshoppers. Joe Ranft voiced Heimlich because the crew couldn't find any German actor for the part (the revelation of the kid bugs speech to the circus bugs was the first thing he animated).

Behind the Scenes Information

I know it's a rock, but pretend
that it's an egg for this pic :)

And to give some more trivia: When Heimlich gets turned to a butterfly, the crew eventually realized how well liked he was. So he was just added some wings without having to change his design completely (and to have him move smoothly, he was given more controls by the animators than other characters in the film).

Yes, I had to make
certain
adjustments :)

And yes, since this movie has a circus, it does have a nod to Dumbo. And the rock-seed joke between Flik and Dot was deliberately added to not be too saccharine (Dot was a suggestion by Andrew Stanton's daughter). Both Lasseter and Stanton even voiced some of the characters, as "don't look at the light"-scene and some of the singing grasshoppers. The big eyes on the characters were deliberately given to their acting, not to just add to the Disney trademark of having big eyes.

Originally the movie opened with the colony hiding inside the dandy lines. The outtakes was also a deliberate choice, dating all way back to Toy Story, in order to stress the reality of the animation. And therefore fooling the audience. And originally 30 outtakes were made. The baby birds at the end were deliberately made to be as cute as possible. The prologues and epilogues at Pixar are usually always the first scenes to been executed, to see how the movie develops. Malt was chosen to finally live due to his popularity at screen audiences.

Epilogue

We`re the G-rated version of
Brady Bunch :) The Happy
Meal Version :)

But if we're finally going to look at why A Bug's Life became somewhat swept under the rug when Pixar’s catalog began to expand, then some people claimed that it simply was inferior to it`s counterparts. And also the aforementioned comparison to Antz is relevant, since some considered Antz to be superior. Regardless of this feud, I frankly think both films deserves to be acknowledged for each of their strengths and weaknesses (yes, I know I'm politically correct, but still).

We're having a staring contest
to look who has the biggest
shadow :)

Perhaps the sweet tone may be a reason why people consider Bug's to be inferior. But A Bug's Life is a delight nonetheless! I remember being genuinely mesmerized by it when I saw it initially, even more than I was by Toy Story. And frankly my fondness of the film is still something that I carry to this day! It may be derivative and formulaic, but it's still a sweet and cute movie nonetheless. Who deserves to grow big and epic (yes, I couldn't resist this pun, guys :)

Even bugs can be Chameleon's :)

Shrink my updates on https://www.facebook.com/people/Blogg/100035703494050/ and https://twitter.com/NerdyLunada.

References:
A Bugs Life Collectors Edition DVD.
A Bugs Life: The Art and Making of an Epic of Miniature Proportions (Jeff Kurtti)
Disney Magazine Winter 1998-1999
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Bug%27s_Life
http://www.reelviews.net/reelviews/bug-s-life-a

http://www.reelviews.net/reelviews/antz

https://www.dvdizzy.com/abugslife.html

https://www.dvdizzy.com/abugslife-bluray.html

https://www.dvdizzy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=95 (Why is A Bug's Life so underrated?)

https://www.dvdizzy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9642 (A Bug's Life -vs.- ANTZ)
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-A-Bugs-Life-forgotten-by-Pixar