Select Page

Angry Birds Movie – Film Review

Angry Birds  Movie – Film Review

Before the Candy Crush Saga there was another bright-coloured game from the app store that had people’s thumbs jabbing and swiping screens for hours on end; a battle between productivity and procrastination as they progressed to the next level.
I gather interest in the game has declined over the years, which is why they made it a movie. On a beautiful and colourful island lives a population of flightless birds with nothing to be angry about. Red (Jason Sudeikis) is one of the less common, grumpier birds, who lives on the outskirts of this island since he does not fit in with the rest of the flock. After an incident with a hatchling, he is forced to join an anger management group where he meets Chuck (Josh Gad) and Bomb (Danny McBride). This group of socially awkward birds might just become the heroes of the day when the gullible island inhabitants are visited by some winsome green pigs who seem to have questionable motives.
Just as expected, the visuals are excellent. The producers really made sure to preserve what attracted so many to the video game in the first place. The colours are bold, pretty and bright. The artwork is gorgeous and true to the game.
Angry Birds basically tells the story of why the birds are so angry, offering a reason why the birds should be slung into fort-like structures in the first place. You might watch it to see whether it lives up to the hype, whether it is as satisfying as playing the game. Though giving the game a back-story only seems to give you more reason to play it, it begs the question whether the feature film itself is worth revisiting.
Luckily, it is one of those movies with bits of humour that can reach all ages. But there is a clash or struggle as to whether or not this is a good thing. Some of the puns are rather risqué for children, who might be able to connect the dots more than we may think. I may be exaggerating but there are quite a number of sexual innuendoes and hints of nudity scattered throughout the story. One scene, for example, is a 45-second long clip showing the rear view of an eagle as he urinates into a lake while the other birds stare and distort their faces in disgust. Considering that some advertisements are not even that long, the scene seems to take ages. The makers of this movie could have considered toning down the toilet humour a little bit for the kids.
The story itself, separated into three acts, moves at a decent pace. It does take some time before we get to the true essence of the story as we know it from playing the game, though. The first two acts provide a rather lengthy back-story before we get to the final act where the true Angry Bird action finally lifts off. But this is probably for the best since once the birds manage to fulfil their destiny of crashing into objects, there is not much of a story beyond that.
For the most part, the Angry Birds movie does come together nicely to deliver a mildly satisfying story. This movie’s biggest concern was catering to its target audience. I suppose there is no redemption in that aspect – to make a sequel would be overkill. On that note, Angry Birds is something one would watch simply for the sake of it – but watch it once and be done with it.

About The Author


Today the Typesetter is a position at a newspaper that is mostly outdated since lead typesetting disappeared about fifty years ago. It is however a convenient term to indicate a person that is responsible for the technical refinement of publishing including web publishing. The Typesetter does not contribute to editorial content but makes sure that all elements are where they belong. - Ed.