Flushed Away was a bit of a disappointment for Dreamworks animation in 2006. Let me clarify though. In spite of what the poster says this was not from the creators of Shrek or Madagascar. Dreamworks distributed it, but it was made by Aardman animation, makers of Chicken Run and Wallace and Gromit. Budgeted at a huge $149 million, this film mustered just $64 million. Wallace and Gromit had also generated subpar numbers the year before, and Dreamworks decided to bid adieu to their partnership with Aardman. As long as Aardman can still finance films, they may be better off creatively, its just a shame that American audiences haven't been more receptive to this cheeky British humor.

Flushed Away is a bit of an oddity. I suppose the reason it cost so much us that the studio had to develop CG tools for the film as they had traditionally used just clay animation. The decision to go 100 computer animated was explained as better fitting the watery theme of the film, but still, it seems odd to go so far away from your successful tradition. I have to say though, the computer did a marvelous job at replicating the clay effect, and was probably much less of a painstaking task to animate. Still, it would be a shame if Aardman abondoned clay in the future.

The film involves some rats in the London sewer and an evil Toad that is trying to get them. The general plot of the film is actually sort of straight forward and predictable, but a couple of things bring the film quality up a bit. First, the film is peppered with scenes of singing sewer slugs. These guys steal every scene they are in, and its too bad we didn't get more of them. Another scene I really enjoyed involved a frog mime and a cell phone. Quite funny. There were also a couple of clever references to Wolverine and Han Solo for the observant, but in all, this movie could have been funnier and less manic. The action is just going, going, going, and a little too crazy. Flushed Away is a good film that deserved a bigger audience, but with all the films released in 2006, it got overshadowed. While not quite classic, Flushed still gets a B.

Really quite disappointing for an Aardman film. Where past films were wacky and surprising, it was as if the filmmakers decided on a few 'funny' things and then kept re-using them... the sound-effect slugs were entertaining to begin with because it was a surprise, but by later in the film you were half expecting it because the gag had already been done five times previously.

Also there was a definite quality of 'more and faster is better' for the action sequences. Clearly CGI opened up a lot of options for Aardman, but all the action sequences felt too frantic and not nearly as funny or well thought-out as their previous films.

There's some good stuff here and hints at what might have been a good movie, but personally I don't think it ever quite came together in the way that their other work has in the past.

It's good, but not good enough to be Aardman.

I enjoyed Flushed Away from start to finish, don't get me wrong. There were lots of great characters, madcap adventures, a wonderful world, hilarious spoofy jokes, and whatnot. And the slugs were wonderful. Worth rewatching, I'll definitely see it more than once.

But Flushed Away has neither the sheer joy of Wallace and Gromit nor the intense motivations of Chicken Run, and I can't help feeling that it's the fault of the villain.

Ian McKellen (whom I ADORE) has done a great job with the voice of the toad, but he is still a small, petulant, STOCK villain.

(SPOILER--Seen Antz? Then you've seen his entire plan already. Get 'em down to the Great Opening Ceremony and flood them out. Phhht.)

He is motivated by a petty sense of revenge, and is not a big enough villain for a really good movie. Mrs. Tweedy, with her arrogant ruthless chicken-exploitation leaves him a mile behind in the dust, and at least General Mandible was driven by a vision. Toad's reason for genocide is amusing, but too silly to be impressive. A villain needs a certain amount of respect from the audience to feel like a real threat, and Toad doesn't work that up, not even with Ian McKellen for a voice. In fact, the movie seems to make a point from his first appearance that he's a hopeless loser. That's no way to create a good nemesis. The villain needs to seem more than a match for the hero.

The pathos of Roddy's situation as a pet was well and subtly expressed, The continual return to toilet references and humor was not (to me, anyway) as funny as it was meant to be, though the half-time plot was sorta funny. And by the end of the film, it felt as if they were really starting to milk those slugs for all they were worth.

Still, it's as good as any of the competition, and it does have a nice Aardman feel to it. Worth watching!

This one was totally different than what I thought it would be from what I saw in the trailers, which was a nice surprise.

The storyline, although enjoyable, was pretty predictable, like most animated films that were released this year. The characters were good. I didn't find any overly annoying, and there was great voice acting by the whole cast. The animation was nice, emulating the claymation style. The score was also good, another by Harry Gregson-Williams. One of my favorite things about the film were the slugs. I found them absolutely hilarious, and all there singing. XD

Overall I'd say this is one worthy of being seen in the theater. There's lots to see in each shot so watching it on the big screen is worth it.