Antz VS A Bug's Life-Which is Better?

On October 2nd, 1998, DreamWorks SKG released Antz. A critical and box-office hit, the film sits at a 93% on Rotten Tomatoes and a 72 on Metacritic. Despite lukewarm fan-reception, the movie has gained a cult-following over the years. It’s also remembered fondly by those willing to overlook the controversies surrounding its production and lead. I also think it’s a decent movie.

On November 14th, 1998, roughly 6 weeks later, Pixar released A Bug’s Life. A critical and box-office hit as well, the film sits at a 92% on Rotten Tomatoes and a 77 on Metacritic. While not remembered as one of Pixar’s best, it has a more-dedicated cult-following than Antz and is often pitted against it as “the better movie”. But is it? That’s what I plan to determine.

As usual, this comparison will be subjective and contain spoilers for both movies. You’ve been warned.

Anyway, let’s begin with storyline strength…

Story:

VS

Despite originating from similar concepts, Antz and A Bug’s Life couldn’t be more different narratively. Antz is the story of Z, a neurotic ant who longs to break free from his predetermined job and make a name for himself. His best friend, Weaver, is a loyal troop who’d willingly put down his life for the colony. When the two agree to switch places for a day, Z miraculously survives a traumatic battle with the neighbouring termites. Not content with his status as a war hero, Z kidnaps Princess Bala and makes a run for it in search of Insectopia. Eventually, Z learns to put the colony’s needs ahead of his selfishness, which comes in handy when he discovers General Mandible’s plan to wipe out the worker ants and replace them with soldier ants.

A Bug’s Life goes a much different route. The story focuses on Flik, a bumbling inventor whose inventions keep making life for his colony a nightmare. When his latest creation causes the harvest for the grasshoppers to fall into a lake, Flik travels to the city to recruit warrior bugs to fend them off. He discovers a group a disgraced circus performers and takes them back, hoping they can liberate his colony. That is, of course, assuming he can keep up the charade of making these circus bugs look like warriors.

Both movies have complicated set-ups with lots going on, especially Antz. Surprisingly, however, both movies’ stories are really simple. With A Bug’s Life, it might even be too simple. Antz definitely leans on the classic story The Prince and the Pauper, but it also mixes in the concepts of uniformity, the 9-to-5 job and the military industrial complex, all of which are relevant in 2020. A Bug’s Life is a critique on capitalism, which is also relevant in 2020, but it leans way too heavily on Aesop’s fables and Seven Samurai. In the latter’s case, the Kurosawa film’s fingerprints are all-over the movie, to the point of potential plagiarism.

In its defence, A Bug’s Life has something that Antz lacks: urgency. With the exception of the termite battle and the climax, the majority of Antz’s story meanders. It’s not non-existent, but you rarely feel like there’s danger even in times of, well, danger. A Bug’s Life, conversely, has urgency written all-over it. You get the stakes, and you feel the stakes. It’s a skill Pixar was still mastering in 1998, but they got it down-pat here.

Unfortunately, A Bug’s Life uses The Liar Revealed trope. This is when a protagonist lies to get the story going, is discovered in an over-the-top fashion and gets excommunicated for the sake of tension. It drags the story to a halt, only picking up again once the character’s snapped out of their funk. In this movie’s case, it’s additionally unfortunate because the runtime is only about 93-minutes. I’m glad Pixar got this trope out of the way early in their history, but it still hurts the experience.

I’m giving this one to A Bug’s Life, though. Is it less-original? Yes. Is its use of The Liar Revealed unbearable? Also yes. But it moves with a sense of urgency. Antz has the better story, but it feels more aimless.

Winner:

But a story needs a good cast of characters, which leads me to…

Cast:

VS

This is an unfair comparison. A Bug’s Life has a bigger roster of characters, but most of them are forgettable. Antz, on the other hand, has a smaller roster of characters, but they’re also more interesting. It really depends on what you want: a big story with a small focus (Antz), or a small story with a big focus (A Bug’s Life)? You’re trading one for the other.

A Bug’s Life has wonderful characters in the main roster-Flik, Princess Atta, Dot, Hopper, the circus crew Flik recruits-but some really generic supporting characters. Think about those two grasshoppers who reveal Hopper’s plan to squish The Queen: do they really have much to them? They could’ve easily been swapped out with other characters and still served their purpose. (Speaking of, wouldn’t it make more sense if Hopper’s brother, who’s already a loose-lipped idiot, had revealed the plan instead?)

With Antz, the characters are all unique: Z’s the neurotic loner, Weaver’s the tough guy with a heart, Azteca’s the worker with attitude, Princess Bala’s the bored princess and General Mandible’s the eugenicist general. Even characters with relatively few lines, like Barbados, are memorable. It’s interesting considering how all the characters’ personalities were modelled after their famous voices, and that should annoy me. But it doesn’t.

So yes, Antz wins in the cast department. It’s got a much smaller character roster, but it utilizes it better.

Winner:

But what’s an animated movie without animation? This is…

Aesthetic:

VS

I’ll say this: both movies used impressive computer techniques for 1998. With A Bug’s Life, the film managed to copy-paste multiple ants to appear on-screen at once, which was considered revolutionary. Antz, on the other hand, played with character models and scope (more on the latter in a bit). Both movies were visual marvels, but with that comes a datedness. Perhaps it’s because of modern CGI, or because CGI doesn’t age well, but it’s easy to tell that both movies released in the late-90’s.

So, which looks more interesting? Antz, for two reasons: firstly, the character models are distinct, even in crowd shots. A Bug’s Life, for all its technical achievements, has plenty of repeated stock models. Antz, while having blockier designs, has unique models that play on size and weight. Z looks different than Azteca and the rest of the worker ants, as does Weaver and the rest of the soldier ants. That distinction works in its favour.

Secondly, Antz plays with scope. A Bug’s Life has nicer-looking character designs, but most of the bugs are pretty uniform in size. You’d think that Heimlich, for example, would be bigger than Flik, since he’s an overweight caterpillar, but nope! In contrast, Antz’s characters are all played to scale, with wasps and termites being significantly bigger than the ants. That’s not even getting to the minute differences between the worker and soldier ants, with the latter being much bigger!

It’s pretty obvious who the victor is.

Winner:

But aesthetics don’t work when the movies are lacking sound, which leads me to…

Sound:

VS

Both movies have excellent sound design. Whether it’s Antz using dangerous sounds to convey the fear of humans, or A Bug’s Life using the same motif for environmental hazards, a lot of thought went into the sound design of these films. The same is true of the scores and original songs, with Antz using jazz and pop songs and A Bug’s Life having Randy Newman’s compositions. Based on this alone, it’s be a tie. So where do I tip the scales?

Simple: in the voice acting. It’s unfair to chastise Antz for picking movie celebrities over A Bug’s Life’s TV celebrities, especially since both are effective, but the kicker comes with Woody Allen. For a variety of reasons, I really don’t like Woody Allen. He’s fine as Z, he makes the character work, but he could’ve been replaced and I wouldn’t have missed him. No one in A Bug’s Life could’ve been swapped out. Plus, given what we now know about Kevin Spacey, him voicing the villain makes me swallow his performance more.

A Bug’s Life wins.

Winner:

And now for the final category!

Entertainment factor:

VS

One of the unfortunate parts of reviewing these movies is feeling that, in hindsight, they’re not really all that great. Even in 1998, Antz had tough competition from The Prince of Egypt, DreamWorks’ first traditionally-animated film, and I’d much prefer watching that. Meanwhile, A Bug’s Life feels like a step backward for Pixar following Toy Story, and it’d remain their worst-reviewed movie until Cars. Still, I’ll try and assess which one’s more enjoyable.

Which is hard! For every strength of one movie, it fails in relation to the other in a different area. The comedy in Antz is more adult than A Bug’s Life, even containing curse words, but it’s not nearly as funny. The story’s less-original in A Bug’s Life, but more urgent. The animation’s blockier in Antz, yet more distinct than in A Bug’s Life. And while Antz is smarter overall, I’d sooner re-watch A Bug’s Life.

I’d settle this with a game of “pick one, dammit!”, but that’d be unfair. So I’ll instead imagine what it’d be like to watch these movies as a kid, because that’s when I first saw them. And coming from the viewpoint of a child…Antz wins out. Barely. A Bug’s Life might click more as an adult, but it was never meant for adults. Neither was Antz, but 8 year-old me would’ve gotten more from it than A Bug’s Life.

So yes, Antz wins.

Overall winner:

That was tough to write! Thanks for sticking it out, and I’ll see you next time!