Gentleman Jack
Member
I wouldn't call something divisive just because a few board members disagree with a very, very positive critical consensus.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
How Pixar Lost Its Way
- Thread starter entremet
- Start date
I wouldn't call something divisive just because a few board members disagree with a very, very positive critical consensus.
eso76
Member
My 4y/o loved it as did all her friends, so from my experience I would say that's a wrong assumption.
Some of the parents thought it was too violent and scary in places.
Daughter was just devastated when the kid found his family and Arlo finally let him go and they went separate ways.
Devastated.
She named her goldfish Arlo too.
And at the petshop where she bought it, the owner (this huge gay guy) said "you want to name it Arlo ? Ohhh I loved that movie, it made me cry like a little baby".
While it's fine that you weren't too high on it, that's obviously just not true given the critical and audience reaction.
RT just means theres a critical consensus that it doesnt suck. Most peoples opinion is that inside out is very much B tier pixar.
Caddywompus
Member
Well it's more than a few (not just in this thread every time Pixar pops up here) and it's not like they enjoyed it but wasn't their favorite they just didn't like the film. Which is odd to have such a strong opposition to a highly praised film.
You maybe be shocked to hear this but critical consensus may not reflect public opinion.
Caddywompus
Member
It's true the movie is poorly paced and clearly rushed. Liking it for what is was doesn't mean it couldn't have been better.
Daffy Duck
Member
They didn't.
Man you are in the minority on that one. Film was great. Its legs at the boxoffice were legendary. I still remember pulling boxoffice mojo and watching it chart while the freaking BluRay had already came out. Film hit some great notes with a modern day relevant lesson, and did so without being heavy handed. All the eyecandy and world building topped it off. There's not really any part of the film that was executed poorly.
Fancyarcher
Member
Disney hasn't much success when it comes to the live-action original films, hence all the remakes. Can't really blame them, at the same time I'd be lying if I said I wasn't disappointed at the lack of original films.
Boss Doggie
all my loli wolf companions are so moe
To people who needed a pick up after the snorefest that is A Good Dinosaur, I implore you guys to watch You Are Umasou.
It will cleanse you from the sterility that is A Good Dinosaur. Ironically enough it tackles similar storylines (being raised as a different thing, raising something that is quite different from you, survival from the wild), but it actually does it with more unified and creative visuals, really great animation, and a really great protagonist.
Alternatively go watch In A Stormy Night for feels and maybe a subtle hint of gay.
Actually I disagree - the original layout actually felt edgier, but at the same time the message was too cut and dry. I actually like the new one in that there's no clear "this side vs. yours" despite the message.
Like what then?
It will cleanse you from the sterility that is A Good Dinosaur. Ironically enough it tackles similar storylines (being raised as a different thing, raising something that is quite different from you, survival from the wild), but it actually does it with more unified and creative visuals, really great animation, and a really great protagonist.
Alternatively go watch In A Stormy Night for feels and maybe a subtle hint of gay.
Actually I disagree - the original layout actually felt edgier, but at the same time the message was too cut and dry. I actually like the new one in that there's no clear "this side vs. yours" despite the message.
Like what then?
On this very board people said Finding Dory would bomb.
It made a billion and got great reviews.
lvl99 Pixel
Member
that's not at all an objective statement
I know I'm in the minority, but I just didn't find the characters or the story to be very interesting. To be fair, I really dislike stories that rely on animals living in a human-like society. It feels hokey to me. I'd rather just see the story with people, instead of watching a bunny behave exactly like a person, while facing problems in an advanced human-like city. I know, I know. It's meant to be a children's movie and watching a bunny rather than a person is exactly what kids are into (and it let Disney convey its message without risking offense). I'm generally not so nit-picky about children's movies catering to children, but it's just a weird pet peeve of mine.
Caddywompus
Member
Do you mean what could have been better?
Well for starters I would have cut out two of the three scenes they tossed in after Hopps was made main character. The tired overused Godfather parody and the nudist colony didn't really land, though the latter one could be reworked.
I agree the shock collar wasn't the right solution but I would have keep the carnivores oppression theme over the rabbits can't be cops idea. I think tackling this discrimination is more interesting than what the "you can be anything in Zooptopia" side story turned into. Maybe Hopps should be a clear omnivore in this version so the gray area of what makes one animal a carnivore and one a herbivore is blurred. Though that means no carnivore in power, so no fat cheetah cop or Lion Mayor.
Which leads me to Secretary Lamb. She should have been a class mate of Hopps when she was bullied. Hell they had lambs already there in that scene. The dynamic between how Hopps embraced this situation and empowered herself compared how Secretary Lamb ultimately decided to tear down others as the better course of action would have been fascinating. But instead we get another forgettable villain who wasn't set up properly nor was the misdirection they attempted with Mayor Lion effective at all. You know you don't have interesting villains if you can't remember their name.
The last scene would have been more poetic since Secretary Lamb already saw this move as a child in the opening children's play scene. Building a relationship with the would be villain would have made for a better film than a surprise twist background character they went for instead.
Boss Doggie
all my loli wolf companions are so moe
I thought the mob angle was nice enough to show that Judy wasn't really much of a moral fiber of a character. And the nudist colony was honestly more for world building (and also adds more to the victim - seriously, said sweet otter has ties to the mob and is a nudist?).
The "rabbits can't be cops" was more of an overhead layer than anything else. The main theme really was more of discrimination - but rather than specific discrimination, it was of multiple layers. It's why despite being "flexible" that people can interpret it as "race" or "gender", it's actually its own thing. And the whole fat cheetah lion mayor was more for visual stereotypes.
I do agree Bellweather was a weak character and pretty much everyone agrees on that, but I think the idea is that she isn't a standout character. That's a pretty good way of using a mystery villain. Though the drops of "us small folks should stick together" was a bit too on the nose. Also they had a nice blink and you'll miss it details on her desk among other things.
With that said, honestly I like it that the villain has no relationship with the hero. She's just a criminal and she's just a cop. Too many often villains always have a forced relationship with the hero even if they end up pointless or arbitrary.
Except being a bunny is exactly a plot point, an important part of the story (and worldbuilding). And honestly that's what makes this movie work - rather than relying on yet another "real life mirror" conflict, we got a unique one that while may seem similar to real life conflicts, ultimately is its own thing.
The "rabbits can't be cops" was more of an overhead layer than anything else. The main theme really was more of discrimination - but rather than specific discrimination, it was of multiple layers. It's why despite being "flexible" that people can interpret it as "race" or "gender", it's actually its own thing. And the whole fat cheetah lion mayor was more for visual stereotypes.
I do agree Bellweather was a weak character and pretty much everyone agrees on that, but I think the idea is that she isn't a standout character. That's a pretty good way of using a mystery villain. Though the drops of "us small folks should stick together" was a bit too on the nose. Also they had a nice blink and you'll miss it details on her desk among other things.
With that said, honestly I like it that the villain has no relationship with the hero. She's just a criminal and she's just a cop. Too many often villains always have a forced relationship with the hero even if they end up pointless or arbitrary.
Except being a bunny is exactly a plot point, an important part of the story (and worldbuilding). And honestly that's what makes this movie work - rather than relying on yet another "real life mirror" conflict, we got a unique one that while may seem similar to real life conflicts, ultimately is its own thing.
Caddywompus
Member
The mob angle itself was fine, it was just doing a specific Godfather parody felt lazy where this movie did a decent job to avoid topical pop culture references overall. That was just out of place, where the idea of the nudist colony worked I just don't think the execution landed.
The otter victim was odd too. Something bother me that they had such a inept Police force but didn't set it up as such. Nor was it corrupt. But a rookie comes in breaks the case just by looking into the file.
And right out of the gate they have these conflicting storylines, is this going to be about "I can be anything if I put my mind to it" because that's what they start with and it just felt cliche when you have such a unique take on everything else.
See I would rather have them use a means to cast a perspective of all herbivores through the lenses of Hopp instead of the specific discrimination in the Police Academy. Had they done that then the "gasp, a random herbivore" was behind everything would have worked. You would have been able to understand the motives without knowing the villain personally.
In the extras the creators explain the trouble this movie went through and to me confirm that opinion regardless of the results.
lvl99 Pixel
Member
aren't the results all that matter? Star Wars was a mess in development too iirc
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
Apparently I'm a heartless bastard cause I never thought Inside Out was anything special.
As you said, it's really meant to be a film about discrimination. They just used a bunny as the means of conveying that story. It feels cheapened and watered down that way. Like Disney is trying to teach me an important lesson, using finger puppets. Also, it didn't feel unique. It's just "don't judge a book by it's cover" and "you can be anything you put your mind to," but with a bunny. Having said all that, I feel silly criticizing a children's movie, for seeming too childish. I just didn't find it as compelling as other movies out that year (like Kubo and the Two Strings) or as fun (like Moana).
Caddywompus
Member
If you're satisfied with the results being satisfactory, sure. When I watch Zootopia all I think about is what could have been.
Boss Doggie
all my loli wolf companions are so moe
Honestly I don't really care much for "popularity" in a sense that people here like to flipflop about it.
"So what if this film is popular/critical? It's not a measure of quality." "Can't you see this film is popular/critical? It should be good!"
Zootopia has so many pop culture references though, just not as overt as you'd think. Hell, it's less a pop culture thing and more of a mob scene archetype.
As for the otter, it's less about inept and corruption and more of the police having their hands full and they didn't really want to help Judy out.
But they're not really conflicting because they all link to each other. Also it was more on "I can be a cop even if I'm a rabbit" which then links to the various conflicts in the film. Yeah she did become a cop but there's discrimination, the system only added her because of brownie points, etc.
Putting Hopps merely for "herbivore" is kinda misleading cause you got big guys in the cops. It wasn't really about herbivore vs carnivore in the police force but because of Hopps being a rabbit (we see a bunch of herbivore cops). It's why the line "Us small guys have to stick together" was important. It wasn't just discrimination on her capabilities, but because she was also forced into it by the Mayor. And it wasn't less about a herbivore and more of a control-happy villain who doesn't liked to be pushed around and thus went for chemical warfare and fear. Again, while it seems "just" herbivore vs carnivore, it's actually based on multiple conflicts and discriminations.
As for their statements, that's more of a general thing many staff say - many films have that "we could have done more" thing.
You miss my point then.
Discrimination is bad, but at the same time this film focuses on discrimination that is fantastical and hard to apply in real life due to how the made-up society works. I mean, just because it's fictional and can't reflect real life problems doesn't diminish the conflict, and simply associating them to "finger puppets" is personally insulting to their message.
Also you really miss the film's message if that's what you got that from the film. Hell, "don't judge the book" is pretty much unimportant in the grand scale of things and very minimal. Also this ain't "just for kids", it's a family film.
Funny you mention Moana too, I couldn't get invested in the two main characters because a bulk of their conflict relies on misunderstandings to work. It's like watching a condensed j-drama.
"So what if this film is popular/critical? It's not a measure of quality." "Can't you see this film is popular/critical? It should be good!"
Zootopia has so many pop culture references though, just not as overt as you'd think. Hell, it's less a pop culture thing and more of a mob scene archetype.
As for the otter, it's less about inept and corruption and more of the police having their hands full and they didn't really want to help Judy out.
But they're not really conflicting because they all link to each other. Also it was more on "I can be a cop even if I'm a rabbit" which then links to the various conflicts in the film. Yeah she did become a cop but there's discrimination, the system only added her because of brownie points, etc.
Putting Hopps merely for "herbivore" is kinda misleading cause you got big guys in the cops. It wasn't really about herbivore vs carnivore in the police force but because of Hopps being a rabbit (we see a bunch of herbivore cops). It's why the line "Us small guys have to stick together" was important. It wasn't just discrimination on her capabilities, but because she was also forced into it by the Mayor. And it wasn't less about a herbivore and more of a control-happy villain who doesn't liked to be pushed around and thus went for chemical warfare and fear. Again, while it seems "just" herbivore vs carnivore, it's actually based on multiple conflicts and discriminations.
As for their statements, that's more of a general thing many staff say - many films have that "we could have done more" thing.
You miss my point then.
Discrimination is bad, but at the same time this film focuses on discrimination that is fantastical and hard to apply in real life due to how the made-up society works. I mean, just because it's fictional and can't reflect real life problems doesn't diminish the conflict, and simply associating them to "finger puppets" is personally insulting to their message.
Also you really miss the film's message if that's what you got that from the film. Hell, "don't judge the book" is pretty much unimportant in the grand scale of things and very minimal. Also this ain't "just for kids", it's a family film.
Funny you mention Moana too, I couldn't get invested in the two main characters because a bulk of their conflict relies on misunderstandings to work. It's like watching a condensed j-drama.
lvl99 Pixel
Member
On the other hand, all I could think about was how an anthropomorphic movie alluding to racial diversity could have been a disaster.
Instead I got some of the best use of varying character sizes and a legitimately funny, beautiful looking movie *shrug*
Boss Doggie
all my loli wolf companions are so moe
And I'm gonna say this...
If people complain about "pop culture references and jokes" but at the same time laughed at Looney Tunes, Fleischer cartoons, and some MGM films, and hey maybe some classic Disney shorts, they should be drawn and quartered.
And don't give me that "but they're used well!" No, from what I've seen a mere mention of a random reference that reminds people of something triggers them. Hell I've seen people going "this character is voiced by a popular artist, POP CULTURE REFERENCE!!"
If people complain about "pop culture references and jokes" but at the same time laughed at Looney Tunes, Fleischer cartoons, and some MGM films, and hey maybe some classic Disney shorts, they should be drawn and quartered.
And don't give me that "but they're used well!" No, from what I've seen a mere mention of a random reference that reminds people of something triggers them. Hell I've seen people going "this character is voiced by a popular artist, POP CULTURE REFERENCE!!"
RastaMentality
Banned
It really didn't hold up on second rewatch.
Caddywompus
Member
I just don't like how blunt that one scene was, it is a direct Brando day of my daughter's wedding hit you over the head joke because I like all the subtle pop references because it breathes life into this world without dating the film. EDIT: Your example of Looney Tunes brings up a broader issue because how are those jokes viewed by a different generation? Without the reference is it funny or is it just a funny voice to them or does the joke just disappear into time. If there's no joke without the reference is there a joke at all, then why put the reference there just to age?
Everything about the otter victim wasn't handled great, it just led into a sloppy 3rd act. Pretty much from the Panther scene to the subway car, that was all just so forgettable. Especially considering how well they handled the "car chase" scene in tiny town earlier.
I know they shoehorned it in there, it doesn't make it an elegant solution, even if they connected all the dots. I'm not saying it was some plot hole or anything like that, they made it work. Just their use of a overused "I can be anything when I grow up", however you want to frame that, I didn't like that decision. There wasn't a payoff by going that route if you chalk it up being about size.
That's what I'm saying it should have been in regards to the herbivore/carnivore not that it was. They should have build more upon that than the little guy angle. If they had continued to use scale like they did in the first half of the movie, the chase, the Popsicle con, ect. I would had been fine with that little guy take in the final act. If the otter was being discriminated by size, which lead to a conflict in scale during the action scenes into some "there are no small roles but small actors" idea during the fake death scene, there's so much you could have build upon even if you don't change anything about the storyline.
The whole movie feels disjointed in that way. Like it was built at different times so they had to force these segments together and stitched them into a functional movie.
Vampirolol
Member
Inside Out is their best movie and Finding Dory is pretty good too.
Girlfriend and I recently watched Inside Out for the first time. It was a great movie, easily the best thing Pixar has done since probably Wall-E.
But having said that, since Tangled in 2010, Disney Animation Studios have been on an amazing role and have utterly destroyed Pixar's efforts.
Pre-Tangled: Pixar > lol Disney Animation Studios
Post-Tangled: Disney Animation Studios > lol Pixar
But having said that, since Tangled in 2010, Disney Animation Studios have been on an amazing role and have utterly destroyed Pixar's efforts.
Pre-Tangled: Pixar > lol Disney Animation Studios
Post-Tangled: Disney Animation Studios > lol Pixar
Magic Mushroom
Member
Not true at all. It has a 94 percent MC. Almost every review is a rave. Critical consensus is that it's a superb movie. Which it is.
Cheat Code
Member
Pixar are still geniuses for making people think Up was a good movie.
Throw in an emotional 5 minutes and the rest of the film is irrelevant.
It's like Marley and Me in reverse.
Throw in an emotional 5 minutes and the rest of the film is irrelevant.
It's like Marley and Me in reverse.
Monocle
Member
No way.
Pixar has pretty much always been hit & miss. Their second film was A Bug's Life, which wasn't exactly a classic. Cars was also smack in the middle of their hay day.
Of course they didn't do themselves any favors with the hat trick of Cars 2, Brave and Monsters U. The latter two aren't bad, but they feel like the type of unfinished projects Pixar normally cancels or delays.
Still, if Cars 3 is better than expected (shouldn't be hard), Incredibles 2 is Toy Story-sequel tier and Coco works out well, the narrative will easily shift to 'Pixar's back, baby!'
I agree that Up is slightly overrated. The villain especially got a raw deal. Dude made dogs talk, let him have one bird! But its emotional highs truly soar (no pun intended).
Of course they didn't do themselves any favors with the hat trick of Cars 2, Brave and Monsters U. The latter two aren't bad, but they feel like the type of unfinished projects Pixar normally cancels or delays.
Still, if Cars 3 is better than expected (shouldn't be hard), Incredibles 2 is Toy Story-sequel tier and Coco works out well, the narrative will easily shift to 'Pixar's back, baby!'
I agree that Up is slightly overrated. The villain especially got a raw deal. Dude made dogs talk, let him have one bird! But its emotional highs truly soar (no pun intended).
They're not the consistent hitmakers they once were, but they still make some absolutely incredible films. Inside Out, for me, really was a return to form. I liked Finding Dory too, but.. just too formulaic to be special.
I think Up was overrated too, it was definitely still very good - Wall-E came out a year before and I think it was a lot better, one of my all time favourite Pixar films.
I dunno about the comparisons, but Moana was brilliant - one of the best animated films I've seen in years.
I think Up was overrated too, it was definitely still very good - Wall-E came out a year before and I think it was a lot better, one of my all time favourite Pixar films.
I dunno about the comparisons, but Moana was brilliant - one of the best animated films I've seen in years.
SpacePirate Ridley
Member
Im still waiting for brad bird to deliver the incredible goods.
PhazonBlazer
Member
Cars 3 actually looks pretty good after the disaster that Cars 2 was.
I just feel like Tangled, Pooh, Ralph, Frozen, BH6, Zootopia and Moana >>>> Pixar's efforts since Toy Story 3. With Inside Out being the obvious exception.
DAS is on fire this decade.
This thread kills me.
The worst Pixar movies I can remember seeing are Cars 2 and The Good Dinosaur, and both were fine. Not award-winning or legendary, but fine.
I unwittingly end up taking my kids to a lot of crappy movies. A Pixar movie is a guarantee that the kids will love it and I won't hate it. By that criteria, Pixar has never failed me.
Do you guys not see some of the inane garbage that passes for kids' movies lately? The worst Pixar movie is still better than 90% of what's out there. For one studio to maintain that level of quality is admirable.
The worst Pixar movies I can remember seeing are Cars 2 and The Good Dinosaur, and both were fine. Not award-winning or legendary, but fine.
I unwittingly end up taking my kids to a lot of crappy movies. A Pixar movie is a guarantee that the kids will love it and I won't hate it. By that criteria, Pixar has never failed me.
Do you guys not see some of the inane garbage that passes for kids' movies lately? The worst Pixar movie is still better than 90% of what's out there. For one studio to maintain that level of quality is admirable.
Yup. Moana was also really boring.
Finding Dory on the other hand was fantastic. As was Inside Out.
Bullshit. A Bug's Life is amazing.
NHarmonic.
Member
You should watch it. I really don't see what's so offensive about that movie that makes people say is the worst shit.
Inside Out is good but that is the exception for the last 6 years
Good and above:
Inside Out
Okay and below:
Cars 2
Brave
Monsters University
The Good Dinosaur
Finding Dory
Compared to the 6 years prior...
Good and above:
The Incredible
Ratatouille
Wall-e
Up
Toy Story 3
Okay and below:
Cars
With their next film being Cars 3, I'd say 'lost their way' is accurate for the time being.
Good and above:
Inside Out
Okay and below:
Cars 2
Brave
Monsters University
The Good Dinosaur
Finding Dory
Compared to the 6 years prior...
Good and above:
The Incredible
Ratatouille
Wall-e
Up
Toy Story 3
Okay and below:
Cars
With their next film being Cars 3, I'd say 'lost their way' is accurate for the time being.
Citation needed on that last part bub
Yep, I was thinking "have Pixar really lost it..", nope Inside Out is their best work. Absolutely wrecked me. Wish they would stop wasting money on pap like Cars though. Also wish they'd make something a bit darker. Not hugely dark, but just a touch darker. Inside Out was close. I still hate the fact that Wall-E got ruined by featuring humans. The teaser trailers made it feel like it would be a much more lonely and stark adventure. continue the first 30 minutes like that, take it in a whole different direction, have the audience see the aftermath of their demise through the eyes of this robot.... THAT would have been awesome!
Why we still haven't gotten this yet baffles me.
I wonder how much of it is Pixar losing a step VS everyone else stepping their game up. It's easy to look like an unassailable juggernaut when your competition is Shrek sequels and Chicken Little.
Competition's good. I like Moana, Zootopia, Finding Dory, Inside Out, Kubo, Coraline, Lego Movie, Lego Batman and the HTTYD movies. There may be a sort of... lack of variety in terms of demographic approach, but in terms of average quality, I don't think American cinematic animation has ever been as good as it is right now.
(Fuck those Illumination movies though)
Competition's good. I like Moana, Zootopia, Finding Dory, Inside Out, Kubo, Coraline, Lego Movie, Lego Batman and the HTTYD movies. There may be a sort of... lack of variety in terms of demographic approach, but in terms of average quality, I don't think American cinematic animation has ever been as good as it is right now.
(Fuck those Illumination movies though)
I saw that and thought it was really boring, I was glad when it was over.
Similar threads
- Locked