Support NeoGAF

[olimario]

The Incredibles is the finest Pixar movie I've seen-- and I've seen them all.
I've read all of the poor reviews for this film and my mind reels thinking about the complaints these people had.
Take a look...




http://www.eclipsemagazine.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1192

Sketching human figures still isn’t a Pixar animation strong suit. The intention, of course, is to make the Incredibles larger than life, even if they have the smallest ankles I’ve ever seen. But the animators sacrifice reality to adopt a shiny, plastic Ken doll sensation, which worked quite well for “Toy Story” twosome Buzz and Woody but distracts here.

Speaking of Buzz, isn’t he the mold from which Mr. Incredible is broken? A delusional superman with an inflated ego trapped in a mundane society that displays no real need for his special talents? Sounds like Buzz to me. And the comparisons go on and on. Pixar eventually had to step down from its elevated perch. The studio simply set its bar too high with its previous successes. “Incredibles,” while acceptable, isn’t outstanding because it doesn’t stand out.

What?



http://www.moviemartyr.com/2004/incredibles.htm

The plot this time out is as conventional as in any of the past Pixar films, borrowing liberally from the Spy Kids franchise, Alan Moore’s “Watchmen” comics, and James Cameron’s far superior True Lies. The imagery, usually the highlight of these things, calls to mind this year’s wondrous Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, but minus a soul.

Without a soul? The Incredibles has more charm and more soul than the cookie cutter and occasionally boring Sky Captain.

Additionally, the voice acting is more restrained than the non-stop yelling that has marred several of the studio’s past efforts, but something’s still rotten here, rendering The Incredibles as the least of the animation house’s efforts, by far.

No film, live action or animated, that I can recall, features children murdering so cavalierly.

Lord of the Flies?!?! Piggy!!!



I just don't understand.
More Here
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/incredibles/

 

[karasu]

Eh, seen one pixar movie seen em all. The only thing that changes is the world the characters inhabit. Otherwise, it's the same shit. It can be fun if you're into that sort of thing, but feh.

 

[Overseer]

I still have no intrest in seeing the movie. After Finding Nemo my animation life was complete. I LOVE FINDING NEMO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111

 

[Spectral Glider]

Eh, seen one pixar movie seen em all. The only thing that changes is the world the characters inhabit. Otherwise, it's the same shit. It can be fun if you're into that sort of thing, but feh.

Actually, the reason I liked it was because it wasn't the old, "Look! Talking toys and animals" schtick. Sure, there's nothing new about superheroes, but it was at least different ground for Pixar IMO. It's prolly also why Cars looks so unpromising to me.

It's funny that dude in the one review referenced Sky Captain in an effort to put down the Incredibles. I can't think of a movie more devoid of soul and character than Sky Captain.

 

[Insertia]

Eh, seen one pixar movie seen em all. The only thing that changes is the world the characters inhabit. Otherwise, it's the same shit. It can be fun if you're into that sort of thing, but feh.

IAWTP

 

[SteveMeister]

Eh, seen one pixar movie seen em all. The only thing that changes is the world the characters inhabit. Otherwise, it's the same shit. It can be fun if you're into that sort of thing, but feh.

OK, so let's see:

Toy Story 1: New toy is introduced to the boy's room, but he doesn't think he's a toy. There's a rivalry between this new toy and the boy's old favorite toy, but they eventually learn to appreciate each other & get along.

A Bug's Life: Grasshoppers have been demanding large portions of the ants' harvest for years. One year, an inventive ant develops a device to speed up the harvest, but it ends up ruining things and the ants don't have enough grain for themselves AND the grasshoppers. The grasshoppers issue an ultimatum -- get us our grain or we'll come back and kill you all. Exiled, the inventive ant discovers a group of circus performers he at first believes are fearsome warriors. He convinces them to come defend the anthill from the grasshoppers. Hilarity ensues. Similarity to Toy Story? None.

Toy Story 2: The boy's original favorite toy from the first movie discovers that he is part of a famous and rare set of toys. He gets the opportunity to leave the boy's room and join the set as they get sold to a toy museum in Japan. Should he go with his newfound colleagues, leaving the boy who will eventually outgrow him anyway, or stay with the boy and enjoy the time he has left? Similarity to Toy Story 1: Same characters. To A Bug's Life? None.

Monsters, Inc: Monsterville is where all the monsters in our children's closets come from. But what they do is scare children and harvest the energy from their screams of fright to power their city. But there's a problem -- children are becoming more sophisticated and aren't as susceptible to fear as they used to be. A pair of monsters discovers a plot to kidnap children and harvest screams directly from them -- and along the way they discover a much more powerful and positive source of energy. Similarity to the Toy Stories and A Bug's Life? None.

Finding Nemo: A clown fish's son is captured by humans and put in an aquarium. The fish's father, along with a companion with short-term memory loss, treks across the ocean in search of the missing youth. Similarity to any other Pixar movie? None.

The Incredibles: After a series of lawsuits, the country's superheroes are forced to hang up their capes and retire to "normal" life. But it's not easy for Mr. Incredible, who's stuck in a dead-end job and longs for the old days. When an opportunity to return to glory presents itself, he's ready for it -- but what will his family think? Similarity to any other Pixar movie? None.

 

[Warm Machine]

Eh, seen one pixar movie seen em all. The only thing that changes is the world the characters inhabit. Otherwise, it's the same shit. It can be fun if you're into that sort of thing, but feh.

Hollywood pumps out buddy-cop movies like Bad Boys, Lethal Weapon, Die Hard, and Last Boy Scout and people flock to them including myself.

We should be grateful for Pixar. I agree that their stories do not repeat themselves. Each of their movies are so filled with creativity it is sickening.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Y'know, reading that list made me realize-- that while I rate Bug's Life lowest among Pixar flicks, it's still a great movie (even if it is just a remake of the Magnificent Seven).

 

[belgurdo]

Eh, seen one pixar movie seen em all. The only thing that changes is the world the characters inhabit. Otherwise, it's the same shit. It can be fun if you're into that sort of thing, but feh.

.

 

[Agent Dormer]

158 Fresh to 5 Rotten. I think we can see that those who don't like it simply lack a soul, s'all.

 

[karasu]

OK, so let's see:

Toy Story 1: New toy is introduced to the boy's room, but he doesn't think he's a toy. There's a rivalry between this new toy and the boy's old favorite toy, but they eventually learn to appreciate each other & get along.

A Bug's Life: Grasshoppers have been demanding large portions of the ants' harvest for years. One year, an inventive ant develops a device to speed up the harvest, but it ends up ruining things and the ants don't have enough grain for themselves AND the grasshoppers. The grasshoppers issue an ultimatum -- get us our grain or we'll come back and kill you all. Exiled, the inventive ant discovers a group of circus performers he at first believes are fearsome warriors. He convinces them to come defend the anthill from the grasshoppers. Hilarity ensues. Similarity to Toy Story? None.

Toy Story 2: The boy's original favorite toy from the first movie discovers that he is part of a famous and rare set of toys. He gets the opportunity to leave the boy's room and join the set as they get sold to a toy museum in Japan. Should he go with his newfound colleagues, leaving the boy who will eventually outgrow him anyway, or stay with the boy and enjoy the time he has left? Similarity to Toy Story 1: Same characters. To A Bug's Life? None.

Monsters, Inc: Monsterville is where all the monsters in our children's closets come from. But what they do is scare children and harvest the energy from their screams of fright to power their city. But there's a problem -- children are becoming more sophisticated and aren't as susceptible to fear as they used to be. A pair of monsters discovers a plot to kidnap children and harvest screams directly from them -- and along the way they discover a much more powerful and positive source of energy. Similarity to the Toy Stories and A Bug's Life? None.

Finding Nemo: A clown fish's son is captured by humans and put in an aquarium. The fish's father, along with a companion with short-term memory loss, treks across the ocean in search of the missing youth. Similarity to any other Pixar movie? None.

The Incredibles: After a series of lawsuits, the country's superheroes are forced to hang up their capes and retire to "normal" life. But it's not easy for Mr. Incredible, who's stuck in a dead-end job and longs for the old days. When an opportunity to return to glory presents itself, he's ready for it -- but what will his family think? Similarity to any other Pixar movie? None.

Well gee. At least half of those movies are about morons/outcast becoming heroes. Not only that, but they all have the same style of humor, the shots are set up the same between them all, thesy all have the same character types etc etc. Which is all fine if you love Pixar. But if you don't, you don't. And if you can't see the similarities in films all from the same studio, you need help. "None"? WTF?!

People do flock to Buddy Cop pictures, but you know, those suck too.

 

[SteveMeister]

The plots of the movies are totally different. Perhaps there are some similarities in some of the characters.

Since you don't like Pixar movies, I find it surprising that you know enough about them to comment on how similar they are to each other. I would have thought you'd have stopped watching them earlier.

 

[Phoenix]

Eh, seen one pixar movie seen em all. The only thing that changes is the world the characters inhabit. Otherwise, it's the same shit. It can be fun if you're into that sort of thing, but feh.

If you mean that in Pixar movies there are characters seeking to overcome diversity, then yes. In every other conceivable scenario - hell no.

 

[karasu]

We should be grateful for Pixar..

Why? Because I dislike their style? If I want to see keen western animation I'll just turn on the tube. I'm 'thankful' for Bruce Timm and the like.

 

[IAmtheFMan]

Y'know, reading that list made me realize-- that while I rate Bug's Life lowest among Pixar flicks, it's still a great movie (even if it is just a remake of the Magnificent Seven).

...Which is just a remake of Seven Samurai.

Who cares.

 

[Kiriku]

Yes, some people have an opinion different from the norm. Let's hunt them down and smack 'em real bad, there's obviously something terribly wrong with them. Now imagine eyes that roll.

Pixar are really good at making polished movies...but they're just, too polished and structured making them easy to predict. The jokes, the characters and so on. I still liked Toy Story 2 a lot though, it had a story I cared for.

 

[karasu]

The plots of the movies are totally different. Perhaps there are some similarities in some of the characters.

Since you don't like Pixar movies, I find it surprising that you know enough about them to comment on how similar they are to each other. I would have thought you'd have stopped watching them earlier.

One, I'm a cinephile, so i watch everything. I have no problem feeling negatively towards a film. That doesn't scare me away from what could be a good experience.

Two, anything foor the kids. Even though they aren't mine.

 

[borghe]

Well gee. At least half of those movies are about morons/outcast becoming heroes.

umm.. aside from bug's life, what the hell are you talking about?

Not only that, but they all have the same style of humor, the shots are set up the same between them all, thesy all have the same character types etc etc.

obviously you are incapable of telling the diference between directors and cinematographers. if you could you would see there are stark differences between the movies by Stanton, Bird, Lassetter, etc.

And if you refuse to see the differences in films just because they are all from the same studio, you need help. "Same"? WTF?!

Fixed.

People do flock to Buddy Cop pictures, but you know, those suck too.

really? people flocked to hollywood homicide? taxi? showtime? etc..?

sorry, but your arguments pretty much suck. I suggest either get better ones or bow out because right now you are way over your head.

One, I'm a cinephile, so i watch everything. I have no problem feeling negatively towards a film. That doesn't scare me away from what could be a good experience.

BULLSHIT!

There isn't ONE cinephile I have EVER met who hasn;t gushed about pixar. the two cannot coexist. film snob, maybe, but even most film snobs love pixar.

 

[Phoenix]

umm.. aside from bug's life, what the hell are you talking about?


obviously you are incapable of telling the diference between directors and cinematographers. if you could you would see there are stark differences between the movies by Stanton, Bird, Lassetter, etc.


Fixed.


really? people flocked to hollywood homicide? taxi? showtime? etc..?

sorry, but your arguments pretty much suck. I suggest either get better ones or bow out because right now you are way over your head.


BULLSHIT!

There isn't ONE cinephile I have EVER met who hasn;t gushed about pixar. the two cannot coexist.

 

[karasu]

obviously you are incapable of telling the diference between directors and cinematographers. if you could you would see there are stark differences between the movies by Stanton, Bird, Lassetter, etc.

Yeah, like what? Other than their names. Please tell me of these stark differences in cinematography. Or are you just saying it because it sounds good?Of course you are. John Lassetter wrote & directed three of their movies, and he produced at least four. :roll

really? people flocked to hollywood homicide? taxi? showtime? etc..?

sorry, but your arguments pretty much suck. I suggest either get better ones or bow out because right now you are way over your head.

Uh, are you slow? Did you read the thread? Warm Machine said that, I simply agreed. Wh
y? Because it's true. So you list 3 that bomb, big whoop. The Rush Hourseries , The Lethal Weapon series, The Beverly Hills Cops series, The Bad Boy series, all say differently.

BULLSHIT!

There isn't ONE cinephile I have EVER met who hasn;t gushed about pixar. the two cannot coexist. film snob, maybe, but even most film snobs love pixar.

God please give me a fucking break and stfu with that n00bsense. So all film buffs rave about the exact same movies now? We NEVER disagree. Everybody loves everything thats popular. Especially if it's an animated movie that's popular on the GAOTF!! There isn't a rolleyes big enough....

There style/formulas don't work for me, sorry if that ruins your life.

 

[FortNinety]

Christ, these are some piss poor reasons to not like movie. I think some are just saying they don't want to see the film just to look cool, or won't admit to having a desire to see it for the same reasons.

I'm still trying to figure out if this is for real...

I still have no intrest in seeing the movie. After Finding Nemo my animation life was complete. I LOVE FINDING NEMO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111

So yeah, you see one good thing and don't want to be exposed to something possibly as good. Brilliant reasoning.

 

[borghe]

Uh, are you slow?

dumbass, I quoted you..

There style/formulas don't work for me, sorry if that ruins your life.

There is a difference between not prefering something and talking through your ass about its supposed lack of artistic brilliance. One is opinion based but the other one should be approached and discussed with at least some level of objectivity. If you were a true movie buff that is, or "cinephile".

 

[radios shipping overview]

Now, I'm interested in The Incredibles and might catch it in the theatre, but I do have a question that I think is fair: does it turn into the same rescue-operation affair in the latter half, the way every other Pixar movie I've seen has done? I love their movies' style and humor, but I can't stand to watch 'em more than once because of that framework.

 

[borghe]

to be truthful, the last half is fairly formulaic. what the last half specifically has going for it is the absolute brilliant use of super-powers. so yes it is "everybody fights the bad guy to the end," but it is so damn entertaining to watch it is hard not to get pumped.. I mean do we tire of seeing superman fight? or batman? of the ff?

as for the movie itself, I feel it is stabilized enough that the action-packed last half is excusable. Some feel it is horrible pacing (slow first half, fast seond half), but for my money, it is done to create empathy for these characters so that in the rather formulaic last battle, you are rooting for more than the good guys. In fact you are rooting for these people that you have fallen in love with.

just my thoughts.

you will enjoy the movie regardless, but I will be curious to hear what you think of the end specifically.

 

[karasu]

dumbass, I quoted you..

Well, you should have read the rest.

There is a difference between not prefering something and talking through your ass about its supposed lack of artistic brilliance. One is opinion based but the other one should be approached and discussed with at least some level of objectivity. If you were a true movie buff that is, or "cinephile".

What the FUCK does that even mean? :lol I said I didn't like their style, and that they were redundant. You act llike I bashed them to high hell and said that anyone who likes them is a moron. I ended damn near every post with "which is cool if you're into that sort of thing."

 

[Fresh Prince]

Many people (okay two) agree with karasu.
This is what I feel
1) All their stories(except Toy Story 2) revolve around two characters who don't like each other at first start to get along as they progress through the film, with one having to end up rescuing the other.
2) Most of the 'other' cast members (forgot the term for it) all share the same personality traits ie. fish in the tank ~ Andy's toys

That said I appreciate their technical brilliance and Toy Story 2 is one of my Top 3 'Children's Films'.

Also Finding Nemo ain't that great seriously if you want a real Father and Son Story watch Lion King (aka Kimba the White Lion)
Anyway I'm going to laugh in 10 years time when Pixar turns into Disney and in turn gets bashed by critics and the public alike.

 

[3phemeral]

I think he's asking you to provide some sort of debatable information... like - what is it about the style that you don't like? Why is it repetetive to you? What makes Pixar's flims so "lacking"? etc etc etc

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

...Which is just a remake of Seven Samurai.

Who cares.

Er, that's what I meant. I've never seen the Magnificent Seven, just the Seven Samurai.


And I guess what I meant was that the "worst" Pixar film is only that because it's a remake, and an excellent one at that.

 

[borghe]

I said I didn't like their style, and that they were redundant. You act llike I bashed them to high hell

Well, let's see:

Eh, seen one pixar movie seen em all. The only thing that changes is the world the characters inhabit. Otherwise, it's the same shit.

Well gee. At least half of those movies are about morons/outcast becoming heroes. Not only that, but they all have the same style of humor, the shots are set up the same between them all, thesy all have the same character types etc etc.

If I want to see keen western animation I'll just turn on the tube.

Hmm... sounds like you are pretty much criticizing the studio as a whole, a studio that virtually EVER "cinephile" agrees is the last great animation studio in hollywood, even the people who don't care for their animation (the one or two).

oh, and I missed this

Yeah, like what? Other than their names. Please tell me of these stark differences in cinematography. Or are you just saying it because it sounds good?Of course you are. John Lassetter wrote & directed three of their movies, and he produced at least four. :roll

Well, to start with, john lasseter only really directed the toy story's. if you had actually done any research into the film you would have found that Andrew Stanton did the vast majority of the work on Bug's Life and John Lasseter pretty much dropped out once they decided Toy Story 2 was going to be a theatrical release. As for differences, hmm..

Toy Story's = tight shots usually emphasizing that everything is huge while making the toys normal size.

Bug's Life = lots of wide shots, usually emphasizing everything as normal size while making the bugs small

Monster's Inc = the most normal type camera work

finding nemo = lots of three dimensional shots emphasizing the three dimensions of movement in water. overhead, underneat, three qurter perspective wide angle, etc.

incredibles = lots of unusual "comic-type" shots to give it the feel of a comic book. tight telephoto shots of the main character and the and the obstacle (villain, robot, etc) filling the entire frame, low angled static camera shots with full compositions and minimal motion, etc

and even character design... the organic nature of nemo, the impresionistic nature of monsters, comical nature of incredibles, plasticine toy story, etc.

Sorry, I fail to see "all of these similarities" aside from that they are all from the same studio.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Many people (okay two) agree with karasu.
This is what I feel
1) All their stories(except Toy Story 2) revolve around two characters who don't like each other at first start to get along as they progress through the film, with one having to end up rescuing the other.

Except for Bug's Life, The Incredibles, and Monsters Inc, you're right!!1!

 

[borghe]

Many people (okay two) agree with karasu.
This is what I feel
1) All their stories(except Toy Story 2) revolve around two characters who don't like each other at first start to get along as they progress through the film, with one having to end up rescuing the other.

aside from bug's life, incredibles, monsters inc, and finding nemo, I agree with you.

2) Most of the 'other' cast members (forgot the term for it) all share the same personality traits ie. fish in the tank ~ Andy's toys

hmm.. andy's toys were mainly background, whereas the fish in the tank took on a pretty pronounced roll in the film in actually helping nemo. andy's toys = other monsters in monsters inc, maybe... but in the other movies most of the cast had a pretty large effect on the story of the respective flick.

Also Finding Nemo ain't that great seriously if you want a real Father and Son Story watch Lion King (aka Kimba the White Lion)

completely inappropriate. Lion King is not a father son movie, especially when the father dies 1/3 of the way through. Lion King is about a trying to find his place in the world, admittedly eventually living up to his father. A father son movie to most people is a movie about a father and son and some sort of struggle and resolution through their relationship.

Anyway I'm going to laugh in 10 years time when Pixar turns into Disney and in turn gets bashed by critics and the public alike.

As long as Lasseter is with the company this will never happen. Mark my words.

 

[Fresh Prince]

1) P1:
A Bug's Life- Flick and Princess don't like each other. Flick and circus crew rescue that other small princess. Princess likes Flick.
P2:
Flick and Crew rescues the Anthill. Anthill community now likes Flick.
2) The Incredibles- not watched it- but it involves a rescue - right?
3)P1:
Mike doesn't like Boo. Mike and Blue Thing rescue Boo. Mike somewhat likes Boo.
P2:
Mike and Blue thing through the course of film are friends- then hate each other and then like each other after rescuing Boo.
4) Nemo and Marlin don't see eye to eye. Nemo thinks his dad is to protective. When Nemo goes missing he realises how much he needs and loves his father, while Marlin discover that if you truly love someone you must let go. When they resuce each other they see eye to eye.

In the end it always involves a resuce.

 

[borghe]

those are some pretty wide cast generalizations there and don't conform very well to your original point. that being said

Raiders of the lost ark - indy and marion don't like each other. he rescues her and they like each other in the end.

Temple of Doom - indy and kate capshaw don't like each other. he rescue's her. they like each other in the end.

last crusade - indy and connery don't like each other. indy rescues him. they like each other in the end.

star wars - leia doesn't like any of them. they rescue her. she likes them in the end.

spirited away - sen and her parents don't see eye to eye. she rescues them. they see eye to eye in the end.

I mean when you break it down like that almost every movie can be described that way.

 

[SteveMeister]

Conflict and resolution. Essential elements to storytelling. Can you propose any alternative story constructs that would fit within a family movie such as those made by Pixar?

 

[Fresh Prince]

Yes but the point is Indiana Jones and Star War movies are a series.
With the exception of Toy Story 2, the other pixar movies are supposed unique within and of themselves.
To me it seems they are not. Perhaps the protaginist's character changes, the environment changes but the rest stays same-ish. Pixar has a formula- it works but some people think that Pixar isn't all that 'revolutionary'.

 

[Christoff Yurievich]

what's that old quote, something about there being only so many ways you can tell a story?

 

[Fresh Prince]

Conflict and resolution. Essential elements to storytelling. Can you propose any alternative story constructs that would fit within a family movie such as those made by Pixar?

A love story?
Any adventure story that didn't involve a rescue?

 

[J2 Cool]

Yeah, like what? Other than their names. Please tell me of these stark differences in cinematography. Or are you just saying it because it sounds good?Of course you are. John Lassetter wrote & directed three of their movies, and he produced at least four. :roll

My reply in the other Incredibles thread without being influenced by this thread

"Yeah, I noticed that and was wondering why they felt so real and I think Brad Bird really brings that to his work. Simpons for example. Iron Giant had the same impact for me as well. He doesnt hold back anything because it's an animated film and he doesnt create his films because they're animated. They just work as strong stories alone. Then he benefits that story with animation and art and creativeness. I just find antics about his characters from his dialogue to their human-like quirks detailed by the animation that are so real.

I think each director of these Pixar films adds his own flair. Lasseter's stuff feels detached from reality and even parodies it in a lot of ways but with no lack of emotion. It's pure magic. Stanton gives a sense of wonder and a new perspective on things from a Bug's view, a fish's. He puts you in their shoes and their tale. And I think with new directors like Jan Pinkava, who added a billion or so quirks to make Geri come alive as an old man, we'll get guys pushing themselves to new heights wanting to live up to the genius that Pixar has been."

Why? Because I dislike their style? If I want to see keen western animation I'll just turn on the tube. I'm 'thankful' for Bruce Timm and the like.

Listen, you really gave weak arguments to why the stories are the same. You can give me close to ANY movie, and I could stitch something together to say they're the same. And besides, all Bruce Timm does is superhero shows. Let's see how long he can struggle before he gets the edge on the villain and saves everyone! How exciting! And in all seriousness I like Bruce Timm but if I were to debate with you there's the flip side of the coin. Seriously, please give me some movies or directors you like. Its so easy.

Oh, and btw, on rotten tomatoes, 97% is not bad. You always have reviewer's who think their opinion is beyond this, that there is some underlying thing bad about this movie, that nobody but they see with their distinguished eye. It's a joke. I fucking hate those guys. Let's see, Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind which I loved

"Ultimately it seems another unpleasantly glib, shallow demonstration of Kaufman’s self-satisfied cleverness, further marred by failed pretensions to profundity about romantic destiny." - Frank Swietek, ONE GUY'S OPINION

What the hell is that??! Just as I said, idiots who thing they're brilliant. "Self satisfied cleverness" only pertains to this ignorant fool. Let's see though, something that should be impregnable to hate... I dunno, Back to the Future... 93%

"Too cute, too clever, too damn smug."

And if you look it just goes on and on. Now with the Incredibles. Plastic characters? Check out the stubble on Mr. Incredible. Who cares if their ankles are skinny! Nobody said Pixar was trying to recreate real humans. Then you got those watching the movie for their children instead of themselves as a reviewer. So we get 40 year old men appalled by guns and attempts at murdering a kid. Get off your fucking high horse. This movie is made as a movie, watch it as a movie. The idiots can't look past "ooh, it's animated". Can't stand that shit. And no, Mr Incredible is not Buzz. That deserves a serious, wtf? Besides a jaw and superhero like looks, they have nothing in common. How is Mr. Incredible delusional wanting to save people when he actually can? I can't even comment anymore on that.

 

[borghe]

I just used those off the top of my head.. I could pull MANY MORE out that aren't from series.

SteveMeister said it.. conflict and resolution. It is required in some form for any truly great story. Someone needs rescuing. Someone needs to be shown the way. A relationship needs to be worked out.

If anything Pixar should be commended for not throwing just one act of conflict at us but multiple ones thus giving the story depth IMHO.

It isn't only about Woody getting Buzz back but them getting along. Then throw in there needing to give buss a sense of purpose.

It is about saving Boo, getting her back to her door, foiling a malicious plot, etc.

I would argue that not only does conflict and resolution exist in all films, but that it is only "bad" in films where it is forced. take any typical horror movie. How many times do you say "who the hell would do that??? That makes no sense!" It is Pixar's (and other great filmmakers') ability to introduce both the conflict and resolution in a natural way that makes sense. In Toy Story you never wonder why Buzz and Woody don't like each other. You don't never question Woody's desire to go after buzz. In Monsters, Inc. you never question Sully's desire to get Boo back. You never question Mike's total dedication to his friend thus doing everything to help him (eventually).

The formula is the same in the sense of conflict and resolution, but whether it is the emotional victory of Toy Story, the epic victory of Bug's Life, the personal victory of Nemo, or the heroic victories of Incredibles or Monster, each movie holds something different.

 

[Fresh Prince]

No disagreements with what you just said, but eventually people will get tired of the Pixar 'formula'- Cars could be the movie that does so.

 

[J2 Cool]

No disagreements with what you just said, but eventually people will get tired of the Pixar 'formula'- Cars could be the movie that does so.

why, because it will have a rescue? There is no formula. Cars supposedly is a story of on car's dreams, learning from his elders/predecessors, and exploring america. That's like saying eventually people will get sick of movies or fairy tales. That's just stupid.

 

[borghe]

I honestly think people will be caught off guard by Cars.. a couple things most people seem not to know

Cars is not "about NASCAR"

It is about multiple (I believe five) intersecting stories, not necessarily shown in order or completion (pulp fiction, the simpsons episode where homer gets his thumb cutoff, etc)

It is only the third movie to be fully and truly written and directed by Lasseter (after the two Toy Stories)

It is the one movie he has done that is deepest to his heart

I really believe most people will be blown away by it.. I don't get why they released the trailer as they did, especially when by all reports the trailer has little to do with the actual movie.. but from what I know about the actual movie (culled from AICN interviews) I think most people will be surprised, especially considering the trailer.

 

[Meier]

Definitely their best effort yet. Anyone who didnt care for this film has absolutely no taste -- plain and simple.

 

[karasu]

Well, let's see:






Hmm... sounds like you are pretty much criticizing the studio as a whole, a studio that virtually EVER "cinephile" agrees is the last great animation studio in hollywood, even the people who don't care for their animation (the one or two).

v

dude, everthing you quoted equates to me calling them redundant.

oh, and I missed this

Well, to start with, john lasseter only really directed the toy story's. if you had actually done any research into the film you would have found that Andrew Stanton did the vast majority of the work on Bug's Life and John Lasseter pretty much dropped out once they decided Toy Story 2 was going to be a theatrical release. As for differences, hmm..

Yeah, and Andrew Stanton cowrote like five of their movies!

Toy Story's = tight shots usually emphasizing that everything is huge while making the toys normal size.

Bug's Life = lots of wide shots, usually emphasizing everything as normal size while making the bugs small

Monster's Inc = the most normal type camera work

finding nemo = lots of three dimensional shots emphasizing the three dimensions of movement in water. overhead, underneat, three qurter perspective wide angle, etc.



Srrry, I fail to see "all of these similarities" aside from that they are all from the same studio.

You are shitting me right? I mean you're obviously pulling my chain here, because every one of those movies are full of everything you said distinguishes them. Toy Story, and Bug's Life for example. BOTH focus on tiny creatures in a large worl both use both wide and tight shots to illustrate that.. I mean you changed the word huge to normal when you mentioned A Bug's Life, but come on. I don't even know what " lots of three dimensional shots " is suppossed to mean. That's kind of the point of all 3d animation, and
Lee Unkrich would say that the photography was always ' the normal kind'. I'm sorry you can't see the similarities, really I am. It makes no sense to me. Especially considering that most people can tell Pixar films from all other 3D films because of the qualities they share.

Your insistance that all 'cinephiles' love Pixar is fucking retarded. Cinephiles aren't a fucking hive. All Sci Fi fans don't love Star Was, not all Comic Book fans love Superman, etc etc. Disliking Pixar doesn't negate my love of film you fanboy. Jesus, you call my argument weak and all I'm arguing is my own fuckinng position. For some reason that threatens you. You're trying to prove wrong something that's ridiculous to try and prove wrong. Instead of simply admitting that you enjoy the style they work with and the sensibilities the team bring to the table, you're acting like that style and sensibility doesn't exist.

 

[Warm Machine]

Pixar is simply genius when it comes to setting up scenes and working within the story, envinroment, and character parameters they set up.

The action scene with Elastagirl getting caught in the doors was really cleverly developed. Working scenes where the family's powers are used together into the action was excellent too.

They are also great with rising action and payoff. The airport scene in Toy Story 2 had such a great build to it starting with the luggage carosel and heading into the plane itself. The chase with the deep sea creature with the light on it's head in Finding Nemo was incredible.

Few movies have that sort of action based storytelling. Movies that come to mind that are like that are Raiders of the Lost Ark and Empire Strikes Back. The plot is developed through the action and the events within the action scenes are both exciting and seamlessly worked into the structure of the film.

 

[Fresh Prince]

why, because it will have a rescue? There is no formula. Cars supposedly is a story of on car's dreams, learning from his elders/predecessors, and exploring america. That's like saying eventually people will get sick of movies or fairy tales. That's just stupid.

Well I presumed wrongly about Cars.
About your shtick about Fairy Tales, I would disagree- if you look at the 'Girls' Toys there has been a move away form the home maker and 'fairy tales' Barbie (when say I was young) to the more teeny and 'ghettoish' Bratz toys.

 

[SteveMeister]

karasu, I think it just boils down to one thing: people who love Pixar movies can't understand why others might not like them. Personally I can't think of anything to DISLIKE about them.

It's like how Kerry supporters can't understand why people could possibly have voted for Bush, and vice versa.

 

[karasu]

My reply in the other Incredibles thread without being influenced by this thread

"Yeah, I noticed that and was wondering why they felt so real and I think Brad Bird really brings that to his work. Simpons for example. Iron Giant had the same impact for me as well. He doesnt hold back anything because it's an animated film and he doesnt create his films because they're animated. They just work as strong stories alone. Then he benefits that story with animation and art and creativeness. I just find antics about his characters from his dialogue to their human-like quirks detailed by the animation that are so real.

Notice that I never mentioned the Incredibles.

Listen, you really gave weak arguments to why the stories are the same. You can give me close to ANY movie, and I could stitch something together to say they're the same. And besides, all Bruce Timm does is superhero shows. Let's see how long he can struggle before he gets the edge on the villain and saves everyone! How exciting! And in all seriousness I like Bruce Timm but if I were to debate with you there's the flip side of the coin. Seriously, please give me some movies or directors you like. Its so easy.

Maybe because I didn't say the stories AKA Plots were the same? All I said was that it was the same shit. Meaning the style of humor, character personalities and interactions, and everything else that I actually said.

 

[J2 Cool]

You are shitting me right? I mean you're obviously pulling my chain here, because every one of those movies are full of everything you said distinguishes them. Toy Story, and Bug's Life for example. BOTH focus on tiny creatures in a large worl both use both wide and tight shots to illustrate that.. I mean you changed the word huge to normal when you mentioned A Bug's Life, but come on. I don't even know what " lots of three dimensional shots " is suppossed to mean. That's kind of the point of all 3d animation, and
Lee Unkrich would say that the photography was always ' the normal kind'. I'm sorry you can't see the similarities, really I am. It makes no sense to me. Especially considering that most people can tell Pixar films from all other 3D films because of the qualities they share.

Your insistance that all 'cinephiles' love Pixar is fucking retarded. Cinephiles aren't a fucking hive. All Sci Fi fans don't love Star Was, not all Comic Book fans love Superman, etc etc. Disliking Pixar doesn't negate my love of film you fanboy. Jesus, you call my argument weak and all I'm arguing is my own fuckinng position. For some reason that threatens you. You're trying to prove wrong something that's ridiculous to try and prove wrong. Instead of simply admitting that you enjoy the style they work with and the sensibilities the team bring to the table, you're acting like that style and sensibility doesn't exist.

Brad Bird as a director is not the same thing as other Pixar movies. The only similarity to other Pixar flicks are a few gags that fill the movie but in a lot of ways the humor is completely different. Seriously, watch the movie, or watch The Iron Giant, or read my post regarding your quotes. But don't generalize something you havent seen.

 

[karasu]

karasu, I think it just boils down to one thing: people who love Pixar movies can't understand why others might not like them. Personally I can't think of anything to DISLIKE about them.

It's like how Kerry supporters can't understand why people could possibly have voted for Bush, and vice versa.

I think you're right, but I also think it's idiotic. Not even everyone likes Freedom or being alive. Why the fuck is the world gonna unite over Pixar. :lol