Good luck finding the Pizza Planet truck. [BRAVE]

Centipede Damascus

from Neil Gaiman's tumblr:

I bought my niece Coraline as a gift. When I next saw her, I asked what she thought of it. She got about half-way through, then got so scared she wrapped it up in a blanket and put it in a shoe box. Then put the shobox in an empty toybox, then filled the toybox, locked it, and put it up in the attic. Which was then locked. Just thought I'd share that.

I think that’s the most wonderfully sensible treatment of a book that scares you I’ve ever heard of.

MrDapper

That sounds like something from Coraline ironically.

SabreMau

Hullis wrote: »

I just watched tangled tonight

wow <3

I still remember everyone's reactions to Tangled before it actually came out, just based off its ad campaign. Because I saved them in a thread.

Liiya wrote: »

Also, I've seen the trailer for Tangled, it looks... okay?

Quoth wrote: »

but the rapunzel movie looks hella stupid

if this were pixar i wouldn't be worried but disney...

mensch-o-matic wrote: »

Padding I wouldn't mind, but the prince character looks so obnoxious, like he was ripped right out of a Dreamworks movie

Raijin Quickfoot wrote: »

Crashmo wrote: »

tangled looks kinda bad

like they're trying to be all shrek-y

This is the same thought I had.

Raneados wrote: »

it looks exactly how dreamworks movies look every time, condescending smirks and a whole dollop of mediocrity abound

Peccavi wrote: »

Is Tangled a hentai movie where this girl has tentacles growing out of her head that she uses to force sex on a dude?

Cause that's what it looked like.

Quoth

It did look stupid!

Thank goodness it was not

Personface

The way most Pixar trailers are cut would suggest an equal level of stupidity
It's like no one can make a dignified animated trailer, the producers have to scrounge for the most awful parts/basest jokes so they can make a compilation of the worst possible sort.

the Professor

Woah shit i just opened this thread and got an assload of dreamworks face is this like a thing of you guys now

KalTorak

Tangled is goddamn awesome.

Druhim

PaperLuigi44 wrote: »

Cars merch is insanely popular so if it helps fund non-Cars stuff then I'm ok with it.

bingo

DouglasDanger

Ten wrote: »

SabreMau wrote:

PaperLuigi44 wrote: »

What was that movie that came out after Madagascar but cribbed the 'zoo animals out of their comfort zone' idea?

I didn't see it but it looked awful.

Was it something like this?

I actually really like this movie, if only for the scene where the squirrel drinks coffee and everything goes into slow motion

But in general it was pretty decent for a non-Pixar animated film

wasn't over the hedge a comic strip?


i liked megamind, but that was largely because of Minion and Brad Pitt doing Bruce Campbell as Elvis as Superman
i enjoyed it, but i felt it could have been a lot more fun based on the voice cast

Butters

Personface wrote:

The way most Pixar trailers are cut would suggest an equal level of stupidity
It's like no one can make a dignified animated trailer, the producers have to scrounge for the most awful parts/basest jokes so they can make a compilation of the worst possible sort.

I don't know if I agree with this at all but I find the second Brave trailer (the one with dialog) to be pretty shitty myself. But their track record on the final product speaks for itself.

KalTorak

The Pixar trailers where it's just original footage made just for the trailer (Mr. Incredible trying to get his belt on, Mike and Sully in the wrong bedroom) are usually way better than their more traditional trailers. Maybe they aren't as effective marketing for the wider audience, I dunno - I wish they'd go back to making them though.

The Geek

KalTorak wrote: »

The Pixar trailers where it's just original footage made just for the trailer (Mr. Incredible trying to get his belt on, Mike and Sully in the wrong bedroom) are usually way better than their more traditional trailers. Maybe they aren't as effective marketing for the wider audience, I dunno - I wish they'd go back to making them though.

Yeah, I always liked when they made original footage just for the trailers.

In other news:

Vann Diras

the new trailer/scene they showed is awesome

i am so pumped for this movie

Personface

KalTorak wrote: »

The Pixar trailers where it's just original footage made just for the trailer (Mr. Incredible trying to get his belt on, Mike and Sully in the wrong bedroom) are usually way better than their more traditional trailers. Maybe they aren't as effective marketing for the wider audience, I dunno - I wish they'd go back to making them though.

This

Rolo

I thought there was some kind of rule against that though - I remember some kind of complaint that people though they were going to see that scene in the movie and complained when they didn't.

Bedigunz

I think Pixar and Dreamworks (more DW than Pixar) feel they need to appeal to a wider audience who sees animation as "kids stuff" so they throw in the terrible jokes and in your face celebrity voice acting to gain the viewers who wouldn't normally watch an animated film

Rolo

Yeah the "feast your eyes on this" line made me cringe a little in the trailer version, but it wasn't so horrible in the clip version

The Geek

Pixar doesn't do that very often.

Rolo

god

I remember that when I worked at the discount used/refurbished electronics store my stupid fucking asshole of a manager used to play DreamWork's Shark Tale on loop. He claimed we weren't allowed to bring movies in to play as demos, just in case the "Movie Inspector" came along and sued us for playing movies without a license (?). So it was Shark Tale, 4.5 times a day, every single day, for a period of about a year and a half.



and this fucking song would play every single time and my manager would start singing and rapping along like the gigantic tool that he was

and I would die

Butters

Rolo wrote: »

I thought there was some kind of rule against that though - I remember some kind of complaint that people though they were going to see that scene in the movie and complained when they didn't.

Well it's a stupid complaint as tons of movie trailers show footage that isn't in the main feature.

CorporateLogo

Flushed Away is not a bad movie

It's not even a Dreamworks movie, it's an Aardman Animations film that was distributed by Dreamworks

Rolo

Butters wrote: »

Rolo wrote: »

I thought there was some kind of rule against that though - I remember some kind of complaint that people though they were going to see that scene in the movie and complained when they didn't.

Well it's a stupid complaint as tons of movie trailers show footage that isn't in the main feature.

Well there was this idiot:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/10/drive-trailer-sarah-deming-lawsuit_n_1003987.html

I remember a similar one for what I'm pretty sure was the Incredibles, and that Pixar violated some kind of MPAA rule for trailer approval since less than X% of the trailer footage was in the actual movie.

Druhim

Rolo wrote: »

Butters wrote: »

Rolo wrote: »

I thought there was some kind of rule against that though - I remember some kind of complaint that people though they were going to see that scene in the movie and complained when they didn't.

Well it's a stupid complaint as tons of movie trailers show footage that isn't in the main feature.

Well there was this idiot:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/10/drive-trailer-sarah-deming-lawsuit_n_1003987.html

I remember a similar one for what I'm pretty sure was the Incredibles, and that Pixar violated some kind of MPAA rule for trailer approval since less than X% of the trailer footage was in the actual movie.

frivolous suits are nothing new and really shouldn't be used to back up a point at all because the people filing them are morons

Rolo

Druhim wrote: »

Rolo wrote: »

Butters wrote: »

Rolo wrote: »

I thought there was some kind of rule against that though - I remember some kind of complaint that people though they were going to see that scene in the movie and complained when they didn't.

Well it's a stupid complaint as tons of movie trailers show footage that isn't in the main feature.

Well there was this idiot:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/10/drive-trailer-sarah-deming-lawsuit_n_1003987.html

I remember a similar one for what I'm pretty sure was the Incredibles, and that Pixar violated some kind of MPAA rule for trailer approval since less than X% of the trailer footage was in the actual movie.

frivolous suits are nothing new and really shouldn't be used to back up a point at all because the people filing them are morons

whoa

that mild correction hurt my feelings there, dru

see you in court bitch

Raijin Quickfoot

Tangled is the perfect example of a movie with an incredibly misleading trailer. They should fire whoever was responsible for it because they made an amazing movie look shitty which I'm pretty sure is the opposite of their job description.

Vann Diras

i don't think pixar really goes for wild celebrity voice actors

they get whoever is good for the role. and pretty much 100% of the time they're completely right about that person

as for stupid jokes... ummmmmmm

Druhim

I think all this bitching about trailers is pretty odd. I mean, you're complaining that trailers don't make films look as good as they are in some cases, but then some of you complain if a trailer makes a shitty film look compelling. Trailers are advertising. I know, this is fucking obvious. But if it's so obvious that trailers are advertising, why do you care so much about whether they make the film look good (or bad) enough? Like all advertising, you should take it with a big grain of salt. There are much better metrics for telling whether or not you might enjoy a film.

The Geek

Vann Diras wrote: »

i don't think pixar really goes for wild celebrity voice actors

they get whoever is good for the role. and pretty much 100% of the time they're completely right about that person

as for stupid jokes... ummmmmmm

I was worried about Larry the Cable Guy for Cars breaking that tradition, but they actually had him be their character instead of his.

Vann Diras

The Geek wrote: »

Vann Diras wrote: »

i don't think pixar really goes for wild celebrity voice actors

they get whoever is good for the role. and pretty much 100% of the time they're completely right about that person

as for stupid jokes... ummmmmmm

I was worried about Larry the Cable Guy for Cars breaking that tradition, but they actually had him be their character instead of his.

i had actually forgotten about him

but like you said he actually did some acting instead of just "here is larry the cable guy's voice"

and he actually did a good job, so that helps

Bedigunz

Vann Diras wrote: »

i don't think pixar really goes for wild celebrity voice actors

they get whoever is good for the role. and pretty much 100% of the time they're completely right about that person

as for stupid jokes... ummmmmmm

To me that's a major glaring difference between Dreamworks and Pixar.

It seems that Pixar writes a character then thinks "who would fit into this voice"

As opposed to Dreamworks who picks a mainstream actor and builds a character around that person (see Shrek and half the cast of Kung-Fu Panda)

Bedlam

I havent even seen Cars but those Mator shorts they've shown on Disney Channel are great.

The Geek

Vann Diras wrote: »

The Geek wrote: »

Vann Diras wrote: »

i don't think pixar really goes for wild celebrity voice actors

they get whoever is good for the role. and pretty much 100% of the time they're completely right about that person

as for stupid jokes... ummmmmmm

I was worried about Larry the Cable Guy for Cars breaking that tradition, but they actually had him be their character instead of his.

i had actually forgotten about him

but like you said he actually did some acting instead of just "here is larry the cable guy's voice"

and he actually did a good job, so that helps

Bedigunz wrote: »

To me that's a major glaring difference between Dreamworks and Pixar.

It seems that Pixar writes a character then thinks "who would fit into this voice"

As opposed to Dreamworks who picks a mainstream actor and builds a character around that person (see Shrek and half the cast of Kung-Fu Panda)

Yup.

Bedigunz

Whatever you think of Monster vs Aliens, it was really obvious that they picked actors, then wrote characters based on those actors.

FF

Druhim wrote: »

I think all this bitching about trailers is pretty odd. I mean, you're complaining that trailers don't make films look as good as they are in some cases, but then some of you complain if a trailer makes a shitty film look compelling. Trailers are advertising. I know, this is fucking obvious. But if it's so obvious that trailers are advertising, why do you care so much about whether they make the film look good (or bad) enough? Like all advertising, you should take it with a big grain of salt. There are much better metrics for telling whether or not you might enjoy a film.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't...

mensch-o-matic

SabreMau wrote: »

Hullis wrote: »

I just watched tangled tonight

wow <3

I still remember everyone's reactions to Tangled before it actually came out, just based off its ad campaign. Because I saved them in a thread.

mensch-o-matic wrote: »

Padding I wouldn't mind, but the prince character looks so obnoxious, like he was ripped right out of a Dreamworks movie

and i was right

KalTorak

What prince?

mensch-o-matic

flynn wasnt revealed as a non-prince until later on i think?? also w/e

Quoth

Shrek was based on a kids' book FYI

Centipede Damascus

mensch-o-matic wrote:

flynn wasnt revealed as a non-prince until later on i think?? also w/e

I don't think they ever insinuated that he was a prince, although the orphanage upbringing certainly suggests that they might reveal that he is in a sequel or something

SabreMau

We already got a sort of sequel that they played before Beauty and the Beast 3D. Now that he's married Rapunzel, does that make him a prince-in-law?