ElJeffeNot actually a mod.Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPAmod
edited June 2010
Just saw this; it was pretty great. I'll need to digest it before I go ranking things.
Ken is awesome.
I've decided that I fucking hate 3D movies. I don't really give a shit about 3D and find that it detracts from the movie as often as it adds to it (though TS3 was actually subtle and didn't bug me at all), and I don't like paying an extra $3-4 per ticket. And when a movie comes out in 3D, it's a fucking act of god to find a showing that's not in 3D, which means that basically if I want to see that movie in the theater, I have to pay a bunch of extra money for a feature that I don't even much like. $32 for matinee for two adults and a kid is not okay.
grumble grumble damn clouds
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Just saw this; it was pretty great. I'll need to digest it before I go ranking things.
Ken is awesome.
I've decided that I fucking hate 3D movies. I don't really give a shit about 3D and find that it detracts from the movie as often as it adds to it (though TS3 was actually subtle and didn't bug me at all), and I don't like paying an extra $3-4 per ticket. And when a movie comes out in 3D, it's a fucking act of god to find a showing that's not in 3D, which means that basically if I want to see that movie in the theater, I have to pay a bunch of extra money for a feature that I don't even much like. $32 for matinee for two adults and a kid is not okay.
grumble grumble damn clouds
$3. Word is that Disney was very strict about keeping the price down.
the 3d in up and toy story wasn't really that mind-blowing, but i did enjoy it a lot, it also draws a lot of attention to how awesome the textures are.
and god, the 'IT'S COMING RIGHT AT YOU!' bullshit. i thought we were done with that in like the 90's or some shit, but no. FUCK YOU monsters vs aliens.
and am i the only person that really wants to see legend of the guardians?
They did a fantastic job and keeping aware of what was established in Toy Story 1 and 2. The entire opening sequence was... just so well done. Pixar is so fucking clever.
Improvolone on
Voice actor for hire. My time is free if your project is!
I think the 3D only really works if it was planned in there at the beginning. Toy Story 3's didn't impress me, but Alice did, even if the movie itself...not so much. And the ending made me tear up a bit, but not cry like a baby. I think I'm not as a big a toy-phile as many people are. Sure, I had my Voltrons, my Silverhawks, my turtles who are also ninjas. But I never got that attached to them. I think part of it has to do with losing a stuffed Mickey Mouse, my favorite toy at the time, when I was six. Besides, I "graduated" to video games as early as six to eight first when I saw someone play the original Super Mario Brothers at a Showbiz Pizza, and later when a babysitter introduced me to Megaman 2. Now, if there was a lovingly written and directed trilogy of movies about eight-bit videogame heroes who somehow come to life, leave the screen and have adventures....
...excuse me. I think I have an outline for my next screenplay to write.
EmperorSeth on
You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
0
Options
ElJeffeNot actually a mod.Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPAmod
edited June 2010
I enjoyed the 3D in TS3 above that in Alice specifically because it was so low-key. It made everything look very life-like and natural, and accentuated the movie rather than draw attention to itself. In the other 3D movies I've seen, there are always a lot of scenes where I become reminded that I'm watching a 3D movie and wearing 3D glasses.
And honestly, I don't blame the 3D itself too much for the "It's coming right for us!" crap. That's largely just a CG thing, and shows up in damn near every non-Pixar CG movie ever made. Directors have a hard-on for all the fancy camera tricks they can do in CG, and nearly always have a few scenes where the camera does ridiculous things just because it can.
The Pixar movies that have been in 3D probably don't have that problem because Pixar doesn't rely on gimmicks to sell their movies.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
True, but then how life-like and natural is Wonderland supposed to be? It should be weird, which the 3D effects nicely emphasized. Besides, a matinee ticket for me is $6 and a 3D IMAX ticket is $14. For eight extra dollars, the 3D damn well BETTER be noticeable.
EmperorSeth on
You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
And the ending made me tear up a bit, but not cry like a baby. I think I'm not as a big a toy-phile as many people are. Sure, I had my Voltrons, my Silverhawks, my turtles who are also ninjas. But I never got that attached to them.
I didn't tear up because I was a toy person,
but because I could relate to the pain experienced from losing someone important in your life, even when you know it's for the best.
Also, beginning the film with the scene where they're so desperate to be play with Andy caused that final scene to hit me that much harder. Even though they were motionless, remembering the opening helped me imagine what they were feeling, and before I knew it I was experiencing the very same mixed emotions.
As for toys, I never developed an attachment to mine either.
I enjoyed the 3D in TS3 above that in Alice specifically because it was so low-key. It made everything look very life-like and natural, and accentuated the movie rather than draw attention to itself. In the other 3D movies I've seen, there are always a lot of scenes where I become reminded that I'm watching a 3D movie and wearing 3D glasses.
And honestly, I don't blame the 3D itself too much for the "It's coming right for us!" crap. That's largely just a CG thing, and shows up in damn near every non-Pixar CG movie ever made. Directors have a hard-on for all the fancy camera tricks they can do in CG, and nearly always have a few scenes where the camera does ridiculous things just because it can.
The Pixar movies that have been in 3D probably don't have that problem because Pixar doesn't rely on gimmicks to sell their movies.
It doesn't hurt that Avatar imposed a standard of using the screen as the near-point (the term is "in relief," correct?).
I enjoyed the 3D in TS3 above that in Alice specifically because it was so low-key. It made everything look very life-like and natural, and accentuated the movie rather than draw attention to itself. In the other 3D movies I've seen, there are always a lot of scenes where I become reminded that I'm watching a 3D movie and wearing 3D glasses.
And honestly, I don't blame the 3D itself too much for the "It's coming right for us!" crap. That's largely just a CG thing, and shows up in damn near every non-Pixar CG movie ever made. Directors have a hard-on for all the fancy camera tricks they can do in CG, and nearly always have a few scenes where the camera does ridiculous things just because it can.
The Pixar movies that have been in 3D probably don't have that problem because Pixar doesn't rely on gimmicks to sell their movies.
I forgot what movie it was, I think it was Finding Nemo, where in the Director Commentary Pixar established the fact that even though they know they can do much more with the CG Camera (going through objects, insane camera tricks etc.) they tend to never do just because keeping the camera in the bounds of a normal movie camera makes the films seem more believable and engaging.
I enjoyed the 3D in TS3 above that in Alice specifically because it was so low-key. It made everything look very life-like and natural, and accentuated the movie rather than draw attention to itself. In the other 3D movies I've seen, there are always a lot of scenes where I become reminded that I'm watching a 3D movie and wearing 3D glasses.
And honestly, I don't blame the 3D itself too much for the "It's coming right for us!" crap. That's largely just a CG thing, and shows up in damn near every non-Pixar CG movie ever made. Directors have a hard-on for all the fancy camera tricks they can do in CG, and nearly always have a few scenes where the camera does ridiculous things just because it can.
The Pixar movies that have been in 3D probably don't have that problem because Pixar doesn't rely on gimmicks to sell their movies.
I forgot what movie it was, I think it was Finding Nemo, where in the Director Commentary Pixar established the fact that even though they know they can do much more with the CG Camera (going through objects, insane camera tricks etc.) they tend to never do just because keeping the camera in the bounds of a normal movie camera makes the films seem more believable and engaging.
I know they worked really hard in Wall-E to mimic the kind of camera equipment that so many of our favorite Sci-Fi films were made with.
I want to see a full length 2D film made by Pixar. Just to show the world they can do it. You know Lasseter wants to.
Cameron_Talley on
Switch Friend Code: SW-4598-4278-8875
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
edited June 2010
Saw it today, and I have to say I was largely impressed. I wasn't the biggest fan of Toy Story 1 or 2, as I felt they aimed a little young and were fairly rote. Still brilliantly presented, mind you, but not doing much beyond being high-quality children's entertainment. And then, after the ultimately disappointing (but still very good) WALL-E and Up, I was feeling the Pixar backlash.
But I loved this film. Earnest but not saccharine, honest but not hokey, self-aware but not smug, it hit all the right notes for me. Plus, it hit a significantly dark note in the climax that would be rare in any motion picture, but here magnified because how the relative safety of the series lured in very small children and then exposed them to some very real grimness.
To take a film that was completely unwarranted and could have possibly been utter cash-grabbery and put this much care and effort into it earns Pixar a huge kudos from me, and guarantees Toy Story 3 an eventual spot in my blu-ray collection alongside The Incredibles, Ratatouille, and Monsters Inc, despite the fact both its predecessors are absent from that group.
After seeing this, my optimism in Pixar's future output is cautiously renewed (even though I know a Cars sequel is on the way). Given that we'll soon be seeing a romantic comedy and a fantasy epic from them, I eagerly await future productions. Maybe Pixar is moving in a better direction; maybe they're growing up.
Man, I have to give the Owl movie credit for doing something different besides goofy comedy. Pixar is the only one that really blends emotion and humor these days.
That being said, it tries way too hard. Your movie is about goddamn owls! That's a tough sell! No, do not have a location in your movie that is spelled with an apostrophe!
Sterica on
0
Options
RentI'm always rightFuckin' deal with itRegistered Userregular
Man, I have to give the Owl movie credit for doing something different besides goofy comedy. Pixar is the only one that really blends emotion and humor these days.
That being said, it tries way too hard. Your movie is about goddamn owls! That's a tough sell! No, do not have a location in your movie that is spelled with an apostrophe!
I tried to get into it, because I could see a lot of effort was being put into it, but it's an incredibly large pill to swallow to take "owls live together in a society with magic powers and evil guys and shit" seriously. It felt so goddamn ludicrous
Also the music for the trailer is stuff I'd listen to regularly but didn't fit the trailer at all. At some points I thought the owls were going to put on distressed jeans and Converse and continue listening on their iPods
I think my only complaint about the movie would be about:
Sid's Cameo. It seemed like they could have put more emphasis that the garbage guy was Sid. Watching the film again, if you do look closely you can see the skull T-shirt, but I think if you weren't looking for it you'd probably miss it. I think they should have him be called out by another worker or something. Or even maybe singing "WHERE ARE YOUR REBEL FRIENDS NOW" along to his rocking out. I mean they even got the guy who did Sid's voice from the original you'd think they'd have him do more then random noises.
Saw it today, and I have to say I was largely impressed. I wasn't the biggest fan of Toy Story 1 or 2, as I felt they aimed a little young and were fairly rote. Still brilliantly presented, mind you, but not doing much beyond being high-quality children's entertainment. And then, after the ultimately disappointing (but still very good) WALL-E and Up, I was feeling the Pixar backlash.
...
After seeing this, my optimism in Pixar's future output is cautiously renewed (even though I know a Cars sequel is on the way). Given that we'll soon be seeing a romantic comedy and a fantasy epic from them, I eagerly await future productions. Maybe Pixar is moving in a better direction; maybe they're growing up.
Just a little.
I got to say, you may be the only one that has these sentiments. Up and WALL-E are some of Pixar's best. I still think WALL-E is their best film. What specifically did you find lackluster?
Better direction? While there's always room for improvement, by all accounts Pixar doesn't need "growing up." They're already quite mature.
Cameron_Talley on
Switch Friend Code: SW-4598-4278-8875
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
I think my only complaint about the movie would be about:
Sid's Cameo. It seemed like they could have put more emphasis that the garbage guy was Sid. Watching the film again, if you do look closely you can see the skull T-shirt, but I think if you weren't looking for it you'd probably miss it. I think they should have him be called out by another worker or something. Or even maybe singing "WHERE ARE YOUR REBEL FRIENDS NOW" along to his rocking out. I mean they even got the guy who did Sid's voice from the original you'd think they'd have him do more then random noises.
Yeah, but it's Pixar. They love doing subtle things like this. It's a little bonus for fans.
My only complaint about the movie is that I didn't get the TRON trailer in front of it like some did.
Cameron_Talley on
Switch Friend Code: SW-4598-4278-8875
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
I stayed till the end of the credits and didn't see anything, though I remember reading here that there was something. There was the new toys welcome to Sunnyside with the credits, but thats it.
I also did not catch the Sid thing.
Improvolone on
Voice actor for hire. My time is free if your project is!
I got to say, you may be the only one that has these sentiments. Up and WALL-E are some of Pixar's best. I still think WALL-E is their best film. What specifically did you find lackluster?
Better direction? While there's always room for improvement, by all accounts Pixar doesn't need "growing up." They're already quite mature.
For me (and while I'm certainly not alone in these opinions, I realize their minority status), I find similar problems in both Up and WALL-E. Both aim extremely young, and both have inconsistent tone. Both films muddle their message a bit, and both have overly simplistic dynamics for what would actually be very strange and remarkable relationships. Basically, they have some thematic and storycrafting holes that better Pixar films avoid, and those better films do so without having such heavy-handed subtext.
But again, just an opinion, and I don't want to get into a Pixar dickslinging contest over who loves what the most. Up and WALL-E are still very good, and WALL-E is in my blu-ray collection. They just don't match up well to Pixar's more mature fare to suit my tastes.
Man, I have to give the Owl movie credit for doing something different besides goofy comedy. Pixar is the only one that really blends emotion and humor these days.
That being said, it tries way too hard. Your movie is about goddamn owls! That's a tough sell! No, do not have a location in your movie that is spelled with an apostrophe!
To be fair, that movie is based on a (series of) book(s). The names were pre-apostrophe'd for them.
Posts
I woke up crying like a damn baby.
Ken is awesome.
I've decided that I fucking hate 3D movies. I don't really give a shit about 3D and find that it detracts from the movie as often as it adds to it (though TS3 was actually subtle and didn't bug me at all), and I don't like paying an extra $3-4 per ticket. And when a movie comes out in 3D, it's a fucking act of god to find a showing that's not in 3D, which means that basically if I want to see that movie in the theater, I have to pay a bunch of extra money for a feature that I don't even much like. $32 for matinee for two adults and a kid is not okay.
grumble grumble damn clouds
Did he have the gun in the last one?
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
$3. Word is that Disney was very strict about keeping the price down.
I've watched 1 and 2 more than a dozen times each in the last two weeks with my son, I assure you he has never had a gun and just an empty holster.
He has a holster that held a match at one point
It's more like an open satchel, really
and god, the 'IT'S COMING RIGHT AT YOU!' bullshit. i thought we were done with that in like the 90's or some shit, but no. FUCK YOU monsters vs aliens.
and am i the only person that really wants to see legend of the guardians?
...excuse me. I think I have an outline for my next screenplay to write.
And honestly, I don't blame the 3D itself too much for the "It's coming right for us!" crap. That's largely just a CG thing, and shows up in damn near every non-Pixar CG movie ever made. Directors have a hard-on for all the fancy camera tricks they can do in CG, and nearly always have a few scenes where the camera does ridiculous things just because it can.
The Pixar movies that have been in 3D probably don't have that problem because Pixar doesn't rely on gimmicks to sell their movies.
Is that the owl-o-rama movie? The flick with nothing but 47 skillion owls?
Then yes, you are.
I didn't tear up because I was a toy person,
Also, beginning the film with the scene where they're so desperate to be play with Andy caused that final scene to hit me that much harder. Even though they were motionless, remembering the opening helped me imagine what they were feeling, and before I knew it I was experiencing the very same mixed emotions.
As for toys, I never developed an attachment to mine either.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
scene. How far was I into the movie? From what I did see, though, it was quite good, and used the 3D parts rather tastefully and subtly.
Maybe 2/3 in, I'd guess.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
It doesn't hurt that Avatar imposed a standard of using the screen as the near-point (the term is "in relief," correct?).
I forgot what movie it was, I think it was Finding Nemo, where in the Director Commentary Pixar established the fact that even though they know they can do much more with the CG Camera (going through objects, insane camera tricks etc.) they tend to never do just because keeping the camera in the bounds of a normal movie camera makes the films seem more believable and engaging.
I know they worked really hard in Wall-E to mimic the kind of camera equipment that so many of our favorite Sci-Fi films were made with.
I want to see a full length 2D film made by Pixar. Just to show the world they can do it. You know Lasseter wants to.
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
But I loved this film. Earnest but not saccharine, honest but not hokey, self-aware but not smug, it hit all the right notes for me. Plus, it hit a significantly dark note in the climax that would be rare in any motion picture, but here magnified because how the relative safety of the series lured in very small children and then exposed them to some very real grimness.
To take a film that was completely unwarranted and could have possibly been utter cash-grabbery and put this much care and effort into it earns Pixar a huge kudos from me, and guarantees Toy Story 3 an eventual spot in my blu-ray collection alongside The Incredibles, Ratatouille, and Monsters Inc, despite the fact both its predecessors are absent from that group.
After seeing this, my optimism in Pixar's future output is cautiously renewed (even though I know a Cars sequel is on the way). Given that we'll soon be seeing a romantic comedy and a fantasy epic from them, I eagerly await future productions. Maybe Pixar is moving in a better direction; maybe they're growing up.
Just a little.
That being said, it tries way too hard. Your movie is about goddamn owls! That's a tough sell! No, do not have a location in your movie that is spelled with an apostrophe!
I tried to get into it, because I could see a lot of effort was being put into it, but it's an incredibly large pill to swallow to take "owls live together in a society with magic powers and evil guys and shit" seriously. It felt so goddamn ludicrous
Also the music for the trailer is stuff I'd listen to regularly but didn't fit the trailer at all. At some points I thought the owls were going to put on distressed jeans and Converse and continue listening on their iPods
Great movie, I couldn't possibly speak any higher of it. Hands down, the best movie I've seen so far this year.
I got to say, you may be the only one that has these sentiments. Up and WALL-E are some of Pixar's best. I still think WALL-E is their best film. What specifically did you find lackluster?
Better direction? While there's always room for improvement, by all accounts Pixar doesn't need "growing up." They're already quite mature.
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
My only complaint about the movie is that I didn't get the TRON trailer in front of it like some did.
3DS Friend Code: 0404-6826-4588 PM if you add.
3DS FC: 5343-7720-0490
hm... maybe it's because I saw that Bobo episode of the Simpson earlier.
I also did not catch the Sid thing.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
It's really easy to miss. The only reason I noticed it is that I blundered into his name on the movie's IMDB page and was on the lookout for him.
For me (and while I'm certainly not alone in these opinions, I realize their minority status), I find similar problems in both Up and WALL-E. Both aim extremely young, and both have inconsistent tone. Both films muddle their message a bit, and both have overly simplistic dynamics for what would actually be very strange and remarkable relationships. Basically, they have some thematic and storycrafting holes that better Pixar films avoid, and those better films do so without having such heavy-handed subtext.
But again, just an opinion, and I don't want to get into a Pixar dickslinging contest over who loves what the most. Up and WALL-E are still very good, and WALL-E is in my blu-ray collection. They just don't match up well to Pixar's more mature fare to suit my tastes.
It's subtle, but yeah Woody still has the beefy bicep.
I guess they liked it in the first movie and kept bringing it back.
Crazy character in a normal world, or a normal character in a crazy world.
To be fair, that movie is based on a (series of) book(s). The names were pre-apostrophe'd for them.
I will say that at least it looked more visually stunning than the talking wolf movie did.
Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop