Disneycember 2012

[Rebochan]

Since the old Disneycember thread was closed and I remember there were other snopesters that are fans, I thought I'd start this up and see if anyone wanted to chat about it on a site where the userbase isn't complete unmoderated and out of control. This year, Doug's covering all of Disney's CG output, which means lots of Pixar.

Toy Story

A Bugs Life

Toy Story 2

First three episodes. I'm not entirely clear on his schedule for these.

Toy Story: I'm kind of amazed he said the animation held up, because this was the first time I'd seen anything of the original Toy Story in a decade and wow! The humans were just awful! It's so hard to remember that back then, that was state of the art technology! Seriously, compare the humans in the first film to even the humans in the second film, and then the humans in the third are just...well, it's amazing what almost twenty years of technological advances can do for your CG. As for the film itself, I still like it and I think its a great inventive movie. It's just that the two sequels took the concepts it set up and told more complicated stories with them, so this one feels weaker by comparison. Still, going back and looking at the original film, it's amazing how much they were able to build on with a fairly simple concept and then continue to do so over two more movies.

Bugs Life: Not gonna lie - this is my least favorite Pixar film. Toy Story was simple but fresh, Bugs Life was just simple and cliche'd. It's not that you CAN'T do Seven Samurai with bugs and make it work, but this wasn't the script that pulled it off. Doug also brought up Antz, which I haven't seen since its release either, but I remembered liking that one more simply for having more fun with the whole "bugs" concept. The animation on this one also REALLY doesn't hold up, so the weak script pops out more when the visuals aren't able to keep distracting me. I remember at the time I saw it thinking that Pixar was done for - they only had one good idea in them and that was that. Glad I was wrong

Toy Story 2: I actually debate with myself over whether this one or Toy Story 3 was better. They both took the entire concept of being a disposable child's toy and ran with it, but they approached it in different ways. I'm also not gonna lie, even the few strains of "When She Loved Me" in the video got me choked me up - easily the most emotional scene in the entire Toy Story series in my book. I also absolutely loved how the characters grew from their experiences in the first film - especially with Buzz and the gag of giving them a second Buzz actually worked because it served as a great highlight of how much that character changed after accepting his true state of reality. Even the relationship he and Woody had is clearly based on having had a deep and meaningful journey together - and I love that Buzz is the reason Woody ultimately rejects being on display forever even though he knows his time with Andy is finite.

I assume if he just going in chronological order, the next video will cover Dinosaur....which is still not as awful a movie as Chicken Little

[Beejtronic]

Toy Story is very nostalgic for me, as it came out when I was 8 years old (first movie I ever saw in IMAX!), but Toy Story 2 was my favourite film from 1999-2010. Now I'm constantly waffling between Toy Storys 2 and 3 as my all-time favourite, while the first film isn't even really in the running. It's great, of course, and how it changed animation (and filmmaking, even) can't be understated, but I just don't love it the way I love the second two. (Jessie just might have something to do with that.)

I like A Bug's Life, though I only recently bought it. That's partly because my Pixar obsession didn't begin until after Toy Story 2, but also because it's not quite good enough for me to have desperately needed the DVD back when I was a student. So, I sort of understand where people are coming from with A Bug's Life, though I disagree that Antz was better. (And, ugh, Katzenberg. I hate him so much. The man who almost singlehandedly ruined Toy Story by wanting to make it dark! and edgy! See: Black Friday) Anyway, I think it's miles better than my least favourite Pixar movie, which is Cars. (And Cars 2, which I couldn't even be bothered to think about enough to decide which I disliked more.)

This series should be fun! Looking forward to the rest.

[Mau]

I cheerfully adore all Pixar movies..

Toy Story [and it's sequels] is more nostalgia for me - it's not at the top of my list.

Ratatouille [sp?], Walle, and more recently Brave are among my favorites. I'm looking forward to the Monsters sequel, also.

I could do without Cars [and I'm a bit <_< that they're making Planes now].

[Blatherskite]

This whole thread is making me feel vaguely nostalgic, as it was last year's Disneycember (which I found linked from this message board) that began the long process of me getting slightly obsessed with the TGWTG network. Now I watch so many TGWTG reviewers regularly, and it's all thanks to the snopes message board!

[Rebochan]

Monsters, Inc

I guess he's doing the Pixar films before tackling Disney's own CGI output.

I'm kind of baffled at his opinion on Mike Wazowski and his idea of Jack Black or Patton Oswalt being funnier is odd because I think he completely missed the point of the character. Nothing against either of those actors, and I actually like both of them, but they also tend to play completely different types of characters and would likely not have played as well off of John Goodman's character.

I'm also surprised he found the plot complicated, and I think he over thought it too much. If anything, one of the reasons I liked this movie so much at the time was because there was a lot more going on in the story than their previous efforts, which to me suggested they were maturing in their storytelling. The difference between Toy Story 1 and 2 is pretty obvious, but this movie added a lot more players with their own agendas to the mix.

And honestly, most of the fun I had with this movie outside of the segments he pointed out (the doors sequence is still amazing!) was the interplay between the principles and the various visual gags they got out of it. Not just with the monsters themselves (and those were also quite fun), but even things like reproducing a Chuck Jones cartoon.

Even the idea of people hating Boo is a foreign concept to me. I guess if you're one of those people who violently despise even the concept of children, but she's not over the top, she's not precocious, she's not any of the wretched cliches that make child characters normally annoying. She's an actual kid, and it's pretty clear from the movie that the people that wrote her were using actual toddlers as their model (in fact, Boo was voiced by a child the same age.)

I think Boo's also a good model for much better their human animation was getting, but this movie did still have a bit of that plasticine sheen.

[Rebochan]

Finding Nemo

So it has occured to me that I have not seen this movie since it first came out!

I remember really loving it, and seeing the clips brought back why. I was much older when I saw this film, and what struck me about the movie was that they tackled such adult fears as losing your children from the main character's perspective. It's not something you usually see in family films at all, but it felt so beautiful in this one. I also remember enjoying that Nemo and Marlin had two separate arcs that expressed what is otherwise a cliche concept ("family is important!") in a realistic and meaningful method while letting them both grow from the experience. When I saw Brave this summer, I felt like in a way it was a gender-swapped Finding Nemo...which I didn't find too much of a knock on Brave since they presented the idea with a very different perspective.

This was also the first one I've seen that I noticed the plasticine sheens are gone. They finally got their tech to the point where they could create organic things like flesh and water and plants and make them feel real yet still stay stylized. Just watching the animals swimming is mesmerizing.

[Rebochan]

The Incredibles
Cars

The Incredibles: Not gonna lie, I loved this movie and I STILL love this movie and until Wall-E, it was my favorite Pixar movie. I love superheroes through and through and this movie was practically made for me. Unlike a lot of media about superheroes as a concept, the people behind this one really did their homework - you can spot all kinds of references to the history of comics in this movie. I also really dug that this was one of the few movies with "family" as a theme that felt like it understood it as a concept. Everyone in the family has their own arcs and the experience of the movie helps them overcome their own problems, but more importantly, they learn to overcome them together. I also really loved the way the producers played with superpowers and came up with so many creative applications for the set of powers they created for their cast. It actually reminds me that very few superhero films find any real fun in the idea of having superpowers. I and many other people want to see another return to this, but until someone pries Brad Bird back out of San Francisco, they probably won't make it without him.

Cars: Okay, I'm surprised Doug thinks he's the "odd man out" on Cars, because pretty much since the movie came out, it seemed to ME that people were tripping over themselves to brag about how much they hated this movie. And they still do, especially after the sequel came out. Now, obviously most of them are in fact buying the DVDs and movie tickets and toys since it's Pixar's biggest money-maker in their entire roster, but they're still not going to cop to actually liking it. As for me, I can see a lot of the film's weaknesses and the Doc Hollywood with cars plot, but...I just can't work up a hate for this movie. The "cars are alive" universe, for all its oddities, was a lot of fun for me because of one factor - I saw this movie with a car guy. And this is probably one of his FAVORITE movies, period. I'm amazed Doug didn't do any research on the film, because the whole reason it exists is because John Lasseter is a car guy through and through and if you know that and you are/know someone like that, you see it that way too. And you notice all the insane amounts of detail put into the cars and the history of cars and the plot suddenly doesn't bother you as much because it's just a big ol' valentine to Cars. So, a weak movie, but a fun one. I never felt it was lazy just...odd. Cars 2...that was lazy >_<

[Beejtronic]

I just plain didn't like Cars. In fact, I remember sitting in the theatre and suddenly realizing with shock halfway through, "This is the first Pixar movie I don't like." Maybe it's not an objectively bad movie, but I'm not interested in cars, I have no nostalgia for small towns, I don't give a crap about the American Southwest, and I hate country music. There was nothing in it for me, and the story just wasn't good enough to carry it despite that. I haven't seen it in full since I first saw it in theatres, and I only saw Cars 2 because I was curious to see if it would improve at all, and because not seeing a Pixar movie just seemed fundamentally wrong to me. (Plus, my nephews love it, so there's something. The general consensus was that the spy stuff was cool, but the movie would have been much better as just a general spy movie without all of the car bollocks.)

Anyway, keep the links coming, Rebochan. I don't always have something to say about the reviews, but I can't seem to remember to watch the videos without these reminders.

[Rebochan]

Keeping the reminders coming because Ratatouille is up already!

Ratatouille

Ha, here's another one I remember because of a relationship with a family member. My mother is obsessed with French cooking and cuisine and when we saw it together, she was rattling off all the details of the kitchens and the way they made food. Looking back at my last post, I think it says a lot about how meticulous Pixar is about replicating a setting and a theme that people like me who love superheroes or people like my friend that loved Cars or my mother that loved food can recognize these immediately in the films they make.

Unlike Cars, I think I like this one because of its own strengths and characters. I disagree with Doug about Linguine's blandness - he's a pretty good foil for Remy in my opinion, since Linguine is so terrified of failure that he rarely takes risks, to the point where he literally becomes a puppet, while Remy is himself daring and impulsive and loves to explore and experiment, but is limited because of his species. I rather like that they become essential to each other's existence and through each other's help find ways to succeed. And Remy's a good lead to sympathize with - he so desperately wants something that society refuses to grant him based on something he cannot change. T

Though I always hated that part at the end where after they went through all this trouble of introducing the other chefs and staff at Gusteau's with all these backstories and unique traits, they all abandon Linguine at the end and never return. Seemed like a waste of a good cast. Something I've always been amazed about is how many people I talk to about this movie that can name a favorite part with such joy and I think that's quite touching about it. And yes, I did have this movie on the brain when I started teaching myself how to cook over the last year. My first success was a ratatouille stew

I have to agree with Doug about not giving away that ending. I still get chills when I see it.

[Rebochan]

Wall-E

Oh, what is there to say about this movie that hasn't been said? I freaking love it. It's hands down one of my favorite films of all time.

As for Doug...wow. I think he completely missed the point of this movie. Like, blindingly missed the point. Like, I can't believe someone who's supposed to be so insightful and intelligent could miss the point of this film so broadly and immediately complain about a simplified version of it and whine that it should have stayed on Earth more or gone on space adventures.

Like, he complains the spaceship isn't that exciting and the humans are samey. As if that isn't supposed to be the entire point - it's not that technology is bad or the environment is good, it's that the technology has lost its soul and innovation along with the rest of humanity. Humans have no need for machines that do anything except fast-track their simplistic lives...therefore, there are no amazing fantastic gadgets on the Axiom. Half the point of the movie to me is how as Wall-E moves his way through the ship, everything he touches seems to come to life and thrive, from the cleaning droid that leaves his designated pathway to the man he helps get back on his seat to the garbage scoops that care for him. Every detail in this film feels controlled and planned, and every time I watch it I find even more. Wall-E is a film that I feel largely works because it spells out so very little of its themes and instead lets the viewer work out most of them. And for a movie largely aimed at children to treat them as that smart and to (for once) be embraced by the general public is a monumental achievement. I do think there's a certain subset of viewers that immediately find even the gentlest critique of an overly-consumerist culture to be pinko-communism and start shutting it out on impulse, but that's not really the movie's fault, now is it?

[ganzfeld]

Maybe he missed the point but I totally agree with his conclusions. I understand that the ship was supposed to be uninteresting and lost its soul or whatever but it was made in such an unentertaining and uninteresting way. Then the end was extremely anticlimactic. I was disappointed, however, that he called it the "Lilo & Stitch effect." What? Lilo & Stitch was a much better story all around. Good movie from start to finish. I had a small boy at home so I know which one can be watched more than two dozen times and it isn't Wall-E! (Although I'd watch the beginning of Wall-E at least a dozen times. If I had to.) I have to totally disagree that Wall-E doesn't spell out its themes. They're spelled out and, for the most part, in an uninteresting and obvious way.

[Kallah]

As an adult I knew going into the movie what it's overarching themes would be For Wall-E and was able to ignore the hammering of them into the second half of the film, but I was rather disappointed by the end because of the giant, gaping plot hole that no one even attempts to explain. Now, I understand it's a family movie and, of course, that it's going to be simplified down for kids, but the problem was clear: humanity was in no way prepared to return to Earth, and Earth was clearly in no way ready to be rehabilitated. Even if a single sample of plant life was a reasonable sign that there was ample clean water and fertile soil, the massive columns of trash and the hazy, polluted sky remain. Furthermore, we're shown that so many generations have passed that humans have evolved major changes to their bone structure, and all of them are clearly obese. Even with high-tech equipment the basics of a food chain (farming, ranching, animal husbandry) are labor intensive. Who is going to do this work? Even if the people, who are portrayed as lazy and helpless, could physically do the work the largest gap in the plot's end remains: no one on the ship possess the knowledge for any of these tasks, let alone experience or actual skill. The Captain, who has the greatest deal of knowledge of anyone aboard the vessel, believes that pizza grows on trees.

I understand that having them get back to Earth and promptly die out in a handful of years would be entirely unsuitable for a Family film, but why not make the moral of the story "We need to go back, and we need to learn, and we need to work very hard to fix the errors of the past" rather than "Sweet! One inspirational speech and everything will be fine once we get to Earth!"?

[Rebochan]

I thought the end credits showed the humans doing exactly that - and not over night, but over generations. And while they themselves may not be well educated, the ship is still functional and does contain the knowledge needed and methods to convey it. On top of that, they have immortal, sentient machinery built specifically for tasks like cleaning up garbage. It wouldn't be easy, but again, the end credits implied all of this took a lot of time.

[UEL]

Originally Posted by Beejtronic

...and I hate country music.

I had to look up the movie to see if there was any country music in it whatsoever. Only 3 songs were country music. You must hate country music badly.

The general consensus was that the spy stuff was cool, but the movie would have been much better as just a general spy movie without all of the car bollocks.

I watched Cars 2 on the plane over here last summer with some trepidation. I enjoyed Cars immensely. I was afraid that what I found magical about Cars would be lost in a Spy story. However, I was quite surprised. I found the car stuff mixed nicely into the spy story. The magic was there (for me the magic involved the friendships between McQueen, Mater, Sally and the rest of the town).

I did not enjoy it as much as the first one, but I definitely did enjoy it. But, I am usually not as pleased with sequels as I am the original, so Cars 2 was par for the course.

[ganzfeld]

I don't even remember the music from Cars or Cars 2. I don't remember anything interesting at all about those movies except that they were in an unlikeable world that made no sense and I wouldn't have missed them if I'd never seen them. (Why did I see them? See previous post. I've seen a LOT of kids' movies in the past decade and a half.) Compared to Cars, Wall-E was a masterpiece.

[Beejtronic]

Originally Posted by UEL

I had to look up the movie to see if there was any country music in it whatsoever. Only 3 songs were country music. You must hate country music badly.

Out of how many songs that were actually played in the film, though? Even "Life is a Highway" was a countrified remix. You'll notice that was only one out of the four things I disliked about the movie, apart from the overall "meh"-ness of it.

I dislike country music. Adding country music as the majority soundtrack to a movie I already dislike is sure not going to endear me to it.

[UEL]

Originally Posted by Beejtronic

Out of how many songs that were actually played in the film, though? Even "Life is a Highway" was a countrified remix. You'll notice that was only one out of the four things I disliked about the movie, apart from the overall "meh"-ness of it.

I dislike country music. Adding country music as the majority soundtrack to a movie I already dislike is sure not going to endear me to it.

Quick question...did you think I was criticising your thoughts about the film? That's how i'm reading your reaction. The reason I posted is that when you mentioned that you disliked the country music, I really could not recall a single country song in the film. That's why I had to look it up. And seeing about a third of the music was country, I just made the comment.

3 of 14 songs according to the soundtrack. The Life is a Highway may be "countrified" but that makes 4/14 songs. I don't think of it as countrified. But then again, preferences are personal.

I got it. You don't like the film. You hate 4 things about it. Understood.

I won't comment any more.

[Beejtronic]

Originally Posted by UEL

Quick question...did you think I was criticising your thoughts about the film? That's how i'm reading your reaction.

Nope. Just further explaining what I meant, since you seemed to have taken my off-hand comment as some sort of hatred.

3 of 14 songs according to the soundtrack. The Life is a Highway may be "countrified" but that makes 4/14 songs. I don't think of it as countrified. But then again, preferences are personal.

The soundtrack is mostly score. (Which I can't really recall, TBH.) I was speaking more of the musical interludes, and popular music released to coincide with the film, which were largely country, which turned me off.

I got it. You don't like the film. You hate 4 things about it. Understood.

I won't comment any more.

This was really unnecessary.

[Mau]

Originally Posted by Rebochan

I thought the end credits showed the humans doing exactly that - and not over night, but over generations. And while they themselves may not be well educated, the ship is still functional and does contain the knowledge needed and methods to convey it. On top of that, they have immortal, sentient machinery built specifically for tasks like cleaning up garbage. It wouldn't be easy, but again, the end credits implied all of this took a lot of time.

The credits do show exactly that. Humans rebuilding life on Earth, and Earth recovering over time from the damage done [the very last bit of the credits shows a beautiful earth with mountains and trees and birds, etc, with Eve and Walle wandering around]. But yes, it's shown over generations, not instant. And I'm sure the ship had information on how to farm... and the Captain thinking pizza comes from trees was more of a misunderstanding on his part [he also said vegetable plants at one point, so.. he has somewhat of a clue].

*absolutely loves Walle and could, and does, watch it over and over*

[ganzfeld]

I still haven't ben able to see Brave. We'll have to rent the disc. It looks so good.