Hancock

[BruceH]

I'm going to see Wall-E instead tomorrow.

I think I'll go see it again. Maybe take one of my kids this time.

AMAZING movie. But then, I've never seen a Pixar film I didn't think was extraordinary (well, "Cars" was probably the weakest of the bunch). I love the film's vision of mankind's future (without walking)!

I agree, Cars was the most humdrum Pixar movie, but still not bad. Wall-E is one of those that's probably spoiled me for new releases for a while because nothing else can begin to compete.

[jazzbo]

Really? I'm not much of a Pixar nut, and I have to admit after seeing several trailers I really wasn't intrigued to see Wall-E.

I guess, again, I'm not the target audience!

[B. Clugston]

The CGIs seem to replace good storytelling these days.

Agreed. Bad CGI wrecked Smith's last movie, I Am Legend. Too bad, because he was really good in it.

[PHILLYQ]

The CGIs seem to replace good storytelling these days.

Agreed. Bad CGI wrecked Smith's last movie, I Am Legend. Too bad, because he was really good in it.

'I am Legend' seemed to have the same arc as 'Hancock' story-wise- interesting for about 45 minutes, then... 'I am Legend' was a very good movie for about 45 minutes, then it became just another zombie movie.

[Chuck Nessa]

I guess, again, I'm not the target audience!

This sounds like an "I'm smarter than most folks" cop-out.

[Alexander]

Really? I'm not much of a Pixar nut, and I have to admit after seeing several trailers I really wasn't intrigued to see Wall-E.

I guess, again, I'm not the target audience!

What continues to amaze me about Pixar is the same thing that I loved about "Toy Story" back when I saw it in 199-whatever:

The CGI aspect is technically dazzling, yet it's probably the least important element of the film itself. In every Pixar film (especially the very best: "Toy Story," "Finding Nemo," "The Incredibles," "Ratatouille," and "Wall-E") the emphasis is on story and performance. And they are absolutely incredible at getting great perfomances out of these digitally animated characters (to go along with the pitch perfect vocal performances). It's proof that it isn't medium, it's the message. The Pixar animaters are every bit as masterful as the pen and ink Disney animators of the 30s and 40s (when Walt's company was at it's absolute Zenith. Decades and dozens of films later, and they STILL haven't improved on "Snow White," Pinocchio," "Dumbo," and "Fantasia"). To compare the artists at Pixar to those at Dreamworks is laughable (or even those at Disney's own digital animation studio). The Pixar animators don't need to make pop culture references (which will date their movies, in the end) or depend on celebrity casting (which is ultimately a waste of money, since for the most part great film actors don't necessarily make great voice actors (Johnny Depp in "The Corpse Bride" is the exception that proves the rule). Their films are classics the day they are released and will endure as classics long after films like "Shrek" are forgotten.

You can tell that I take animation very seriously indeed!

[jazzbo]

Okay, I'm just not a big animation fan, and have to say Toy Story. . . didn't thrill me.

To each their own!

[jazzbo]

I guess, again, I'm not the target audience!

This sounds like an "I'm smarter than most folks" cop-out.

Okay, nice to know that's maybe what it sounds like.

The truth of the matter is I'm not big on animation or Disney movies.

[Shawn]

Zombie films can be great when done correctly (I Am Legend required no CGI effects for the monsters, superfluous and unconvincing). For examples of recent films taking the Zombie theme and creating new dimensions, try "28 Days Later", "28 Weeks Later" and the brilliant Romero re-boot "Diary Of The Dead".

[Alexander]

Zombie films can be great when done correctly (I Am Legend required no CGI effects for the monsters, superfluous and unconvincing). For examples of recent films taking the Zombie theme and creating new dimensions, try "28 Days Later", "28 Weeks Later" and the brilliant Romero re-boot "Diary Of The Dead".

I'm writing a zombie graphic novel right now! It's tentitively titled "These Honored Dead" and is set in 1863, culminating in the Battle of Gettysburg. I don't have an artist yet, in case anyone is interested in collaborating...

I'm seeing a series of these stories set during different historical periods.

Edited July 4, 2008 by Alexander

[Chalupa]

I'm going to see Wall-E instead tomorrow.

I think I'll go see it again. Maybe take one of my kids this time.

AMAZING movie. But then, I've never seen a Pixar film I didn't think was extraordinary (well, "Cars" was probably the weakest of the bunch). I love the film's vision of mankind's future (without walking)!

I agree, Cars was the most humdrum Pixar movie, but still not bad. Wall-E is one of those that's probably spoiled me for new releases for a while because nothing else can begin to compete.

I loved "Cars". Its one of those films you have to see more than once to really"get" it. So many little jokes that fly by you the first couple of times. I have probably watched the DVD in excess of 50 times. That kind of stuff(watching movies repeatedly) happens when A LOT when you live in a house w/ a 4 year old....

We saw "Wall-E" on the opening day. My son's first movie theater experience. He actually made it through the entire film without getting fidgetity. I didn't do as well. In the trailers for the film one of the producers talks about a lunch that the Pixar brain trust had where they came up with the ideas for "Monsters, Inc.", "Cars", "Finding Nemo", and "Wall-E". I can see why they held off on "Wall-E". Good, but not great. Though I admit I probably went in with high expectations. Definitely better than last summer's Pixar offering - "Ratatouille".

[Alexander]

I'm going to see Wall-E instead tomorrow.

I think I'll go see it again. Maybe take one of my kids this time.

AMAZING movie. But then, I've never seen a Pixar film I didn't think was extraordinary (well, "Cars" was probably the weakest of the bunch). I love the film's vision of mankind's future (without walking)!

I agree, Cars was the most humdrum Pixar movie, but still not bad. Wall-E is one of those that's probably spoiled me for new releases for a while because nothing else can begin to compete.

I loved "Cars". Its one of those films you have to see more than once to really"get" it. So many little jokes that fly by you the first couple of times. I have probably watched the DVD in excess of 50 times. That kind of stuff(watching movies repeatedly) happens when A LOT when you live in a house w/ a 4 year old....

We saw "Wall-E" on the opening day. My son's first movie theater experience. He actually made it through the entire film without getting fidgetity. I didn't do as well. In the trailers for the film one of the producers talks about a lunch that the Pixar brain trust had where they came up with the ideas for "Monsters, Inc.", "Cars", "Finding Nemo", and "Wall-E". I can see why they held off on "Wall-E". Good, but not great. Though I admit I probably went in with high expectations. Definitely better than last summer's Pixar offering - "Ratatouille".

See, I completely disagree. "Ratatouille" was an exquisitely beautiful film. Very funny, but also incredibly evocative. I left that movie wanting two things: 1) Something REALLY GOOD to eat, and 2) to go to Paris!

[BruceH]

Jazzbo---Now that's the thing: I am a bit of an animation fan (don't even get me started on Looney Tunes...), but if you're not, well, I can dig it. But it should be noted that there's a world of difference between plain "Disney" and "Disney/Pixar."

Alexander---I'm with you completely! Ratatouille was amazing...and I went in thinking that this might be the first Pixar film that really misses the mark. Rats? A rat that COOKS?? A name that nobody can pronounce or spell? Wha? But you hit the nail on the head; beautiful, funny, evocative.

Wall-E is a film that cast a powerful spell from beginning to end. I sat there in some kind of dumbstruck trance-like state. (That's one of the reasons I want to see it again so soon---make sure the experience was real and not some kind of fluke.) For me I think that a lifelong affinity for science fiction (and longtime love of Chaplin, Keaton, and Tati) contributed to the buzz. But the rest of the audience seemed to like it too. When we walked out of the theater, my wife said, "Wow, that was really good!" Frankly, I doubt that any other summer release is going to come within a mile of matching it.

[Robert J]

Saw Wall-E on the weekend with family.

Absolutely amazing! The first half, with almost no dialogue, is stunning. Like a bleak Twilight Zone episode. You forget it is animation. Also that first half is incredibly bleak for Pixar (or Disney for that matter) in its view of the future of mankind - though possible. At one point you see a scary aerial tracking shot of the destruction and what’s left of the city in the film. That in itself is a big leap forward for a G movie.

The second half is more like a Pixar movie, but there are no cutsie characters here or wisecracks such as what Crystal and Goodman did in Monsters Inc. The two main robots are the draw, but are understated in their need to connect. The message about waste, trash and the environment is also done is such a away that its show not tell – ie, you are not hit over the head constantly with the message. Oddly, Disney itself has done its fair share of accumulating waste on this planet, so the message even attacks them.

[RDK]

i am an animator and an animation fan and i have never seen any pixar movies.

Strange. By choice or circumstance?

[7/4]

i am an animator and an animation fan and i have never seen any pixar movies.

How do you feel about Ren and Stempy?

.

[RDK]

never compelled to see one.

I have a hard time reconciling your being an animator and animation fan with not wanting to see what most people consider to be the pinnacle of contemporary feature animation.

[Alexander]

if i said i was a jazz musician but had never heard boney james or soulive, would that be strange? not to me.

i don't have an interest in toys and toy spacemen and cars and little fish and monsters voiced by robin williams. i do not think this makes me crazy. i like robots but i would rather they be big and have blood spurting and explosions and not an environmental message. just my feelings.

Just to clarify, Robin Williams has never done a Pixar film. He did a Disney film (Aladdin) and has lent his voice to at least one Dreamworks film (Robots), but he's never done Pixar.

While you may not have an interest in the subject matter, I would think that you might be interested in the craftmanship of the Pixar films. They really are superbly made, whatever you think of their "family friendly" themes.

Moreover, it would be a mistake to compare Pixar to Boney James. Charlie Parker, maybe.

The guys who did "Shrek"...THEY'RE Boney James...

[Big Al]

Saw Wall-E on the weekend with family.

Absolutely amazing! The first half, with almost no dialogue, is stunning. Like a bleak Twilight Zone episode. You forget it is animation. Also that first half is incredibly bleak for Pixar (or Disney for that matter) in its view of the future of mankind - though possible. At one point you see a scary aerial tracking shot of the destruction and what’s left of the city in the film. That in itself is a big leap forward for a G movie.

The second half is more like a Pixar movie, but there are no cutsie characters here or wisecracks such as what Crystal and Goodman did in Monsters Inc. The two main robots are the draw, but are understated in their need to connect. The message about waste, trash and the environment is also done is such a away that its show not tell – ie, you are not hit over the head constantly with the message. Oddly, Disney itself has done its fair share of accumulating waste on this planet, so the message even attacks them.

Absolutely totally completely positively 100% agree!!! What attracted me to the movie before I even saw it was, how are the animators going to keep the interest level high without any dialogue? Pixar FAR exceeded my hopes for this movie; actually, IMO, the movie dragged ever-so-slightly once there was dialogue. But it never lost momentum. I was in awe from beginning to end.

And the short subject at the beginning would've made Chuck Jones proud. That rabbit looks like something he would've designed.

I'll go so far as to say "Wall-E" is my favorite Pixar movie.

[Big Al]

Oh, and I like it how the folks at Pixar have, once again, incorporated the voice of John Ratzenberger into anotehr of their movies with "Wall-E." I liked the spoof he did at the end of "Cars" where his character was watching all the "car" versions of other Pixar movies and he comments on how the one guy's voice sounds great until about the third movie or so, and Ratzenberger's "car"-acter (ha) says something like "Hey wait a second: have they been using the same guy in every movie? What a bunch of cheapskates!"

Edited July 8, 2008 by Big Al

[RDK]

Haven't seen Wall-E yet. Was gonna take the girls last weekend, but they said they wanted to wait for the DVD instead. Will try to convince them otherwise. Did see Hancock, though, which i thought had promise but was an absolute mess as rendered.

[BruceH]

Just saw Wall-E again (with the kids this time) and it held up very well. The kids really liked it, too. I think it may end up being my favorite film of the year.