Ratatouille

Originally Posted by kat

I hated the Incredibles and Pixar has killed the Disney cartoon for me.

I'm sure we all oohed and ahhed when Toy Story dueted but no Pixar movie comes close to the hand drawn classics (Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, etc). CGI doesn't really hold a candle to hand painted. At least for me.

Are you saying that hand drawn animation has to be better cause its hand drawn?

It seems like an argument between 2D and 3D than actual comparison between a good movie and a bad movie, The Incredibles was a perfect combo of a super hero flick and a sitcom family movie, and it was original material as well, while Little Mermaid are classics yes, they are still adapdations. And they certainly are classics just cause of the animation, there's other elements that make a good movie, not just by what tools they used to make it, be it pencil or computer.

God I hate it when people judge a game or movie by the way it looks then the actual movie itself. And just cause Disney is more famous doesn't mean all their movies are the best in the animation departement. They certainly haven't done much in the late 90's and early 2000's, instead of relying on Pixar to keep afloat.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

I understand your point, however I don't see why blame on Pixar that other coporates believe that CG is the "In" thing. Toy Story not only succeeds as a CGI ground breaking in technological achievements, but it also had a good story, and Toy Story 2 had an even better deeper story. ( Woody making a decision on whether he lives forever as a classic toy in a museum or go back to Andy for a limited happy life was to me, very powerful and deeper than any Disney movie I've seen.)

I must ask though what aspect of the Increcibles was bad? I can relate to the characters in the family cause, well, like I said, its a sitcom family show with a mixture of Super Hero flicks. It was funny, had good action sequences, had characters that are likeable and have development, and has heart.Just cause you don't like their style doesn't make it a bad film.

Cars perhaps for me was the weakest movie from them, but it was still much more enjoyable than Superman returns and X3. And I'll be very surprised if you said Finding Nemo wasn't good. It was emotional, had a story most families can relate (since its drawn from the Directors experience) and as a bonus it was beautiful to watch.

People need to realise that Pixar is Pixar,a seperate animation studios. Just cause they are contracted to Disney doesn't mean they're gonna do the same style as them.(Its like saying Square Enix will start tampering each others franchises just cause they merged) Their movies are popular for reasons beyond the CG factor, and 2D has gone down only cause Disney hasn't made a hit in recent times. When others like Miyazaki is still making good films in 2D animation. The coporates just don't realise that there's more to the Pixar movies than the CG, so they churn out CG crap flicks just to cheat the kiddies money, cause most kids don't know a good movie from another. Blame coporates for being greedy morons yet again, not the creative minds that decided to move on to a new form of animation.

I mean, I always loved the fairy tale adaptations from Disney, but Pixar is far more creative, since they conjure up original stories through everyday enviroments. A world in a toy's perspective, Bugs, fish, superheroes, cars. They somehow take these ideas and incoprate a appropriate story that can work in thise specific worlds, like how Nemo works in the ocean cause its a large, beautiful but also scary place that anyone can get lost in. It fits with the story of Marlin being paranoid about this world. And I love how the director put his own story on how he was being over protective to his son to the final film. I like persona touches like that.

I love both Disney movies (the classics) and Pixar movies (all of them thus far), I just hope that Ratatouille will be as good as what they did so far. I was a Pixar skeptic before I saw Toy Story, after I saw it along with their other movies, I loved them, despite being different from the Disney movies.

Also, 2D is making a comback, thanks to the new CEO of Disney. Please realise that is because of Eisner that Disney is going CG crap before, NOT Pixar's fault. Don't blame on creativity, blame on the coporate stupidity that is Micheal Eisner.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Just cause they have rats in both movies, doesn't mean they're the same stories, movies or styles. For one thing Ardman Studios is contributing to the movie Flushe Away (hence similar character designs), so its more Wallace and Gromit style, and it takes place in England and the movie is British, not American. The only thing thats changed is that is CG instead of Clay. And by gods Wallace and Gromit is a totally different style compare to Pixar or Dreamworks movies.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Then its all a matter of opinion in the end.

Though why anyone would enjoy The Black Cauldron more than the Pixar movies is beyond me. I fail to see how you didn't see emotional depth in Toy Story 2 (choosing between immortality but alone forever, or live a short but happy life with the person you care about, and god Jessi's flashback has got to bring some tears) or Finding Nemo (When Marlin is distraught that he may never see his son again, several times on the movie I might add). If you wanna talk about movies that uses shallow humour and cheap puns and lack emotional depth, look at Shark Tale instead. Now THAT was a popcorn Hollywood movie.

And if Pixar doesn't spark the flame of the CG movies, someone else would have anyway, like PDI dreamworks who have been creating CG animation for along while themselves, like creating the 3D Homer segement in one of the treehouse of horror episodes. And others jumping the band wagon are moron coporal jackasses that wanna conform since if you conform in a trend, you get money, and that has nothing to do with Pixar, they just want to make good movies, thats all they care about, it was DISNEY's idea to make it a big thing and it was Eisner who actually believe that 2D is dead and fired all the Disney animators.

The majority people regonise Pixar as a company that cares alot of its stories and not just the technology. They also care about their colleagues and pay tribute to those who have passed on, unlike Disney corp that fired all its 2D animators, the same ones who did Lion King and the classics we love. The late Disney movies are crap cause they no longer care about the stories, and believe that as long as Disney is slapped on it as a label, it has to be good. I just hope that Bob Iger can get things right again, cause I too love the Lion King, Little Mermaid and all the old classics myself. It was never about Pixar being better, its about Disney declining in quality management. I"m a Disney fan myself, and it hurt me to see how low they have sunk and relying on Pixar to gain profits.

And by comparison I still think Pixar is more creative just on the sole fact that they have not done an adaptation thus far, instead creating stories drawn from their own experience,(Brad Bird puts his own family situations in the Incredibles, Andrew Stanton coming up with Nemo cause he was acting like Marlin towards his son) and thus make things more three dimensional. But I guess you like the more fantasy like stories in the fairy tales Disney adapts, and so do I, but I love Pixar's works for different reasons, and I prefer to not compare them as they do things differently.

Quote:

WHOA LOOK AT THAT HOW COOL GIANT TURTLE HAHA HE JUST GOT FLUSHED IN A TOILET POTTY HUMOR FART.

Don't understand this, whats so wrong about a giant turtle, and no one laughed at the flush toilet scene, no one will, unless you're the type that thinks about toilet humour all the time. That is not a cheap humour, thats called PLOT DEVICE! Thats his escape route! Not to mention he didn't go down the toilet in the end, he went down the dental little sink. I don't think you really get these movies at all if thats all you can refer to as "cheap humour", when its not even humour in the first place. Ok, so there was a fart joke, it suddently makes it some cheap low humour flick cause Disney movies are so classy they didnt use any fart jokes? One fart joke doesn't undermine the rest of the emotional depth and core story of the movies, which in Nemo's case is a father coming to terms on how he should be with his son.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

I'm just curious about the reasonings behind your opinions thats all. Personally I compare Pixar movies to Live action than other animated features, cause the story lines can be somewhat used in a number of Live actions movies, especially Cars. Thats probably why I love their movies despite the fact they feel nothing like the Disney classics.

Still looking forward to Ratatouille, to stay on topic. Must say that graphical wise, from the teaser, they are getting better an better, the food in the teaser looked very real and edible, without being photo realistic, I love the mixture between fantasy and reality in details like that.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Quote:

Also I hope this isn't an offensive question but I was just wondering if English is your first language. I see you're from Hong Kong.

English is my second language, but I went to international school which teaches everything in English by teachers from English speaking worlds, mine was Australian. I'm from Hong Kong, but I've just move to LA for college.

Quote:

Like I said, I really believe Pixar generates "Hollywood" films that are more quick fixes than a pieces of art that can survive the long term.

I find Pixar's work more genuine than some other movies, like Shark Tale, now that has Hollywood written all over it! I find Pixars work charming cause of the story. Hell if Nemo or the Incredibles was performed by Sock puppets I still enjoy it. (Inceidently thats a easter egg in the Incredibles DVD.)

And I'm pretty sure Toy Story will always be a classic now. Not sure about the other movies, but they all retain a certain level of quality, Cars being the lowest but was still better than other summr movies like X3.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Oh THANK GOD this movie kept up the quality with the previous Pixar movies! I was so worried that one day the crappiness from other cartoons, and the sinking of Shrek will one day infect Pixar as well, the only CG company who is actually making good animated movies. Thank god its not gonna happen from the looks of it.

I'm gonna go see this ASAP Room!

Oh wait, Australia's release date is AUGUST 30th! WTF?! I hate it when Pixar movies do that, it just encourages me to download the damn thing cause I dun wanna wait or get spoiled!

Nor can I watch it earlier if I visit my parents in Hong Kong, same release date!

DAMMIT!

Why is it so hard for movies and TV shows to get released in the same MONTH?! Hong Kong has some retarted marketting scheme for their X mas movies cause they believe Chinese New Year in Feb makes better profit for kids movies than December! But what does the rest of the world have as an excuse? Its just ONE of major the reasons why people download!

(I miss LA already....)

How ya doing, buddy?

Finally the movie is out in Australia. Just saw it a few hours ago and it was great. While I do agree with some of you as that its hard to compare to their older classics and feels a bit inferior, it was still an excellant film. To me it did feel bit better than Cars, which is also my sore spot in their works so far, (though still a great movie on its own right.)

And goddamit after watching it, I was craving for some french food... Damn those great effects that made the food look so good and realistic.

The film was funny, had great character moments, and was just solid throughout. Pixar continues to show they have near consistent quality, and that they only compete among themselves in quality thus far. Can't wait to get the DVD to add to my collection.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?