WALL-E was incredible. I walked out of there having never taken that much from a movie.
WALL-E was great, but really? That important? The message in it has been done to pieces before, and it wasn't particularly innovative in presenting it. The love story was the real reason to watch it, and even that wasn't "never taken that much from a movie" quality. This movie is getting way overrated. It's already #9 on IMDB.
There is also a Mr. Potato Head... and while it isn't Pixar related, they also have Dr. Bunsen Honeydew and Beaker... The only problem with the free roaming Audio-Animatronics is that they are only in America for a few months and are then shipped out to the foreign parks, which means I never actally get to see them in person... -sigh-
I wasn't expecting much from this movie up until about a month ago. The amount of praise and hype that I've heard surrounding this movie make me regret ever doubting the awesomeness that is Pixar. Can't wait to see it this weekend. (Didn't get a chance to see it this past weekend... my friends wanted to see The Hulk... sigh..)
WALL-E was incredible. I walked out of there having never taken that much from a movie.
WALL-E was great, but really? That important? The message in it has been done to pieces before, and it wasn't particularly innovative in presenting it. The love story was the real reason to watch it, and even that wasn't "never taken that much from a movie" quality. This movie is getting way overrated. It's already #9 on IMDB.
Yes, the message was blatant and not subtle. Sometimes, it was painfully so. But you know what? The message is important enough that I don't mind beating people over the head with it.
As for it being highly rated on IMDB, it only have 13k votes so far. It'll probably level out at some point. Even still, if that's how people view it, then the movie accomplished what it set out to accomplish.
Wow, it really shows that people on both sides associate such destructive and terrible imagery with the American right. In a better time, a lefty would have associated that imagery with the right, and a righty would have associated it with the left. You would match the bad guy up with your enemies. When you match the bad guy up with the person you agree with, you know something is wrong.
I am unclear how the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" crowd can find this movie unappealing? It is about taking action and fixing existing problems! This is where the hypocrisy of the right breaks down - with the environment and social programs. Apparently proactively diminishing our output of trash and overall pollution, and giving people a small hand so that they can improve their situation are suddenly bad in the eyes of those that preach responsibility. Apparently that only extends to personal responsibility, not societal. My bad for assuming that everyone counted, not just me. Why is it bad to teach children and society to keep itself clean and be willing to put in some elbow grease and make some sacrifices in order to do your part? How is that fascist? How is that even an exclusively liberal idea? Also, take note that the movie in no way addressed global warming, just wastefulness and laziness. Apparently republicans/conservatives are so touchy about any issue that deals with the environment that they can no longer distinguish one environmental issue from another. Well, if they don't like the film, they should make a children's film that peddles their ideas about the environment - oh, wait, even 5 years olds know that being messy and wasteful are bad things. Apparently that would only appeal to people 20 and up that have their heads so far up their own asses that a garbage dump smells good in comparison.
I am unclear how the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" crowd can find this movie unappealing?
Maybe because their actual stance is "get pulled up by my own bootstraps and someone else's money, then cut everyone else's bootstraps in order to stay on top?"
I kinda have to wonder if they do this sort of thing just to ride the coattails of whatever thing they're ranting about. Could it be that they're so radical that they don't think they should even clean up after themselves? Isn't that the substance of the movie, really - that it would be nice if we just cleaned up after ourselves?
They love to thump Bibles. Wasn't there something in the Bible about being a good steward or some such thing? Or does that not apply anymore?
I saw this in DLP and it was AMAZING. It's the same price, so there's no reason to go to a regular showing when a DLP is available.
Spoilers: I'm pretty sure my friend and I were the only people to notice WALL-E's Mac OS boot-up sound in my theater.
I really enjoyed the references to 2001 (The auto-pilot) and other sci-fi.
Cool stuff: The same guy who did R2D2's sound effects in Star Wars created WALL-E and many other robots' "voices." AUTO's "voice" was created by the Mac's text-to-speech system. (This is the stuff that makes me excited. Is that sad?)
I really liked this movie and so did all my friends. But we're all liberal-ish. The only person I know who didn't like it was my dad, who seemed apathetic/ambivalent, but he's a Republican.
I hate it when people talk like this, the whole "bad for Planet Earth" approach. I know this is a (failure of a) criticism of environmentalists by Lars Larson, but to accept it from him it would have to be satirical (and it isn't). Additionally, it is also true that you hear the environmentalists themselves say it like that. They certainly say "bad for the environment", which is an improvement, but far from perfect.
How do they know what the Planet Earth wants? No self-respecting planet allows life; just ask the Auditors. (If you don't see what I mean, just look at definitions of "bad")
bad for Planet Earth:- Such a poorly defined term. If I were a bastard, every time people said it I would interpret it to mean a hunk of rock that is pretty much going to stay orbiting the Sun unless we *really* screw with something. And when we do it will start grumbling. likely to significantly change Planet Earth as we know it:- at least that is correct literally. bad for the environment:- acceptable, since the environment is, quite deliberately, an agglomeration of life and non-life. Not perfect though. bad for a large number of species on the planet Earth (extinction, suffering also):- a better phrasing by far. reduces biodiversity (though this doesn't hold up in the long term):- now we're getting there. Perfectly honest but effective. but better still bad for humans
The only person I know who didn't like it was my dad, who seemed apathetic/ambivalent, but he's a Republican.
This is exactly how my mom felt when I saw it with her, but I feel that she disliked the movie mostly because of the reason that I praise the movie so highly, the distinct lack of dialogue.
The first half of Wall-E was amazing, but I think it fell apart when they entered the space station. I think that the captan was kinda dumb, and the scenes of the CEO of Buy-and-Large would be bad by video game cut-scene standards and embarrassing by major motion picture standards. I'm not sure why no one else is complaining about these scenes. Maybe it's just me.
Last weekend I was supposed to watch Wall-E because a friend highly recommended it but my dad wanted to see Kung-Fu Panda. So we watched it. It was cute and entertaining but it was just a summer comedy. But something happened that really bothered me. There is this really neat 2-d animation dream sequence at the beginning of the movie. It was highly styleised and I thought it was pretty cool. After it was over and it switched to 3d realism, my dad whispered to me, "Thank god that's over. That animation was terrible". It made my heart sink a bit. I wondered if 2-d animation is fit for the movies anymore. I'm not sure exactly why he didn't like it. He said "animation" but I know that's not what he meant. Was it too much stylisation on the 2-d animation? Does 2-d animation ask too much from certain people? 3-d gives you the whole picture, it leaves nothing for you to imagine yourself. This also leads into that old (low res)2-d vs (high res) 3-d argument in video games. I liked 2-d final fantasy 6 because I pretty much imagined the cast's mannerisms from the little information that they gave me. I might even say that games like that helped develop my imagination. Well, I'm not saying that high res 3-d is bad... I'm getting ahead of myself. I think I'm just sad that my dad, an artist himself (my own TEACHER!) couldn't appreciate that type of art. T.T
I loved the 2-d portion of Kung fu Panda and was wishing for more of it. But if the movie was done in all 2-d like that they wouldn't be able to do some of the things in the film. I also liked the fact that the ending credits was in 2-d.
I really loved Wall-E, but the use of live action footage against the 3-D animation seemed jolting. Did anyone else have this reaction, or did it work for them?
I thought the concept was very cool, and I didn't really have an adverse reaction upon seeing any of the live-action bits. I can see how some people would, though. That's just not going to rub everyone the right way.
I loved the 2-d portion of Kung fu Panda and was wishing for more of it. But if the movie was done in all 2-d like that they wouldn't be able to do some of the things in the film. I also liked the fact that the ending credits was in 2-d.
I agree. Kung-Fu panda 2-d would not be the same. From a production standpoint, It would be a lot more difficult to animate the fights and martial art movements.
I really loved Wall-E, but the use of live action footage against the 3-D animation seemed jolting. Did anyone else have this reaction, or did it work for them?
I didn't mind the bits that were well done live action, but the scenes with the CEO of Buy-and-Large just made me cringe.
Comments
and while it isn't Pixar related, they also have Dr. Bunsen Honeydew and Beaker...
The only problem with the free roaming Audio-Animatronics is that they are only in America for a few months and are then shipped out to the foreign parks, which means I never actally get to see them in person... -sigh-
Now for some funny Wall-E videos!
Can't wait to see it this weekend. (Didn't get a chance to see it this past weekend... my friends wanted to see The Hulk... sigh..)
As for it being highly rated on IMDB, it only have 13k votes so far. It'll probably level out at some point. Even still, if that's how people view it, then the movie accomplished what it set out to accomplish.
I kinda have to wonder if they do this sort of thing just to ride the coattails of whatever thing they're ranting about. Could it be that they're so radical that they don't think they should even clean up after themselves? Isn't that the substance of the movie, really - that it would be nice if we just cleaned up after ourselves?
They love to thump Bibles. Wasn't there something in the Bible about being a good steward or some such thing? Or does that not apply anymore?
Spoilers:
I'm pretty sure my friend and I were the only people to notice WALL-E's Mac OS boot-up sound in my theater.
I really enjoyed the references to 2001 (The auto-pilot) and other sci-fi.
Cool stuff:
The same guy who did R2D2's sound effects in Star Wars created WALL-E and many other robots' "voices." AUTO's "voice" was created by the Mac's text-to-speech system. (This is the stuff that makes me excited. Is that sad?)
I really liked this movie and so did all my friends. But we're all liberal-ish. The only person I know who didn't like it was my dad, who seemed apathetic/ambivalent, but he's a Republican.
How do they know what the Planet Earth wants? No self-respecting planet allows life; just ask the Auditors.
(If you don't see what I mean, just look at definitions of "bad")
bad for Planet Earth:- Such a poorly defined term. If I were a bastard, every time people said it I would interpret it to mean a hunk of rock that is pretty much going to stay orbiting the Sun unless we *really* screw with something. And when we do it will start grumbling.
likely to significantly change Planet Earth as we know it:- at least that is correct literally.
bad for the environment:- acceptable, since the environment is, quite deliberately, an agglomeration of life and non-life. Not perfect though.
bad for a large number of species on the planet Earth (extinction, suffering also):- a better phrasing by far.
reduces biodiversity (though this doesn't hold up in the long term):- now we're getting there. Perfectly honest but effective.
but better still
bad for humans