Hollywood Hackery

A subforum to discuss film culture and criticism.
Message
Author
User avatar
Finch
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#76 Post by Finch » Fri Jun 24, 2011 5:31 pm

Can we include Pixar in the discussion now that Cars 2 is getting even worse reviews than the incredibly boring first movie, and seems to be nothing more than a cynical cash grab after its predecessor generated the highest ancillary revenue of any Pixar film to date? White is so going to enjoy writing the review for this..

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#77 Post by swo17 » Fri Jun 24, 2011 5:33 pm

Doesn't this mean he has to like it though?

User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#78 Post by Brian C » Fri Jun 24, 2011 5:47 pm

swo17 wrote:Doesn't this mean [Armond] has to like it though?
I feel like I can write this review without seeing the movie:

"In sending its characters overseas, Cars 2 demonstrates a complex view of international relations that is a welcome change from the standard American arrogance displayed by Woody Allen in the overpraised Midnight in Paris. Larry the Cable Guy slyly presents a portrayal of the American conscience that is more true than a hundred of Barack Obama's flowery, empty speeches, and harkens innocently back to a time when Spielberg was wowing international audiences with cycnicism-free examinations of national greatness like Always and Empire of the Sun. If we're really serious about solving the world's problems, we could do worse than having this burly Southern Pericles representing us to the world."

Nothing
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:04 am

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#79 Post by Nothing » Sat Jun 25, 2011 12:23 am

I doubt Cars 2 is better or worse than the other Pixar movies in reality - it's just time for that critical knockdown is all, after the ridiculous overpraise for Toy Story 3 (whose most remarkable quality was its subtle CGI lighting, imho!). Pixar movies are well crafted and they do what they say on the tin. Kids like them - although not as much Miyazaki or Spielberg in my experience - but they're All-American money-making value-teaching machines at heart. Up is the only one in the catalogue that I think has some genuine personality, and possibly Finding Nemo, although still very sentimental of course.

User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#80 Post by matrixschmatrix » Sat Jun 25, 2011 12:38 am

Oh cool another Nothing opinion based on a movie he hasn't watched

User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#81 Post by Brian C » Sat Jun 25, 2011 1:02 am

I don't see Pixar movies as anything close to uniform in quality - A Bug's Life and Monsters, Inc., for example, are several steps down in terms of character and story from The Incredibles and Finding Nemo. The first Cars has a lot more narrative dead space than the Toy Story movies. The two Bird movies are quite distinct from the others in terms of personality.

So, um, I find it very plausible that Cars 2 is noticeably inferior. Agreed on the overpraise for Toy Story 3, though, which was capable enough as a stand-alone action/adventure movie but which was awfully redundant in the context of the series.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#82 Post by knives » Sat Jun 25, 2011 1:05 am

I think it also allowed for some of the Spielbergisms that plague the series to override the story especially in the climax and falling action (the bit with Andy and the girl was just embarrassing). That said it was still better than the majority of Dreamworks films.

User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#83 Post by matrixschmatrix » Sat Jun 25, 2011 1:09 am

Brian C wrote:I don't see Pixar movies as anything close to uniform in quality - A Bug's Life and Monsters, Inc., for example, are several steps down in terms of character and story from The Incredibles and Finding Nemo. The first Cars has a lot more narrative dead space than the Toy Story movies. The two Bird movies are quite distinct from the others in terms of personality.

So, um, I find it very plausible that Cars 2 is noticeably inferior. Agreed on the overpraise for Toy Story 3, though, which was capable enough as a stand-alone action/adventure movie but which was awfully redundant in the context of the series.
I've never actually been too on board with any of the Toy Stories, at least relative to the really interesting Pixar stuff (Wall-E, say)- they're not bad, and the music is pretty consistently great, but I never found the animation all that expressive nor the characterization all that interesting, even as a kid. Pixar gets a lot of praise for their montages- and in Up, for instance, deservedly so- but I thought it wound up being kind of a crutch throughout the Toy Story series, where I think all three of them have a kid-bonding-with-toy wistful montage thing.

User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#84 Post by Brian C » Sat Jun 25, 2011 1:25 am

knives wrote:I think it also allowed for some of the Spielbergisms that plague the series to override the story especially in the climax and falling action (the bit with Andy and the girl was just embarrassing). That said it was still better than the majority of Dreamworks films.
In terms of embarrassing, the "claw rescue" was certainly the low point of the series, probably the single biggest story failure of Pixar's entire body of work with nothing else even close. Just complete laziness. But the ending was fine, I thought.
matrixschmatrix wrote:I never found the animation all that expressive nor the characterization all that interesting, even as a kid.
You're probably right about the animation, but the first two were two of the first three Pixar films. The animation in A Bug's Life is a step below either of the two Toy Story films. Monsters has some interesting things - especially with Sully's expressions - but I don't think they really hit their stride until Nemo.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#85 Post by knives » Sat Jun 25, 2011 1:30 am

I think as director and writer it's fair to say Lasseter is the weakest of the Pixar crew and his talents (much like Spielberg actually) are in guiding others, offering a second opinion if you will. I bet when he dies he'll be more warmly remembered as a producer than as a director or writer. I actually have my problems too with Andrew Stanton even if I think as a writer/director he's more talented than Lasseter. While Wall-e shows signs of this improving he clearly loves to do things just for the emotional reaction. I'm also a tad bit annoyed at his inability to admit to the highly environmentalist nature. At least Bird is entirely open about his politics and how they effect his movies. I have no clue what to say about Pete Doctor though. He has all of those Pixar traits, but somehow he makes those weaknesses work as an advantage, but if anything he's were that personality comment belongs to.

edit: To the animation comments I just find it amusing that the hundred year old works of Emile Cohl still stand as great animation while Toy Story does have a high number of awkward pieces (mainly the dog).

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#86 Post by mfunk9786 » Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:05 am

Nothing wrote:Kids like them - although not as much Miyazaki or Spielberg in my experience
Oh puh-lease. Anyway - I don't really understand why people are so worked up about Cars 2 being poorly reviewed. At the end of the day, it's a film geared toward much smaller children than the average Pixar fare. My supposition is that far less effort was put into making it adult-friendly than something like Toy Story 3 or Up.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#87 Post by knives » Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:07 am

While cash grab is a clear part of why it got made considering Lasseter's love of everything involved with the film it might be the most bizarre passion project in recent memory.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#88 Post by mfunk9786 » Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:19 am

Indicting Disney for making a cash grab is crazy. Even their most incredible artistic achievements are still, at the end of the day, cash grabs.

User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#89 Post by matrixschmatrix » Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:24 am

Cash grab seems the more charitable assumption, compared to believing that someone high up in Pixar really, really loves Larry the Cable Guy.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#90 Post by knives » Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:25 am

I wasn't indicting them, I was just showing my amusement that something Lasseter could be so passionate about could also be such a clear and obvious cash grab to re-stimulate the merchandising. It's one of those funny paradoxes.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#91 Post by mfunk9786 » Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:44 am

Oh, I got what you were saying, Knives. Your mentioning of that phrase just reinvigorated me to point out that it's a ridiculous accusation for someone to make against this of all companies

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#92 Post by knives » Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:47 am

Aw, yeah. I suppose it's funny how people react to things when they feel like they're being betrayed. To be fair though from everything I've been hearing on the Internet is that people aren't annoyed that it's them sucking up to their corporate overlords so much as doing it and not creating good product.

Nothing
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:04 am

!

#93 Post by Nothing » Sat Jun 25, 2011 5:52 am

Okay, put it this way, whatever one may or may not think of Pixar, my prediction is that Cars 2 won't be significantly better or worse than the Toy Story sequels or the first Cars movie. After all of those glowing responses to Wall-E, Up and Toy Story 3, expectations had built to breaking point and Pixar were overdue for a slapdown, these things just go in cycles. Point being not to worry about the press, just go and see the picture if so inclined, and no doubt the kids will still like it (although perhaps not as much as My Neighbour Totoro or Jurassic Park - in my experience!).

Now if they'd all been incinerated at the end of Toy Story 3, that would've been something :)
knives wrote:his talents (much like Spielberg actually) are in guiding others, offering a second opinion if you will.
Aw, don't be so hard on the beard... Imho, he's' more watchable than Scorsese these days, eg. Munich and The Terminal.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#94 Post by mfunk9786 » Sat Jun 25, 2011 9:11 am

Have we ruled out the possibility that Nothing is actually Armond White?

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#95 Post by domino harvey » Sat Jun 25, 2011 9:16 am

Nothing, have you contributed a personal Top Ten list? I suspect it would be fascinating

User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: !

#96 Post by Brian C » Sat Jun 25, 2011 11:47 am

Nothing wrote:watchable ... The Terminal.
Now there's two things I never thought I'd see together in a sentence. Is this a Nothing idiosyncracy, or is The Terminal secretly regarded as good? I always thought my opinion of the film (i.e., ultra-tedious soul-crushing bore) was generally in line with its reputation, but I've been surprised by these things in the past.
Last edited by Brian C on Sat Jun 25, 2011 11:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#97 Post by domino harvey » Sat Jun 25, 2011 11:50 am

Wasn't aware anyone even remembered it existed. It's like someone praising Fever Pitch or something

User avatar
Finch
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#98 Post by Finch » Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:27 pm

I don't get it either: of all the Spielberg movies of the last decade I'd personally champion Catch Me If You Can (A.I. has already been re-evaluated) but The Terminal most definitely not.

User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#99 Post by matrixschmatrix » Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:32 pm

I'd agree that Munich was a high point from Spielberg- I don't think I've ever seen anything as morally complex from him- but yeah, the Terminal was blah (and blah is too kind to describe Indiana Jones.) Certainly I wouldn't say he was doing anything more watchable than Scorsese, whose worst movie of the past 15 years (the Aviator) was still pretty good.

User avatar
Roger Ryan
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city

Re: Hollywood Hackery

#100 Post by Roger Ryan » Sat Jun 25, 2011 4:03 pm

This idea that the Pixar factory churns out films that are indistinguishable from each other and that one can be neither better nor worse than the other is pretty strange. It's like saying all of Woody Allen's films are on the same level of quality. Maybe they are set up for a critical smackdown now, but the first CARS was already Pixar's weakest effort so it doesn't surprise me that a sequel no one was really asking for would start gathering poor reviews. As far as 3-D computer animated films go, Pixar has been consistent in producing some of the best. Despite being designed as mainstream audience-pleasing product, the films often have fresh, ingenious ideas that help you to overlook the inevitable family-film cliches. A lot of the time, these ideas come directly from person experiences of the writer/director/animators (the use of HELLO DOLLY in WALL-E for example). To ask Pixar to aspire to the work of Miyazaki or Spielberg is to really ask them to make more adult fare which would be fascinating, but it's not where the company is right now.

Oh, and yeah, THE TERMINAL is one of Spielberg's worst films. CATCH ME IF YOU CAN, MUNICH and AI would be his best work over the past decade.

Post Reply