Shrek 2 was good. Shrek 3 was….meh.
Pixar's "Up"
-
-
You wouldn't think Shrek 3 was as bad as most people made it out to be but once you lay eyes it, it just leaves you puzzled as to how the person who greenlighted it didn't get strung up, beaten ,and hung in alley as example to other movie execs about what happens when you allow such a poorly written, cliche, and underwhelming movie to go into production.
-
emotions run high in shrek 3 when the king dies
Unx5P2l5JMQ
quality storytelling
-
i dunno why the shit dreamworks is mentioned in this thread, as if it is anything at all when compared to pixar.
Up was awesome, certainly in my top half of the pixars, but it definitely had some flaws.
-
! The only thing I didn't understand is how the villain is supposed to be 100 years old, but really shows few signs of being that age, and even being more youthful than Carl. I thought they would give an explanation, but I never saw one. The movie was excellent though, and seeing it in 3D was kind of cool, as they didn't overdo that aspect.
-
Did anyone else think this movie is a metaphor for erectile dysfunction?
-
No…but now I will..... <.<
-
Wow, watch with the spoilers.
-
Wow, watch with the spoilers.
Eh, I figured it out just from listening to a spoiler-free review (although that doesn't really count since Pixar movies are generally predictable). Pixar are rare because they're predictable without being cliched and uncreative, so once you see actually see the movie you REALLY do see (and hear) the subliminal message.
-
No, you're cool.
I was referring to Bobjr's seemingly plot-specific comment. I don't actually know if it's a spoiler or not because I stopped reading a little bit into his first sentence.
-
Oh yeah I just noticed right after I made that post.
-
This is gonna be a definite add to my collection. I can't wait to see how they made it, I only seen part of the making of it, like when they went to South America to take pictures, paint, etc. But this is just gorgeous.
Oh and Alpha's intro scene had me in tears laughing.
-
I loved this movie. It didn't melt my heart like WALL-E, but it did move me to tears at points and the characters were really charming. It didn't take itself seriously at all and I enjoyed the fantastical premise. It felt almost like they had taken one of their short features and extended it into an entire movie. Since it's Pixar, I don't really have to bother saying this but I highly recommend it.
-
This movie was really fun, and was very heartwarming…I almost shed a tear ;_;
There are a few discrepancies I've noticed, but overall that movie rocks...! despite the blood and death of the adventurer @_@
-
! Man, I loved the movie, but I thought the ending was horrible for him. I mean he lost everything for a friendship with an annoying kid and a dog. I would of been crying after losing all of the possessions that hold memories of my wife. I still would of chose to save the kid, but I would be lamenting about it for months after. Still a good movie though. Sorry for not thinking to hide my post
-
! I saw it and loved it. Managed to make me emotional a few of times. While it does go into the Pixar formula at times it still ranks among the better Pixar films. I was glad it went with an actual death and not the whole "disney death" you usually see.
Man, I loved the movie, but I thought the ending was horrible for him. I mean he lost everything for a friendship with an annoying kid and a dog. I would of been crying after losing all of the possessions that hold memories of my wife. I still would of chose to save the kid, but I would be lamenting about it for months after. Still a good movie though.
! Remember, he purposely pushed all the furniture, pictures, etc. out of the house so he could go after the kid. I saw the whole thing as coming to terms with his wife death. He decided to take her advice and start having adventures of his own.
-
! @Sesshy:
! > Man, I loved the movie, but I thought the ending was horrible for him. I mean he lost everything for a friendship with an annoying kid and a dog. I would of been crying after losing all of the possessions that hold memories of my wife. I still would of chose to save the kid, but I would be lamenting about it for months after. Still a good movie though.
! The point of that is that he realizes that his wife is dead and that even though they never went to the falls, she valued the life they shared together a thousand times more than the adventure they didn't have. He stops putting value on his sentimental posessions and finally starts to see reality, that Russel needed him now, and that he could start living his life again by mentoring this kid. It's what his wife would have wanted, not to see him waste away in the dark surrounded by all that crap.
! Though I would have kept the scrapbook at all costs. -
Wow, watch with the spoilers.
Come on, folks…
I want to read reactions without seeing plot specifics. It's gotten hard and taboo just set off a bomb.
-
ACK! Tizoc, you spoilered me!
-
! Yeah, I get the lesson that he's learned and all of that, but at the same time, I still think it's horrible. I can understand learning that there's more to life then those possessions but at the same time he lost everything of his wife other then his own memories. Like I said in my post, I would of sacrificed all of the belongings and saved the kid as well, but I still would of been torn up over the loss.
-
Come on, folks…
I want to read reactions without seeing plot specifics. It's gotten hard and taboo just set off a bomb.
well i'd advise watching the movie then
if you want spoilerless reviews, go lurk rotten tomatoes or something. as far as I'm concerned, the spoiler rules that apply on the OP spoiler board apply here, IE: when it comes out, you can talk about it.
Otherwise, use some fuckin common sense.
-
Picked this one up yesterday along with Night at the Museaum 2. Both were great. I could easily say thta this was one of my more favourite Pixar films (Up there with Toy Story imo)
Definitaly gonna go see it at the cinemas when it opens in the Summer.
-
ACK! Tizoc, you spoilered me!
Ooops sorry, but I thought most of the people here already saw the movie since it was released a week before mi country, I'll put it in spoiler tags now.
Then again I avoid reading a topic about a movie if it's release is near and I'm going to watch it! Also the conflict with the adventurer could've been resolved peacefully IMO
-
C'mon people, who else could tell those balloons were totally a metaphor for viagra?
-
! Also the conflict with the adventurer could've been resolved peacefully IMO
! I don't really think so, the guy was kind of completely out of his mind.
Also remember that it's heavily inferred that he's killed everyone else who he's come across. -
Well there is that, but I can't shake off the feeling that it would've been possible.
-
Oh come on,
! villains dying by falling from great heights are one of the classic staples of a Disney movie.
-
! I think Pixars one big mistep WAS to have an obvious villain. There was no need to go into that territory. Guy could have been an obstacle/crazy without needing to be a VILLINOUS threat that needed heroic dealing-with. There were better resolutions available, than the clich drop him off a cliff route. There was just no need for that.
! They pushed it a little too far and took the easy route out, I think. (Especially the crazy lantern light makign him look pure evil in an otherwise normally lit room.) The entire movie coulda been better if he'd just been another obstacle, and not a typical villain, IMO. The setup and characterization was there, AND he showed up so late in the movie that really, it wasn't needed for him to be MADMAN EVIL. The conflict of him desperatley wanting the bird could have been handled better, more deviously and subtly, than him simply murdering anyone who saw it.
! Don't get me wrong. It was a great movie all around tho. I just wanted an entire movie about his wife though. She was amazing in those first 10 minutes… but I really do think they took the easy cliche route on the villain when he could have instead, been as sympathetic as Carl or as earning of a real, happy ending. -
I saw this movie twice in oen day and when his wife well anyone who's seen it know's, i shed a tear. For THAT i give this movie 5 stars. I really liked it while at the same time hating the premise alot so i won't be buying it, but i will recommend it to anyone.
-
! Just saw the movie today, I must say this is definitely one of Pixar's best. Also, it's the only Pixar movie thus far to make me cry. I loved the visual inventiveness and the witty realistic dialogue. Two things that irked me about it though.
! 1. I'm with everyone else who thought the Charles Muntz thing could've been handled better. It wasn't terrible, but it just seemed a bit off and incomplete.
! 2. What was the deal with Russell's dad? I mean, he mentions him twice about he's usually away and it's implied he has a stepmother named Phyllis. But then at the end we see his mom but no dad? I wish that subplot had been resolved better. -
! 2. What was the deal with Russell's dad? I mean, he mentions him twice about he's usually away and it's implied he has a stepmother named Phyllis. But then at the end we see his mom but no dad? I wish that subplot had been resolved better.
! That was the resolution, his father pretty much ditched him. Speaking from experience, I can tell you that that kind of thing happens all the time.
! I'm actually quite glad that they went the way they did with that. -
! That was the resolution, his father pretty much ditched him. Speaking from experience, I can tell you that that kind of thing happens all the time.
! I'm actually quite glad that they went the way they did with that.! Huh, weird. I got the feeling that his father was maybe a bit neglectful, but I didn't think he was a douche. Oh well, I guess that just sets up Carl as his new father figure.
-
! I saw this earlier this week. Really a fantastic movie. I love children's movies that don't treat the target audience as if they're too young to deal with things like death. I've actually heard some parents complaining about this film in that it's too dark for their sheltered little children. The movie is probably too complicated for most kids under 5, but above that age the problem is just with lazy parents who don't want to explain to their kids that yes, part of life is that people do die.
! I agree with others about the villan though. It seemed the writters had to go out of their way to make him evil, implying that he knocked off all the other explorers who came before. Other than that though, I kind of felt for the guy. I mean he'd spent years tracking this exotic bird, striving for one last great triumph. It's not his fault that Kevin happened to be quirky, funny, and totally lovable.
! I also liked the subtle way they dealt with Russel's family. Serious, but not at all in your face about it. Very well done as far as I'm concerned. -
i laughed when the bad color came out
the red water
-
Saw this movie twice and the second viewing was still a pleasant experience.
! Muntz had to be at least late 20s to early 30s in the film that youngster Fredrickson saw. Thus Charles Muntz has to be over 100+ years old because Fredrickson was 78 years old according to Pixar's movie description. Clearly the guy ages well!
btw, see The Hangover as well, the audience was bawling over the ridicuously hilarious sequences
-
! About the Muntz being over 100 thing. I actually, have a great great aunt who's over 100 years old now (for real) and while she may not be able to climb up the side of blimp, she has a grip like you wouldn't believe.
-
Yeah, not all old people are uberfrail.
-
Alright, after half a year I finally saw it.
I'm a bit disappointed as it is a step-down from the holy grail that was WALL-E, but was a great movie all in all. I feel Monsters, Inc. outranks it, but it's still higher on my list than the Bird works, Bugs and TS1.
The first ten minutes were like major ;_; though. I mean fuuuuuuudge, that was really depressing. I ended up laughing at the end of it though because my Dad said "Wow, that was really depressing" about a second after I thought it.
I felt Carl and his development were good, but too much of the movie was focused on the fat useless kid, who really pissed me off. It pissed me off that of the two "invalids", an old man and a young kid who should theoretically be just as helpless against things, Carl managed to accomplish some things but screwed up at other times while the kid just screwed up non stop, and was more of a hazard to the story than Plummer was.
Contrary to what I normally say with Pixar films, Plummer wasn't really out of place as villain in this story. He was meaning, legitimate threat who drove Carl's development…and was ultimately dealt with appropriately. Villains I hate are just random threats elevated to villain status for no reason other than STORIES WITHOUT VILLAINS = LOSE YOUR AUDIENCE. Plummer was well integrated into Up, a good choice IMV.
I kind of liked how Plummer was modeled after Charles Lindburgh, Lucky Lindy always had an insane side to him. There was an element of tragedy in how he was disgraced, but his own arrogance lead him down there and his sins really couldn't be forgiven.
I could not understand how old that guy must have been though. Not many of the times add up. Judging from the cars, the story must have began in the 1920's or 1930's, and with Fenton's (which I've eaten at by the way, it looks nothing like that now and is not great ice cream) not having any other buildings near it, the story would have ended in the early 1980's MAX, because Oakland was getting heck of developed starting then.
So, if Plummer was 30 in the 1920's, he'd be 70 something in the movie. But, I couldn't get how Carl looked older, he must have been in his 50's or so yet was still so old.
That said though, fittingly, as I hated the kid and loved Carl, I was ambivalent to Doug. I couldn't understand him. On the one hand he liked Carl and the kid, but on the other hand he was trying to bring Kevin to Plummer. His change of heart was sort of sudden for me, and when i watched the second Pixar short for his wish, it made me ask why he bothered to want to bring Kevin back to Plummer anyway.
I still give the movie full marks, but those are my thoughts on it.
-
I rented this movie a few weeks ago. I thought it was definitely one of the best Pixar films. It might actually be my favorite.
The beginning was so depressing, though. Perhaps that's why I liked this movie so much, it was more serious. (well about as serious as you can get with talking dogs, but you know what I mean.)
-
I just watched it again tonight, and I cried the same as I did the first time. Now to go get the music.
-
M_T, if you watched it on Blu-ray they have a secret feature explaining that a dropped plot of the movie was that the egg of the bird is like the fountain of youth and it was going to be explained that he needed to eat another one or something to stay young but was dropped because it was too "out there". Therefore, he is just very old (like over 100 or something).
-
If it ain't in the movie, it doesn't count. "We wanted to do this" or "the special bonus comic book explains it" don't count. Its the responsibility of the movie to explain everything within itself that it wants to explain.
So… he's just really really old.
-
That he was old wasn't a problem. I have no problem imagining him as a centarian, though it is counter-intuitive at first.
The problem was he was a lot younger looking than Carl, and in better shape. Now, I can imagine as an adventurer that he would be in better shape, but not younger looking.
-
I think in a commentary or bonus feature they talked about how it was fun to see how a fight between a 60 and 80 year old would play out. (don't quote me on the numbers).
I know someone who is 50 that looks younger than people in their early 30s, you got a problem with that too?
-
@EvilGamerX:
I know someone who is 50 that looks younger than people in their early 30s, you got a problem with that too?
Is this person starring in an animated movie where the artists had complete control over their look, and their youngish appearance is a bit of a stopping point where the plot is concerned that takes people out of the movie and makes them go "Huh?"
If "no", then its not a problem.
-
So …. let me get this right ... An Old man lures a young boy into his house,
and they fly away into the sky together, for a period of time in which they cannot
leave the house ? :blink:... Right ...
-
@EvilGamerX:
I know someone who is 50 that looks younger than people in their early 30s, you got a problem with that too?
You must be from Texas.
-
I'm pretty sure he's from the East Coast.
-
I'm pretty sure he's from the East Coast.
He's from the NYC area, but I assume that Terek was making a joke.
-
He's from the NYC area, but I assume that Terek was making a joke.
Texas is the fattest state in the US. The only kind of people who would look old while actually being young would be people who take very poor care of themselves, like the obese. If you lived there, then, you would see that kind of thing fairly often.