Wow. I'm proud of myself. I understood 98% of that. My Japanese isn't as rusty as I thought! And no, not because I saw the English trailer, I was literally translating every line in my head.
Pixar movies
-
-
…Is it just me, or did that trailer seem to be pretty much summarizing the entire movie?
-
Dont be so sure about that. Remember what happened the last time we trusted Japanese Trailers?
COUGHBRAVECOUGH
-
Dont be so sure about that. Remember what happened the last time we trusted Japanese Trailers?
COUGHBRAVECOUGH
Actually I have no idea what happened the last time we trusted Japanese trailers. I wasn't reading this thread at the time. So, uh, how completely inaccurate was that trailer to the final movie?
-
The japanese trailer for Brave basically made it look like it was going to be Princess Mononoke… left out all the jokes, played up the mystic forest spirits and evocative music against lush scenery and the action and drama and pathos and like there was going to be a big war against the spirits and nature and STUFF... even more so than the original american trailer.
I still want to see the movie that trailer shows off.
-
At least with Monsters U we're not expecting an artistic masterpiece. We're expecting a great time with some powerful emotional moments that "get'cha right here." Which is kinda Pixar's trademark.
-
At least the Monster U trailer isn't "misleading" and I have semi-low expectations for it (verses Brave's trailer which really blew it sky high…and ultimately lead to a disappointing result). So if the movie turned out decent, I would at least be satisfied with it. Heck, it might even turn out good if there is an interesting twist (although we already kinda know what eventually happens to them in the end so shrug)
-
Surprise twist. Mike dies 3/4 of the way into the film after a horrible college prank gone wrong, and and its his twin brother that becomes friends with Sully's guilty conscience.
-
Or maybe not even that. Sully allucinates Mike.
-
One thing I'm looking forward to in this movie is that we're apparently going to focus on Mike. Monster's Inc. focused on Sully and Boo while Mike was mostly the buttmonkey, now we get to see Mike be the heart of the story. Well, and their friendship, of course, but Mike's problems will the be catalyst, not Sully's. So it appears.
-
So will there be a Wally 2? Get to see Wally and Eve's robot kids growing up in the reformed wastelands.
-
I kind of it there's never one. The movie ended up really open ended and up to imagination. I like to think that obesity was never looked down on this post-apolyptic future. Which to me is a perfect world :D
-
Eh, I don't know if we really need a Wall*E 2. The first one seems just perfectly done the way it is, ending the way it did. And it kind of wrapped itself up in the credits.
-
Wall-e doesn't need a sequel PERIOD. Maybe…an apocalyptic prequel might work where we get to see the world gloriously falling apart with Pixar style visuals, but NOPE...no sequel. The only Pixar movies that could possibly have an appropriate sequel is the Incredibles.
-
So will there be a Wally 2? Get to see Wally and Eve's robot kids growing up in the reformed wastelands.
-
I'll never get the hard on NEARLY EVERYONE has with the Incredibles. I hated that movie.
-
I'll never get the hard on NEARLY EVERYONE has with the Incredibles. I hated that movie.
Because Brad Bird…well, that's my reason for liking it.
-
Because Brad Bird…well, that's my reason for liking it.
Then go watch Ratatouille. Its a FAR better movie.
-
Then go watch Ratatouille. Its a FAR better movie.
I already did and it IS a better movie (for me at least shrug), but it DEFINITELY is not sequel material like the Incredibles.
-
I read this at a feminist Blog. Make the movie about Remy's Daughter who has to succeed him! I say "Daughter" because Brave sucked and Pixar DEFINITELY owes their female audience a movie with a female lead that DOESNT SUCK.
Oh and have Brad Bird Direct.
-
I read this at a feminist Blog. Make the movie about Remy's Daughter who has to succeed him! I say "Daughter" because Brave sucked and Pixar DEFINITELY owes their female audience a movie with a female lead that DOESNT SUCK.
Oh and have Brad Bird Direct.
2 things about this:
1. How would a female rat protagonist change the story any differently from a male rat protagonist aside from strictly having a "strong" female lead? Seems like a pointless idea to me in general (simply to appease the disappointed Brave crowd? C'mon…).2. What would a Ratatouille sequel offer that Ratatouille didn't already give us? Cars 2 didn't ask this question and that is why it exists and...is seen as a terrible flop of a Pixar movie. That is not to say a Ratatouille sequel would be bad as Cars 2, but the point is I think Ratatouille covered its bases really well in the end. What would be new that the Ratatouille universe could offer to their fans?
-
2 things about this:
1. How would a female rat protagonist change the story any differently from a male rat protagonist aside from strictly having a strong female lead? Seems like a pointless idea to me in general (simply to appease the disappointed Brave crowd? C'mon…).That's the whole point. To show a movie featuring a girl is just the same as with a male lead. That it can be good, awesome even.
Why is this so hard to understand? So hard to do? And its not just for the "dissapointed Brave Crowd". Its for every little girl and woman who wants a Pixar groundbreaker starring a girl.2. What would a Ratatouille sequel offer that Ratatouille didn't already give us? Cars 2 didn't ask this question and that is why it exists and...is seen as a terrible flop of a Pixar movie. That is not to say a Ratatouille sequel would be bad as Cars 2, but the point is I think Ratatouille covered its bases really well in the end. What would be new that the Ratatouille universe could offer to their fans?
I dunno, get to see other characters in Remy's rat colony or something.
-
I dunno, get to see other characters in Remy's rat colony or something.
Sounds like the same reasoning anyone would have for supporting Cars 2… In other words, there is no point in it. Ratatouille wrapped up the narrative just fine. There's no need to continue the story further or any particular elements within the story to expand upon.
-
You didnt say anything about my other argument. The one inside the quote bubble.
-
I'll never get the hard on NEARLY EVERYONE has with the Incredibles. I hated that movie.
You're a terrible person and you should feel bad.
-
You didnt say anything about my other argument. The one inside the quote bubble.
What? Brad Bird? If he's directing it, fine. But I'm sure even he knows that there isn't a story beyond Ratatouille based on the way he wrote it. He pretty much closed up a solid stand alone movie.
-
@RobbyBevard:
You're a terrible person and you should feel bad.
U MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!?
lol
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
What? Brad Bird? If he's directing it, fine. But I'm sure even he knows that there isn't a story beyond Ratatouille based on the way he wrote it. He pretty much closed up a solid stand alone movie.
No, this one.
That's the whole point. To show a movie featuring a girl is just the same as with a male lead. That it can be good, awesome even.
Why is this so hard to understand? So hard to do? And its not just for the "dissapointed Brave Crowd". Its for every little girl and woman who wants a Pixar groundbreaker starring a girl.Why do people worship Pixar so much? They arent gods, they are just as fallible as Dreamworks.
-
Have you ever considered that you are simply a soulless automoton
-
Because though personal tastes may vary, Pixar pretty much had an awesome unblemished track record of GREAT creative artistic movies for about 10 movies (15 years) in a row, which is pretty much unmatched by any studio in Hollywood.
And especially the Ratatouille/Up/Wall-E/Toy Story 3 set they had EXTREMELY fantastic movies that were all on "Best Picture" level.
-
What is with all the trolls out today. Is it some kind of festival?
-
@Cyan:
Have you ever considered that you are simply a soulless automoton
Have you considered that. GASP! Peoplef have diferent opinions!?
Guess not.
@RobbyBevard:
Because though personal tastes may vary, Pixar pretty much had an awesome unblemished track record of GREAT creative artistic movies for about 10 movies (15 years) in a row, which is pretty much unmatched by any studio in Hollywood.
And especially the Ratatouille/Up/Wall-E/Toy Story 3 set they had EXTREMELY fantastic movies that were all on "Best Picture" level.
I DO like Pixar. Especially those movies I Bolded above, (I dont like Up, surprise surprise) Its just that I feel like the only person in the world who thinks they are great, but fallible?
-
Im a troll? . SERIOUSLY.
Just because I dont like some Pixar movies,Im not a troll
-
Well, I know who to play with come April 1, at least.
-
…Now that's interesting. I would love to see what you prepare for me.
-
U MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!?
lol
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
No, this one.
Why do people worship Pixar so much? They arent gods, they are just as fallible as Dreamworks.
Hmm, I don't know how I missed that. Fine I'll answer it by posing a question:
How would a female rat improve the narrative in a potential Ratatouille sequel? Normally one utilizes a female character to do something that a male character would normally not do or fit in a role (i.e. Kill Bill needed a female protagonist, Brave needed a female protagonist, etc…because characteristics of their gender was inherent in the story). One shouldn't throw in a female protagonist just because THEY CAN and not expand upon it. There needs to be a reason for a particular character to be female (character dynamic? backstory? etc...).
It just sounds like you want a female character in the story SIMPLY because she is a female character. That would be lousy writing and would only prove to be disappointing and artificial. How would having a female rat make the story better than a male rat? Simply because she is female? That's it? What dynamics in the Ratatouille world would suit a female rat protagonist more so than a male rat? Romance? Emotional drama?
Besides, women are harder to write for (especially if you're a guy).
-
How do you know that's lousy writing? Maybe its genderblind writing?
Also, I LOVE how you go for the "Writing Girls is HARD". So! Does that mean Pixar should avoid writing women and girls? SO MUCH for the "Pixar Brain Trust" Being infallible.
-
Im a troll? . SERIOUSLY.
Just because I dont like some Pixar movies,Im not a troll
You're a troll because you sounded your species mating call.
-
Im going to assume (Or Pretend) you are kidding.
Nice one! ;)
-
You're a troll because of how you interact with people, not because of your opinions.
@Nex:
You're a troll because you sounded your species mating call.
ROFL.
-
You're a troll because of how you interact with people, not because of your opinions.
ROFL.
Point out the "Trollish Behaviour".
Sorry if Im being rude. But Im not a "Troll"
Use the word "Rude", not Troll. Because calling me a troll and dismissing me as such shows that you cant stand someone disagreeing with you.
-
I was going to wait the two weeks. But screw it.
"I know I'm being rude" isn't really a great defense for trolling.
-
A dum-dum .
-
P.S. Thank you for PMing me and revealing you had a dupe account.
This forced me to do an IP check and discover you're apparently also several other people that have been banned… or just unlucky enough to share their IP adress.
-
Aww and I was busy for about 2 hours to respond to his nonsense. Goddammit….
anyway I still stand by the fact that women are harder to writer for in general. But since I face no opposition...drat. -
Incredibles was my favorite untill Walle came out. Walle had tons of heart. Bioshock is also one of my favorite games.
Has anyone read this interesting comparrison of Bioshock and The Incredibles?http://nomorequo.blogspot.com/2007/12/what-does-bioshock-have-in-common-with.html
-
Hmm, I don't know how I missed that. Fine I'll answer it by posing a question:
How would a female rat improve the narrative in a potential Ratatouille sequel? Normally one utilizes a female character to do something that a male character would normally not do or fit in a role (i.e. Kill Bill needed a female protagonist, Brave needed a female protagonist, etc…because characteristics of their gender was inherent in the story). One shouldn't throw in a female protagonist just because THEY CAN and not expand upon it. There needs to be a reason for a particular character to be female (character dynamic? backstory? etc...).
It just sounds like you want a female character in the story SIMPLY because she is a female character. That would be lousy writing and would only prove to be disappointing and artificial. How would having a female rat make the story better than a male rat? Simply because she is female? That's it? What dynamics in the Ratatouille world would suit a female rat protagonist more so than a male rat? Romance? Emotional drama?
Besides, women are harder to write for (especially if you're a guy).
what? So you're saying that every movie ever should be about a man unless there is some specific thing that requires the lead to be a female
That's actually the problem right there. You'd be surprised how often I go through my day doing the exact same things a male would be doing!! There are literally HOURS where I go without having to use my femininity!!
The problem with your logic is that you need some kind of reason for the character to be female because he default character is male, meaning your character suddenly has to act differently now. This is where that annoying 'princess' cliche starts creeping in. Just because a woman has the same ambitions and goes through the same trials as a boy would, doesn't necessarily mean she would react to it any different than a boy would. I bring up Miyazaki a lot during these discussions but think about replacing his heroines with males. It's not so much the character that changes as does our view of them. Game of Thrones and Korra are good examples of a variety of women doing a variety of traditionally male roles. These characters are great, even exotic compared to what we traditionally get in cartoons and films.
I refuse to believe Pixar can't write an interesting female lead. They are literally some of the most talented storytellers in the world.
-
Thank you very much Robby. You just made this thread completely tolerable. I can't ask for a better Birthday present 3)
-
what? So you're saying that every movie ever should be about a man unless there is some specific thing that requires the lead to be a female
That's actually the problem right there. You'd be surprised how often I go through my day doing the exact same things a male would be doing!! There are literally HOURS where I go without having to use my femininity!!
The problem with your logic is that you need some kind of reason for the character to be female because he default character is male, meaning your character suddenly has to act differently now. This is where that annoying 'princess' cliche starts creeping in. Just because a woman has the same ambitions and goes through the same trials as a boy would, doesn't necessarily mean she would react to it any different than a boy would. I bring up Miyazaki a lot during these discussions but think about replacing his heroines with males. It's not so much the character that changes as does our view of them. Game of Thrones and Korra are good examples of a variety of women doing a variety of traditionally male roles. These characters are great, even exotic compared to what we traditionally get in cartoons and films.
I refuse to believe Pixar can't write an interesting female lead. They are literally some of the most talented storytellers in the world.
I was just going to write something about that, but you kinda nailed my point Yeah, I think writing for a woman is only hard if the story is explicitly about her being a woman. I guess when we are talking about a Ratatouille sequel where the only difference is that the main character is a female, the story kinda should be about her being a woman in a way (which also shows what a bad idea this was, because thats a really lame basic plot idea for a sequel). But I think a movie with a female protagonist that doesn
t necessarily ask for or need a female protagonist and where the story doesn
t depend on her gender or is changed by it, would not not only be not a problem, but actually a good way to introduce and use a kickass, awesome female main character. As long as you define a females story by her being female, you wander into the dangerous field of clichès and "chick flick" accusations. Not circling the story around the gender I think would in the end allow the writers to write a much more three-dimensional, well-rounded character. -
I refuse to believe Pixar can't write an interesting female lead. They are literally some of the most talented storytellers in the world.
Exactly my point. Pixar would not write a female protagonist and simply not do anything with it. Heck, they have even created numerous female characters that broke conventions like Doris (not getting together with the male lead at the end…thank god). My point being is that Pixar is not going to just say, "Hay! Brave got us some negative backlash regarding the female character so lets artificially SHOVE a female lead into say...a Ratatouille sequel just to make them happy." There will need to be reasons for what the gender can offer that the other couldn't as a protagonist (such as in breaking conventions, expectations, roles, etc...).
You don't simply write a protagonist and then toss a coin at the end to determine its gender. You write particular lines, motivations, etc...that indicate elements of the gender even if it is not the focal point. True, you can write very gender ambiguous roles like Miyazaki, but I feel that GOOD character driven narratives often play with gender identities by often breaking conventions or putting new twists to them. With gender in mind, you can create a very well rounded character that is sympathetic to the audience. You can do different things with a character based on gender. It isn't necessarily about the character being feminine or not, but the values/expectations imposed UPON the character by the environment surrounded by them and HOW the character interacts with them (which is why I asked the question about how the Ratatouille universe would be efficacious in constructing a good narrative for a female rat protagonist).
Also if one wants a bad-ass female character. Fine. But it would be incredibly lazy and shallow to simply write her as "A bad ass female character" and leave her as that. We already have plenty of shallow (yet entertaining) movies with males doing that, but a female character can produce some interesting twists to that convention such as like the Kill Bill serie. They didn't overtly sexualize Thurman, she was still bad-ass, but Tarantino put time and effort to make her sympathetic due to her background, motivations, emotional investment as the bride and her relationship with her former associates. The movie would be remarkably different if it were a male protagonist hunting down fellow assassins that killed his wife. The dialogue would be different, execution, etc...
Playing with gender in a film provides a lot of opportunties to play with the audience's preconcieved notions (as well as the universe's conceptions/assumptions surrounding gender roles). I suspect Pixar has enough competent writers that are familiar with this and have broken some conventions (albiet following some VERY closely) with Brave. If they are going to shove a female protagonist at the audience, they better be clever about it aside from her being merely "an artificial way to satisfy the grumpy Brave audience".
PS: The most interesting female lead in Pixar history existed for 10 minutes in the beginning of UP and died.
-
There will need to be reasons for what the gender can offer that the other couldn't as a protagonist (such as in breaking conventions, expectations, roles, etc…).
I think you have the wrong approach here
You're looking at it like being a Male character is default. Like I don't mean to paint the rest of your post in a really big stroke, but it all seems to be built on that idea that when you make a character female, you're actively making a choice to make her "NOT male", which is unfair and also ironically male-centric.
And it just doesn't seem the best of ideas. Your intentions are good, sincerely so, and I understand what you're saying. But I think the idea it's based on is really wrong. Having female characters isn't just about some inherencies only females can have, or whether or not they can break grounds or conventional roles.