Toy Story 3 (Pixar, 2010)

[Watashi]

This movie has some pretty great highs, but a lot of the movie is pretty meh moment-to-moment. A lot of the jokes came off forced and flat. But overall, I liked it.
I think the best comedy bits were Mr. Potato head on the tortilla

and of course, "Quiet musical hog".

But yeah, some gags fall flat (like the how many times have we seen it Mission Impossible joke) and it's probably Pixar's least funniest film. Still, it made up for it in the small things.

[Sycophant]

I will readily agree that those were the two best comedy bits. The former had me grinning for a while.

[Raiders]

This was mostly really good. I like how by now, the bond between the toy's owner, or "person," and the toy itself has practically become a religious belief. Woody is the evangelical, preaching to the lost and crying out for faith and a little courage to still believe they are loved and wanted. Like the last film, it is mostly a crisis of faith featuring a gruff formerly "abandoned" toy who has rebelled and cast off those old beliefs, now bitter and angry (his final comeuppance is being crucified on the front of a truck). Truth be told, much of this film does feel a little familiar, particularly elements from the last film. I also wasn't too crazy about "Spanish Buzz" which was a funny idea but should have been a throwaway, not some drawn-out stereotype which became less funny by the second. Not sure I really understand the extent to the dislike that seems to happen every time for Randy Newman's work, which again I found very complementary to the piece (individually yeah, the songs are weak, but they fit well for better or worse). These films are pretty much sappy nostalgia, but Pixar treats the bond and crisis with the utmost sincerity and poignancy. It would greatly concern me that anyone can watch those last few minutes and not feel the urge to cry at least a little. Also, props must go to Ned Beatty's work as Lotso. Stellar voice-acting.

As for Day & Night, well it was basically a perfect five minutes. It managed an entire story arc, character's discovery, transformation, conflict and acceptance all into its running time and did so with no dialogue (between the characters anyway). Truly a work of visual imagination and a great abstract view of the daily cycle; using of course the two opposites of day and night to point a finger at society. The moment of dusk was truly a rapturous few seconds and if I had any quibble at all it is that the film could, and should, have ended on that perfect image.

[Rowland]

Yeah, Day & Night was pretty spectacular. I was particularly fond of how its formal design reflected the thematic throughline, and furthermore, its canniness in introducing the lone instance of spoken words through a radio satellite, itself as socially outmoded a source for storytelling as many skeptics believe 2D animation to be; so not only is the piece rejecting fear and prejudices of the unknown, it is encouraging an open mind to its younger audience for the expressive fluidity of 2D animation and its entire audience for the purity and potential for bridging divides of the spoken word when wielded with purpose.

The only reason my three-star score isn't higher is because I felt it began to spin its wheels towards the end, the repeated imagery of babes and Las Vegas struck me as tacky for such an otherwise elegant piece, and the quote used for the radio address, while perfectly suitable and defensible (as I did above) was perhaps too on the nose. Still, I might be underrating it.

[Boner M]

Highlight for me was the Brit-thesp teddy. "I believe it's pronounced 'Eye'd-nah'!"

[Sxottlan]

his final comeuppance is being crucified on the front of a truck.

That was exactly what I was thinking too when I saw it.

[number8]

Oh, 4Chan.

http://i.imgur.com/gvHIT.jpg

[Grouchy]

So this was very good, only that, like some of you have pointed out already, it doesn't add anything new to the Toy Story universe. The theme of growing up had already been explored by the second movie and this sequel at times feels like an easy money grab. Still, this is made by Pixar folks and so it retains all the good attributes of a Pixar film: intelligent storyline, pitch perfect comedy and a heart on the right place. It's just not a surprise or a step forward for the company like his latest movies were. Familiar grounds, well delivered.

[Bosco B Thug]

Walter Chaw's waxy review (http://filmfreakcentral.net/screenreviews/toystory3.htm) is worth reading. He really lets himself go, it's nice. Haha.

This was really good. It's amazing the leaps of faith Pixar can pull out of us, and how many suspensions of belief it takes on and successfully smooths over. Smart film. The film's effect is kinda diffuse, though, so that even the shocking [and great] moment in the SPOILER incinerator SPOILER didn't have as much of an effect on me as I knew it was striving for.

[Spinal]

Saw this a couple of weeks ago and haven't thought about it much since. I find the heapings of praise for what I perceive to be a perfunctory money-grabbing sequel to be bewildering. There are some funny moments - Mr. Potato Head's body horror, Spanish Buzz - but most of what is good about this film has been lifted from The Brave Little Toaster and the film seems to be getting a pass because it's untouchable Pixar. While their films are still making tons of money and earning unparalleled critical raves, I see a company in decline. Three of their last five features have not been good.

[Pop Trash]

Wall-E wasn't good? I didn't know that.

[transmogrifier]

Saw this a couple of weeks ago and haven't thought about it much since. I find the heapings of praise for what I perceive to be a perfunctory money-grabbing sequel to be bewildering. There are some funny moments - Mr. Potato Head's body horror, Spanish Buzz - but most of what is good about this film has been lifted from The Brave Little Toaster and the film seems to be getting a pass because it's untouchable Pixar. While their films are still making tons of money and earning unparalleled critical raves, I see a company in decline. Three of their last five features have not been good.

Pixar is Hollywood royalty, and will have to make something very, very, very bad for that to change. But they play it pretty safe each year, mixing low comedy and a sophisticated sentamentalism that especially appeals to middle-aged movie reviewers (the pretty dumb critic speech in Ratatouille, the marriage montage in Up, the twee environmentalism in the otherwise awesome Wall-E (not to mention Hey Dolly!) etc), which means it becomes a pretty easy review to write, year after year.

If only Astro Boy had had a Pixar label slapped on it, perhaps it wouldn't have died a completely undeserved death, and the critics may have lent it a few more column inches.

[Spinal]

Wall-E wasn't good? I didn't know that.

I was referring to Cars, Up and Toy Story 3.

[Ezee E]

I was referring to Cars, Up and Toy Story 3.
Despite your opinion of a declining production company, Metacritic disagrees as they basically hover around 90%, minus Cars.

Toy Story 3 - 91%
Up - 88%
Wall-E - 94%
Cars - 73%
Ratatouille - 96%
Incredibles - 90%

I'm not even a big Pixar fan, but to say they're in decline is kind of silly, even if I have a similar opinion. I only really like Wall-E out of that group there.

[Watashi]

Pixar is not on a decline. Even if Cars 2 sucks (it won't be a financial failure, I can tell you that), it's not going to ruin their legacy.

[Spinal]

Despite your opinion of a declining production company, Metacritic disagrees as they basically hover around 90%, minus Cars.

Toy Story 3 - 91%
Up - 88%
Wall-E - 94%
Cars - 73%
Ratatouille - 96%
Incredibles - 90%

I'm not even a big Pixar fan, but to say they're in decline is kind of silly, even if I have a similar opinion. I only really like Wall-E out of that group there.

Why can't I say that they are in decline in terms of quality? I only need my opinion to make that assessment. How is that 'silly'?

[Watashi]

Why can't I say that they are in decline in terms of quality? I only need my opinion to make that assessment. How is that 'silly'?
'Cause your opinion is in the extreme minority, Mr. Pricklepants.

[Spinal]

If this were another studio, we would be talking about how deeply maudlin and unsatisfying the climax is ...

... in which the central characters are dangled over an inferno before being arbitrarily rescued by peripheral comic relief characters who utter their catch phrase for the third or fourth time in the movie.

Compare and contrast with a very similar scene in The Brave Little Toaster in which the moment becomes about the title character's self-sacrifice and willingness to risk everything for his friends. One is manipulative and cutesy. The other is genuine and revelatory.

[Watashi]

Oh boy, Spinal. I thought you were smarter than to pull the ole "if the movie wasn't directed by A or produced by B, it wouldn't be as celebrated as much". I thought the finale worked not because of the studio, but because of the characters I've been emotionally invested in for 15 years and the aliens rescuing the toys work because it was set up in an earlier scene so it didn't feel completely out of the blue. I can enjoy both Toy Story 3 and Brave Little Toaster on equal levels without saying "well, this film did this better".

[Spinal]

'Cause your opinion is in the extreme minority, Mr. Pricklepants.

While I think it would be too much to say the Emperor has no clothes, I think that perhaps the Emperor has slipped into a silk Hugh Hefner robe and is skating by a little bit on reputation.

[Qrazy]

If this were another studio, we would be talking about how deeply maudlin and unsatisfying the climax is ...

... in which the central characters are dangled over an inferno before being arbitrarily rescued by peripheral comic relief characters who utter their catch phrase for the third or fourth time in the movie.

Compare and contrast with a very similar scene in The Brave Little Toaster in which the moment becomes about the title character's self-sacrifice and willingness to risk everything for his friends. One is manipulative and cutesy. The other is genuine and revelatory.

I agree that the latter is a better scene but to be fair the former wasn't arbitrary, it was set up in the scene and foreshadowed by the use of the catch phrase throughout the film.

[Spinal]

Oh boy, Spinal. I thought you were smarter than to pull the ole "if the movie wasn't directed by A or produced by B, it wouldn't be as celebrated as much". I thought the finale worked not because of the studio, but because of the characters I've been emotionally invested in for 15 years and the aliens rescuing the toys work because it was set up in an earlier scene so it didn't feel completely out of the blue. I can enjoy both Toy Story 3 and Brave Little Toaster on equal levels without saying "well, this film did this better".

It's not that it's out of the blue. It's that the action means absolutely nothing. It's a cheap escape hatch.

And yes, I think that Pixar is getting a pass that another studio would not get.

[Spinal]

I agree that the latter is a better scene but to be fair the former wasn't arbitrary, it was set up in the scene and foreshadowed by the use of the catch phrase throughout the film.

It's set up in the sense that we understand why those characters are interested in the machine. But ........ so what? What does this tell me about any of the characters except for they caught a lucky break? I don't think this is good enough for such an important scene.

[Watashi]

It's not that it's out of the blue. It's that the action means absolutely nothing. It's a cheap escape hatch.

Except that it's not. You have these characters at the lowest they've ever been in the whole trilogy and you release them from this agony and despair by characters who have been foreshadowed through every film by a certain catchphrase to relieve them by something that actually feels genuine and plausible.


And yes, I think that Pixar is getting a pass that another studio would not get.

Well, that's your own jaded perspective. Pixar isn't doing anything special to make them bulletproof. They are very smart in choosing their staff and grateful to their fans. Maybe that's why audiences love them, but they just put out damn good movies.

[Watashi]

I think if Lars Von Trier directed a Pixar film, Spinal's brain would implode.

[Spinal]

Except that it's not. You have these characters at the lowest they've ever been in the whole trilogy and you release them from this agony and despair by characters who have been foreshadowed through every film by a certain catchphrase to relieve them by something that actually feels genuine and plausible.

So the entire trilogy is about the alien toys and their journey from victims at the hands of an unfeeling claw to becoming unlikely heroes?

[Watashi]

So the entire trilogy is about the alien toys and their journey from victims at the hands of an unfeeling claw to becoming unlikely heroes?
Yep.

[number8]

I'm with you, Spinal. I wish the toys were burnt to death, too.

[Watashi]

I'm with you, Spinal. I wish the toys were burnt to death, too.
I don't think any studio could get away with that.

[Derek]

I think if Lars Von Trier directed a Pixar film, Spinal's brain would implode.

Many more people have expressed hatred of LvT's films than all of Pixar's combined and Spinal has made it this far. Not everyone can be as cool under pressure as you when our favorite filmmakers are attacked, but you are a model of tranquility and composure which we all strive to match.

[Watashi]

I wasn't attacking Lars Von Trier. He's one of my favorite filmmakers as well. I just flat-out didn't like Antichrist.

[Qrazy]

It's set up in the sense that we understand why those characters are interested in the machine. But ........ so what? What does this tell me about any of the characters except for they caught a lucky break? I don't think this is good enough for such an important scene.

It's a continuation of the theme that all of these toys have to watch each others backs. They love Andy but they can't really rely on him anymore. They can only rely on one another. So they all join hands when they think they're about to reach their doom, and they are saved by other members of the group who care deeply for them as well. In that sense the repeated use of the phrase 'the claw' is a bit of misdirection, it seems the aliens aren't full members of or interested in the core group until they go out of their way to save the others.

But as I said I agree with you that the Little Toaster film and the issue of self-sacrifice is a better conclusion than a deus ex machina... however we did see Woody perform that self-sacrifice earlier in the film, so there is that. And in a certain sense a deus ex may be the ideal meta way of ending this story... since Toy Story is afterall the story of toys being played with both by the human characters and the animators themselves. The ending with the claw calls to mind the fantasy opening where Buzz saves the train after it falls off the railway tracks. I'm sure when I played with legos many of my stories ended with the hero arriving at the last possible second. The mind of a child is fully of dramatic last second saves.

[Qrazy]

I don't think any studio could get away with that.

Once balmakboor sees the film he will surely claim that the last few minutes of the film are a collective dream sequence had by the toys after they are burnt to death.

[Boner M]

Who knew such a benign movie/studio could incur a war between multiple Lady GaGas?

[Spinal]

Who knew such a benign movie/studio could incur a war between multiple Lady GaGas?

Hee hee.

[Spinal]

I'm with you, Spinal. I wish the toys were burnt to death, too.

I'm thinking something like the ending of MacGruber. Except substitute Woody for Val Kilmer.

[Spinal]

And in a certain sense a deus ex may be the ideal meta way of ending this story... since Toy Story is afterall the story of toys being played with both by the human characters and the animators themselves. The ending with the claw calls to mind the fantasy opening where Buzz saves the train after it falls off the railway tracks. I'm sure when I played with legos many of my stories ended with the hero arriving at the last possible second. The mind of a child is fully of dramatic last second saves.

This is a pretty good defense.

[KK2.0]

http://s1.hubimg.com/u/3333444_f260.jpg WANT <3

[Raiders]

Spinal is right, guys. I clearly was just giving Pixar a pass and not actually really enjoying the movie. I'm going to lower my score a good star, star-and-a-half. You may also insert some jaded comments into my earlier post praising the film.

[Spinal]

Yeah, I'm not backing down from that one. I think they get the benefit of the doubt. I think they are forgiven when they are lazy.

[Grouchy]

Yeah, I'm not backing down from that one. I think they get the benefit of the doubt. I think they are forgiven when they are lazy.
How could they possibly be lazy? A single raised eyebrow or flying lock of hair must take up to eight hours in the animator's chair.

[Spinal]

How could they possibly be lazy? A single raised eyebrow or flying lock of hair must take up to eight hours in the animator's chair.

All of my criticism has been has been about the script. The storytelling. No one is questioning their technical mastery. But it doesn't always make for a good film.

[Grouchy]

All of my criticism has been has been about the script. The storytelling. No one is questioning their technical mastery. But it doesn't always make for a good film.
I know, I just thought given what they do, it was a crazy adjective either way.

[Spinal]

This idea of critical groupthink is not a crazy one. It happens a lot. With Michael Moore films, nearly every review starts with "I don't trust everthing Michael Moore says, but ..." With Lars von Trier films, nearly every reviewer feels the need to mention either the fact he has not visited America or that he 'hates women'. For whatever reason, a pattern develops that is taken as common knowledge while the truth behind the assertion is rarely questioned.

With Pixar, the assumption is that even their lesser efforts are superior to all other animated films that get released. It's repeated over and over in reviews and it simply isn't true.

[Grouchy]

With Pixar, the assumption is that even their lesser efforts are superior to all other animated films that get released. It's repeated over and over in reviews and it simply isn't true.
Well... Sticking within the Hollywood mainstream of animation, I totally agree.

Then again, you might have a point because I haven't actually watched a Hollywood animated movie that's not Pixar since Beowulf.

[Spinal]

Well, let's see, in the past five years, there's ...

How to Train Your Dragon
Astro Boy
Coraline
The Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Secret of Kells
Kung Fu Panda
Ponyo
Horton Hears a Who!
The Simpsons Movie
Happy Feet
Over the Hedge
Azur and Asmar
Monster House
Curious George

... all of which are better than Toy Story 3. I'm not counting the animated stuff geared for adults only. Not all of those are Hollywood, obviously.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Horton Hears a Who!
The Simpsons Movie[/b]

... all of which are better than Toy Story 3. I'm not counting the animated stuff geared for adults only. Not all of those are Hollywood, obviously.

Okay, I was sincerely dicking about in the last thread, but as for this, I haven't seen Toy Story 3, and it might not really be all that great, but there's no fucking way that The Simpsons Movie or Horton Hears a Who! are better movies. I think this is you taking the piss.

[Spinal]

Okay, I was sincerely dicking about in the last thread, but as for this, I haven't seen Toy Story 3, and it might not really be all that great, but there's no fucking way that The Simpsons Movie or Horton Hears a Who! are better movies. I think this is you taking the piss.

No, it's true. Those movies are both funnier and have more satisfying story arcs.

[Spinal]

And this kind of reinforces my point. Those movies can't possibly be better than a Pixar film! Why? Because they're not Pixar films.

[Spaceman Spiff]

And this kind of reinforces my point. Those movies can't possibly be better than a Pixar film! Why? Because they're not Pixar films.

Nah, it's because we have wildly differing views on what's funny. I grew up watching classic Simpsons, and pretty much anything past season 7 or so has been drivel to varying degrees. I guess if you didn't, that would make more sense as to why you found it funny.

And Horton hears a Who was loud, trite and obnoxious. Of this, I am totally at a loss as to why you liked it.

[Spaceman Spiff]

And frankly I don't really give that much of a crap as to what people think about Pixar. Some of their movies are pretty great. Others aren't. Whatever. Sounds like a bunch of other film studios to me.

[Watashi]

What exactly about Pixar's scriptwork don't you like, Spinal?

[Watashi]

Have you bothered to read any non-hyperbolic essays on any of the Pixar films, Spinal? There are lots on The House Next Door that say way more than I could ever write down.

I'm just trying to get where you get this "lazy" comment from. Outside of most Hollywood animation films, Pixar films tend to say so much about life, parenthood, and politics beneath the surface level that it's hard not to admire the grandiose of intellect that goes into the screenwriting process. I always find your preference to Brave Little Toaster very peculiar since John Lasseter storyboarded most of that film and could easily have the Pixar name attached.

[Watashi]

This is a good read (http://www.slantmagazine.com/house/2009/10/a-pixar-week-compendium/).

[Spinal]

What exactly about Pixar's scriptwork don't you like, Spinal?

Too often, the films are calcuated to find the moment that is adorable and precious rather than honest. I've already talked about my problem with Toy Story 3's ending. Even though I liked Wall-E, I outlined my problems with the essential problem of a robot designed solely for clean-up falling in love. Up is perhaps the worst offender with logic thrown out the window for cheap emotional effect. Again, I talked about that film in deatial in that thread. Cars dispenses with humor altogether for a maudlin view of small-town America. The films rarely have a strong edifying message like Happy Feet or How to Train My Dragon. They are too frequently concerned with demanding your love, like a big-eyed puppy dog who just won't leave you alone. Wall-E gets it half-right with the environmental critique, but then becomes too obsessed with Wall-E's big eyes and love of musicals. The Incredibles is a very good movie. A Bug's Life is a very good movie. Finding Nemo and Ratatouille are very good movies. But of late, I've found that the humor is weaker and that I've felt downright suffocated by their desire to please. The joy of discovery has been too often absent. The films are getting safe and predictable.

[Spinal]

Outside of most Hollywood animation films, Pixar films tend to say so much about life, parenthood, and politics beneath the surface level that it's hard not to admire the grandiose of intellect that goes into the screenwriting process.

I've never found the subtext of the films to be all that compelling. Some of Wall-E. Maybe A Bug's Life. With the The Incredibles, the subtext of the film makes me want to like it less, so I find it better to ignore it.

[transmogrifier]

Finding Nemo is still Pixar at its best. Funny, inventive and with a genuinely emotional main story, rather than trying to wrest pathos from dubious universal "themes" (Ratatouille and The Incredibles are the worst offendors in this regard). At it's heart is a father who wants to find his son and make up for his mistakes. Simple, clear, well-done.

[Spun Lepton]

"GROUPTHINK!!" screams the critic with the Lady Gaga avatar.

[Spinal]

"GROUPTHINK!!" screams the critic with the Lady Gaga avatar.

Ha! :lol:

[Ezee E]

The movie starts off perfectly for a sequel that last came out over ten years ago. We're quickly reacquainted with everyone. There's some good laughs. Everything is moving well.

It gets to the nursery, where the primary story starts, and what you have is a rather excellent prison escape story. In fact, I adored this entire portion. The geography of the nursery, the hazards in the way, and the hilarious monkey had me thinking that this would be in the top tier of the Pixar movies.

Then they escape and it all goes downhill. Everything between the escape and the denouement is already rehashed, and mostly boring. It's a shame that it had to be there.

[BuffaloWilder]

I've got your back, Spinal. Out of Pixar's entire filmography, there's maybe four that I can really get behind - for the life of me, I just can't see the attraction behind Monsters Inc., or A Bug's Life, or Cars.

On that note, I think this also goes the other way, as well - it almost seems like mainstream critics will actually intentionally underestimate a rival animated film (and, yeah - Pixar sees them that way, it's weird) in terms of it's thematic, emotional or formal value purely because it isn't Pixar upon its immediate release. It's only when they start looking back at it that they release their gaffe - sometimes even years later.

[Morris Schæffer]

Animation affords a director the ability to really unleash his imagination and dream up, and conceive of ideas and concepts that just seem more difficult in the realm of live-action. Indeed, watching Up, I had the distinct feeling it could only have been animated. But I sense a lack of discipline, of know-how, of inspiration to follow-up on these wild ideas. How else does one explain the utterly unremarkable, completely unmagical, preposterously non-wondrous (for all too easy) nature of Carl's voyage to Paradise Falls?

[Raiders]

Yeah, I'm not backing down from that one. I think they get the benefit of the doubt. I think they are forgiven when they are lazy.

My point is the implied invalidation of people who liked the film as if my reaction is because Luxo Jr. appeared in the opening company credits as opposed to the actual film itself. It's rather insulting to be honest.

[Spinal]

My point is the implied invalidation of people who liked the film as if my reaction is because Luxo Jr. appeared in the opening company credits as opposed to the actual film itself. It's rather insulting to be honest.

Don't we all go into films with certain biases? I know I do. I can't be alone on this.

[Grouchy]

I've got your back, Spinal.
Hot.

Of the movies you listed, I've seen Coraline and Happy Feet and it's true, both are better than Toy Story 3. You lost me with The Simpsons Movie.

[Ezee E]

A big portion of Happy Feet annoys me enough to where I would rather not watch it again. All of that annoys Robin Williams.

Toy Story 3 I'd watch again up until the part I've already mentioned.

[Raiders]

Don't we all go into films with certain biases? I know I do. I can't be alone on this.

I dunno. I just think it's not as if I went in convinced because it was Pixar that I would love it. I was underwhelmed by Up after all.

[BuffaloWilder]

A big portion of Happy Feet annoys me enough to where I would rather not watch it again. All of that annoys Robin Williams.

All of what you said annoys Robin Williams? :P

[BuffaloWilder]

I kind of want Pixar to make The Bear and The Bow. Now, that would be interesting - even if it wasn't a great movie by itself, just by power of its radically different concept within the Pixar canon, it'd still be something to see.

[Fezzik]

I kind of want Pixar to make The Bear and The Bow. Now, that would be interesting - even if it wasn't a great movie by itself, just by power of its radically different concept within the Pixar canon, it'd still be something to see.

You know they ARE still making that, right? They just renamed it to Brave

[Ezee E]

All of what you said annoys Robin Williams? :P
HOW DID YOU KNOW???? :)

[Sycophant]

Is Pixar the only production studio that gets talked about as if it were an auteur itself?

[Ezee E]

Is Pixar the only production studio that gets talked about as if it were an auteur itself?
Other than Ghibli? Probably.

[Sycophant]

Other than Ghibli? Probably.

Yeah, there's Ghibli, but that is 90% of the time just used as a synonym for Miyazaki.

[BuffaloWilder]

HOW DID YOU KNOW???? :)

He's in the house.

http://www.retrojunk.com/img/art-images/underation_nostalgiacritic.jpg

Call the police.

[number8]

Is Pixar the only production studio that gets talked about as if it were an auteur itself?

Roger Ebert tweeted a couple of weeks ago that Pixar is the first movie studio that is also a movie star. Someone corrected him, and he agreed, that that's what the Walt Disney studio used to be.

[Winston*]

Is Pixar the only production studio that gets talked about as if it were an auteur itself?

Disney?

[number8]

Of course, it's fitting for the studio to be called an auteur more than any others because of their "braintrust" system of developing movies. That doesn't exist currently in any other major studios.

[Spun Lepton]

Where most studios hire out filmmaking duties -- script writers, directors, DPs, etc. -- Pixar is all in-house, with the same basic group of people working on all their output.

[KK2.0]

Well, let's see, in the past five years, there's ...

How to Train Your Dragon
Astro Boy
Coraline
The Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Secret of Kells
Kung Fu Panda
Ponyo
Horton Hears a Who!
The Simpsons Movie
Happy Feet
Over the Hedge
Azur and Asmar
Monster House
Curious George

... all of which are better than Toy Story 3. I'm not counting the animated stuff geared for adults only. Not all of those are Hollywood, obviously.

I want to play the opinon game too: From the ones i've saw Coraline and Ponyo are certainly on par; Happy Feet, How To Train your Dragon and Panda come close but not really; Horton is stunning technically, but didn't left me with a lasting impression, at last, The Simpsons, Over The Hedge and Monster House are fun but nowhere near as good.

Maybe it depends on how much you appreciate the previous two, but for me Toy Story 3 is instant classic material.

[Sycophant]

I basically agree with Spinal, btw. Arguing against the conventional wisdom that something like a Pixar film is automatically TEH BEST, especially when saying such implicitly or explicitly seems to call for an accompanying statement that every other ones of its peers since 1995 has been completely empty and terrible (which is often the case; each Pixar film seems to be hailed as the sole savior of animation or family/children's entertainment), is something I think needs to be done.

Doesn't really invalidate anyone's opinion that the film is good or great necessarily.

[transmogrifier]

Best animated films of the past 10 years:

The Emperor's New Groove
Spirited Away
Finding Nemo
Wall-E
My Beautiful Girl Mari
A Scanner Darkly
Fantastic Mr. Fox
Kung Fu Panda
Monster House
Astro Boy

So Pixar has 2 of the 10. Nothing to sniff at, but hardly the saviour of animation either.

Of Spinal's list, I really, really disliked Happy Feet, Over the Hedge and Horton Hears a Who! (all pretty boring, really). Coraline and The Simpsons were merely okay. Haven't seen the rest.

[BuffaloWilder]

well your mom

[Spinal]

Caught a little bit of The Incredibles at the dentist's office this morning and was reminded how exciting and funny that movie is. Brad Bird really is excellent at creating distinct, captivating characters. Frozone, Edna Mode, Elastigirl ... great stuff. That's a sequel I wouldn't mind seeing.

[Sycophant]

Caught a little bit of The Incredibles at the dentist's office this morning and was reminded how exciting and funny that movie is. PIXAR really is excellent at creating distinct, captivating characters. Frozone, Edna Mode, Elastigirl ... great stuff. That's a sequel I wouldn't mind seeing.

lol.

[Sycophant]

I don't mean anything too heavy with that last post.

[Spinal]

Banned.

[BuffaloWilder]

No, but this does.

http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/1973/pixar.jpg

[Qrazy]

The 'shit eating grin' expression has been a staple of all cinema and previously all theater for the last three thousand years. It is merely more identifiable in animated works. Don't knock it till you've tried it.

[Spaceman Spiff]

ahahahahahahaha! That's great!

[number8]

Dreamworks is well aware of this meme and is mocking you all.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/images/uploads/megamindteasersmall.jpg

[KK2.0]

The 'shit eating grin' expression has been a staple of all cinema and previously all theater for the last three thousand years. It is merely more identifiable in animated works. Don't knock it till you've tried it.

This.

it's a formula, stablished by 2D animators decades ago, asymmetrical facial expressions (and body poses) are more pleasing to look at.

[Watashi]

I saw this again last night and I'm in complete agreement with Barty that Lotso = Obama. It's so obvious.

[Spinal]

Yeah, I haven't even touched the fact that the subtext for this film is kinda gross.

[Watashi]

Yeah, I haven't even touched the fact that the subtext for this film is kinda gross.
Gross? As in kissing your sister gross?

[Spinal]

Gross? As in kissing your sister gross?

Worse. Like kissing Joseph McCarthy.

[Derek]

Worse. Like kissing Joseph McCarthy.

Is Pixar working with the Texas State Board of Education (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo .com/2010/01/the_rehabilitation_of_joseph_m ccarthy_texas_textbo.php)?

[Sycophant]

Are you telling me that there's a movie called Megamind coming out this year that looks exactly like Despicable Me? How does this keep happening?

[Mysterious Dude]

I'm not sure the minds behind Pixar are all that brilliant. Around the time they finished Toy Story, some of them got together to have lunch and during that one lunch, they came up with the basic ideas for A Bug's Life, Monsters Inc., Finding Nemo and Wall-E. I imagine them saying, "Okay, what dumb animal or inanimate object can we do next?" It seems unfair to me to dismiss Dreamworks' animated films as all being about talking animals when so many of Pixar's films have as well.

[Barty]

The subtext is great. Unless you hate liberty that is.

:P

[Spinal]

I rest my case.

[Barty]

I rest my case.

You like Ratatouille though, right? That has massive Libertarian subtext.

[Spinal]

You like Ratatouille though, right? That has massive Libertarian subtext.

Well, like I said earlier, I'm generally into Pixar films for surface pleasures.

[Barty]

Well, like I said earlier, I'm generally into Pixar films for surface pleasures.

Fair enough. :pritch:

[BuffaloWilder]

I'm not sure the minds behind Pixar are all that brilliant. Around the time they finished Toy Story, some of them got together to have lunch and during that one lunch, they came up with the basic ideas for A Bug's Life, Monsters Inc., Finding Nemo and Wall-E. I imagine them saying, "Okay, what dumb animal or inanimate object can we do next?" It seems unfair to me to dismiss Dreamworks' animated films as all being about talking animals when so many of Pixar's films have as well.

Yes!


:pritch:

[Spinal]

I think the essential critique of the comic is fair though. Pixar's films tend to start from a central concept that seems more fleshed out than most Dreamworks films. It's hard to imagine a Dreamworks universe as specific and as detailed as Ratatouille, for example. They earned their second class status by churning out crap like Madagascar and Bee Movie. Though, with Kung Fu Panda and How to Train Your Dragon, it seems that the gap is narrowing.

[Watashi]

Jesus Christ, don't remind me of Bee Movie.

Holy shit was that awful.

[Spinal]

Jesus Christ, don't remind me of Bee Movie.

Holy shit was that awful.

Truer words. Never spoken.

[Barty]

http://www.ripten.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/bee_movie_game.jpg

[Pop Trash]

I quite liked it, even if -like a few Pixars- it's getting a bit overrated.

I will say this: Spinal makes a much better anti-Pixar argument than Armond White.

[Sycophant]

http://www.ripten.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/bee_movie_game.jpg

Broken images behind spoiler masks are my new favorite thing.

[Grouchy]

You guys are all fucking crazy.

[Derek]

You guys are all fucking crazy.

A big Bee Movie fan, I presume?

[Grouchy]

A big Bee Movie fan, I presume?
No, actually, I repped Watashi for calling it out as a giant piece of shit.

I just read three posts in a row and that came naturally out of me.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Truer words. Never spoken.

*nods in agreement*

[transmogrifier]

Interesting to note over at RT how many of the reviews of Despicable Me (which are strong overall) just can't help comparing it unfavourably to Pixar for no other reason than it is animated. It's becoming a bit of a tiresome joke at the moment.

Hollywood Reporter: ""Despicable" doesn't measure up to Pixar at its best. Nonetheless, it's funny, clever and warmly animated with memorable characters"

The Boston Phoenix: "First-time directors Chris Renaud and Pierre Coffin and the other filmmakers behind this slight but engaging kids' animated comedy have no ambitions to be original, but like their villainous hero, Gru (voiced by a borscht-accented Steve Carell), they insist on stealing only from the best. That means Pixar, for starters, and you can spend idle time ferreting out the many borrowings: Monsters, Inc, Up, Toy Story 1-3 all have had their pockets picked"

Arizona Republic: "Neither as rich in story nor stunning in animation as Pixar offerings, "Despicable Me" instead settles for simply being goofy good fun, and it hardly seems like settling at all."

Orlando Sentinel: "It’s no Toy Story -- 1, 2 or 3. But there laughs and heart, thanks mostly to some adorable kid voices and a goofy voice-warping turn by Steve Carell as Gru, an also-ran bad guy who longs to be “the GREATEST villain of all TIME!”

Associate Press: "There's just nothing to "Despicable Me," and that becomes glaringly obvious when you compare it to this summer's "Toy Story 3" in particular and Pixar movies in general, where story is paramount."

Slant: "Despicable Me is a healthy reminder that no single animation studio has a monopoly on thoughtful and involving animated features. After Pixar became known as the studio for sophisticated cartoons for adults and children of all ages, it took a while for other American studios to catch up."

[Watashi]

I blame Armond White.

[Spinal]

GROUPTHINK!

[Qrazy]

The subtext is great. Unless you hate liberty that is.

:P

They are a slave to their young 'masters' and since they can't cope with no longer being slaves they decide to find a new younger master? What subtextual liberty are we talking about here again?

[transmogrifier]

Interesting to note over at RT how many of the reviews of Despicable Me (which are strong overall) just can't help comparing it unfavourably to Pixar for no other reason than it is animated. It's becoming a bit of a tiresome joke at the moment.


The Onion: "The first animated film from Illumination Entertainment—an indie founded by former 20th Century Fox Animation president Christopher Meledandri— Despicable Me takes its visual design, storytelling, and thematic cues from Pixar. The characters’ smooth but tremendously expressive faces and the attention to visual detail—right down to the endangered-species-derived furniture in the house of evil-genius protagonist Gru—is sheer Pixar. So is the focus on family dynamics within the loopy, immersive story, in which Gru (voiced by Steve Carell), an ambitious but so-far unprofitable supervillain, faces off against equally ambitious younger rival Vector (Jason Segel), but gets derailed along the way by three sweet orphans who remind him of how his own childhood dreams went unappreciated by brusque mom Julie Andrews."



Did animated films even exist beyond Pixar? If so, they must have been peculiar creatures, looking like they were drawn by a four-year old, with little or no themes beyond "Hey, look, I'm animated!" and a strange ignorance of the concept of family. Pre 1994 must have been a dark, dark time for animation. I shudder to think what kind of barbaric nonsense was perpetrated in the name of animation during that time.

Film historians must pick over these archaic "animated" films (quotation marks must be used, don't you think, because how could they truly deserve the title before the coming of Pixar?) like archaeologists over the quaint knick knacks of a pre-historic Amazonian tribe, amused at the sweet naiveity of a backwards people who had all the raw materials for an advance in technology but lacked the genius and humanity and overall pixarosity to do anything with it.

[Sycophant]

Did animated films even exist beyond Pixar?


Did family films even exist beyond Pixar?


Did films even exist beyond Pixar?


Did even exist beyond Pixar?

.

[Spinal]

To give some perspective to the younger members of this forum, this was my favorite animated film of 1993:

0JOkLGDYAs4

[Watashi]

Match-Cut didn't exist before Pixar.

[Bosco B Thug]

Yeah, the Onion review's pretty off and weak (uncharacteristically, if I may add), but I really don't see the problem with the overall trend... especially if it's true. Despicable Me might be pretty good, but the seeming parading of non-sequitors, one-liners, and little yellow guys may mean critics' constant PIXAR-bating still holds credibility.

[BuffaloWilder]

Critics have to mention Pixar. Pixar has a list. You don't want to be on Pixar's list.

Or, so they tell me.

[Dukefrukem]

Best of the three? C'moooooooooon

[number8]

No.

[Dukefrukem]

It was damn good. Perfect way to wrap up the story.

[Sycophant]

Story done got wrapped up in Toy Story and then again in Toy Story 2.

This movie was a'ight.

[Spinal]

Story done got wrapped up in Toy Story

Bingo. It's not like this is some sort of epic saga that needed more than 90 minutes of screen time.

[Watashi]

Bingo. It's not like this is some sort of epic saga that needed more than 90 minutes of screen time.
You could say the same thing about Star Wars.

If there's more story to tell... tell it.

[Spinal]

You could say the same thing about Star Wars.



I don't disagree with this as much as you might think.

[Dukefrukem]

So just because the movies could be stand alone, means TS3 didn't totally rule? Interesting.

[Sycophant]

No. There are several pages of people like Spinal and myself talking about other reasons why Toy Story 3 is a little weak.

INTERESTING

[Dukefrukem]

I'll go back and read them, but it's interesting why you didn't just say one of those reasons in the first place in response to me...

[Dukefrukem]

If this were another studio, we would be talking about how deeply maudlin and unsatisfying the climax is ...

... in which the central characters are dangled over an inferno before being arbitrarily rescued by peripheral comic relief characters who utter their catch phrase for the third or fourth time in the movie.

Compare and contrast with a very similar scene in The Brave Little Toaster in which the moment becomes about the title character's self-sacrifice and willingness to risk everything for his friends. One is manipulative and cutesy. The other is genuine and revelatory.

Just curious, were you not expecting a happy ending in a kids movie? Granted, I hate it too when external events are brought in to a climax; completely out of the blue.. and I had no friggin idea how they were gonna get out of it... but at least they made a joke about it.

"The claaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaw"

[Dukefrukem]

Oh boy, Spinal. I thought you were smarter than to pull the ole "if the movie wasn't directed by A or produced by B, it wouldn't be as celebrated as much". I thought the finale worked not because of the studio, but because of the characters I've been emotionally invested in for 15 years and the aliens rescuing the toys work because it was set up in an earlier scene so it didn't feel completely out of the blue. I can enjoy both Toy Story 3 and Brave Little Toaster on equal levels without saying "well, this film did this better".

It was a little out of the blue, I'm pretty sure non of us knew there was a claw overhead... but again, they turned it into a joke, and yes it was referenced at least one other time in the movie.

I have to say, the Brave Little Toaster was the LAST thing on my mind watching this. I was expecting maybe Woody to wake up from a dream.

joking

[Dukefrukem]

Finding Nemo is still Pixar at its best. Funny, inventive and with a genuinely emotional main story, rather than trying to wrest pathos from dubious universal "themes" (Ratatouille and The Incredibles are the worst offendors in this regard). At it's heart is a father who wants to find his son and make up for his mistakes. Simple, clear, well-done.

Finding Nemo was definitely my favorite Pixar film until Wall-E. Wall-E is just... too fuckin adorable.

[Dukefrukem]

A big portion of Happy Feet annoys me enough to where I would rather not watch it again. All of that annoys Robin Williams.

Toy Story 3 I'd watch again up until the part I've already mentioned.

100% agree here.

[Spinal]

Just curious, were you not expecting a happy ending in a kids movie? Granted, I hate it too when external events are brought in to a climax; completely out of the blue.. and I had no friggin idea how they were gonna get out of it... but at least they made a joke about it.

"The claaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaw"

No. you misunderstand me. My problem is not that the climax is resolved in a pleasant way. My problem is that it is resolved in an arbitrary way.

[Ezee E]

I'll go back and read them, but it's interesting why you didn't just say one of those reasons in the first place in response to me...
It's just the way he is. False sense of entitlement. :)

[Dukefrukem]

No. you misunderstand me. My problem is not that the climax is resolved in a pleasant way. My problem is that it is resolved in an arbitrary way.

Like I said, that bugger me too... but that's not gonna take away from the previous 3/4 of the movie because of one scene. Were you bored at any time during the movie? Did you hate the plot? The characters? Jokes were a bit mild compared to the previous two movies... I think TS3 uses a lot more subtle jokes. Like the robot with the rotating Angry/Happy face, Ken and his love for clothes, the Phone guy... loved it.

[Spinal]

Were you bored at any time during the movie? Often.


Did you hate the plot? No, but I liked it better in The Brave Little Toaster.


The characters? I do not find the Toy Story characters as irresistably adorable as most people seem to. I think they're cloying. I liked Michael Keaton's take on Ken though.



Jokes were a bit mild compared to the previous two movies... I think TS3 uses a lot more subtle jokes. Like the robot with the rotating Angry/Happy face, Ken and his love for clothes, the Phone guy... loved it.

I think it's very light on funny. A few gags work. Most don't. A Town Called Panic is better.

[Sycophant]

I'll go back and read them, but it's interesting why you didn't just say one of those reasons in the first place in response to me...

No it's not.

...

...

...

[Dukefrukem]

Often.

No, but I liked it better in The Brave Little Toaster.

I do not find the Toy Story characters as irresistably adorable as most people seem to. I think they're cloying. I liked Michael Keaton's take on Ken though.



I think it's very light on funny. A few gags work. Most don't. A Town Called Panic is better.

I plan on watching that soon.

[BuffaloWilder]

100% agree here.

Dicks, dicks. Millions of dicks for you.

[transmogrifier]

Happy Feet gave me a headache and I hope to never watch it again.

[ledfloyd]

finally saw this. aside from the overly sentimental coda i more or less loved it.

[Derek]

I'll go back and read them, but it's interesting why you didn't just say one of those reasons in the first place in response to me...

I'm guessing it was because this statement


So just because the movies could be stand alone, means TS3 didn't totally rule? Interesting.

comes across as smug and he already listed those reasons earlier in the thread and he shouldn't have to repeat them simply because you chose not to read them in the first place.

[B-side]

This movie is still mediocre after all this time. Who'd have thought?

[Dukefrukem]

I'm guessing it was because this statement



comes across as smug and he already listed those reasons earlier in the thread and he shouldn't have to repeat them simply because you chose not to read them in the first place.

Thanks for your enlightening post!

[Chac Mool]

Anyone who doesn't like this film should get their heart and funny bone checked out...

[number8]

That was the first thing I did. The doctor said I was fine and wrote me a prescription for Toy Story 2.

[Spinal]

Anyone who doesn't like this film should get their heart and funny bone checked out...

Peter Travers?

[Chac Mool]

Peter Travers?

A wildly hilarious post, primed to explode with dynamite wit and a star-making performance by Spinal.

[Spinal]

A wildly hilarious post, primed to explode with dynamite wit and a star-making performance by Spinal.

OK, you win. Rep for you. :lol:

[Wryan]

I liked this a fair bit. Not as strong as two, and it was a good idea to jettison some of the extra characters so we could focus on the remaining group. Great voice work and animation (goddamn that fire pit, fucking fuck). The usual winning jokes and laughs, tho not quite as many as typical. But this was good work.

[transmogrifier]

Happy Feet gave me a headache and I hope to never watch it again.

Toy Story 3 did not give me a headache and I can see myself watching it again sometime in the future. It is the best of the three, I think.

[Dukefrukem]

It is the best of the three, I think.

I thought so too at first, but I realized I was considering that because of the emotional ties I had with the franchise. TS3 is by far the most emotional, but I can't get over the out of the blue external ending solution.

[Bosco B Thug]

I thought so too at first, but I realized I was considering that because of the emotional ties I had with the franchise. TS3 is by far the most emotional, but I can't get over the out of the blue external ending solution. It's not that bad. That moment isn't about any of the main toys saving the day. It's about their coming to terms with it. The way the film was written up to that point, it was either deus ex machina or they perish.

SPOILER?

[transmogrifier]

The ending is way too mawkish, that's for sure, and the rescue doesn't seem organic - the aliens don't know they will need the claw later when they rush off to it, for example. And the idea of a 17 year year old playing in the yard with a four year old is just creepy.

[Grouchy]

And the idea of a 17 year year old playing in the yard with a four year old is just creepy.
You have to be an incredible idiot to think this.

[Watashi]

trans clearly never had a little brother/sister.

[transmogrifier]

You have to be an incredible idiot to think this.

Go fuck yourself.

[transmogrifier]

trans clearly never had a little brother/sister.

Sure I did, but I also never went and played with a 4 year old I had never met before on the day I went off to university. As I said, creepy.

[Ezee E]

Sorry trans, you're the weird one on this. I see nothing wrong with it at all, especially with how it was presented in the movie.

[transmogrifier]

Sorry trans, you're the weird one on this. I see nothing wrong with it at all, especially with how it was presented in the movie.

I think especially how it is presented in the movie. If he had known her before, okay, but at that moment, all I could think was, why are her parents letting some weird seventeen-year old play with dolls with their daughter?

And the one last play idea was mawkish in itself as well. Good idea regarding what happens to the toys, poor execution.

[Qrazy]

Sure I did, but I also never went and played with a 4 year old I had never met before on the day I went off to university. As I said, creepy.

Ah k so you had a little brother/sister but you've never babysat someone else's kid before.

[transmogrifier]

Ah k so you had a little brother/sister but you've never babysat someone else's kid before.

Not the same situation at all, I would think.

[Chac Mool]

The ending is way too mawkish, that's for sure, and the rescue doesn't seem organic - the aliens don't know they will need the claw later when they rush off to it, for example. And the idea of a 17 year year old playing in the yard with a four year old is just creepy.

A great example of bringing our own fears into a movie.

[Qrazy]

Not the same situation at all, I would think.

You mean because it's less creepy than babysitting (which is itself not creepy) given that the mom is still around at the time?

[transmogrifier]

A great example of bringing our own fears into a movie.

Possibly. And so creepy it remains. But the fim doesn't sell it well at all, I think.

[transmogrifier]

You mean because it's less creepy than babysitting (which is itself not creepy) given that the mom is still around at the time?

So at seventeen, you were going around playing dolls with four-year-olds you just met?

[Qrazy]

So at seventeen, you were going around playing dolls with four-year-olds you just met?

When I was babysitting them yeah, I played with their toys with them. The mothers of both kids in the film knew each other as well.

[Wryan]

I thought he knew them on some level? Possibly he knew the mom more given their interaction when he walked up, though the little girl didn't seem to know him as well.

It didn't strike me as creepy at the time. Felt right.

[transmogrifier]

I thought he knew them on some level? Possibly he knew the mom more given their interaction when he walked up, though the little girl didn't seem to know him as well.

It didn't strike me as creepy at the time. Felt right.

It felt right up until he was handing them over and describing them.......and then the film tipped over into creepy mawkishness and didn't know when to quit.

[transmogrifier]

When I was babysitting them yeah, I played with their toys with them. The mothers of both kids in the film knew each other as well.

Was he babysitting? No.
So...question still stands. If people can questions whether I have brothers and sisters as a way of undermining my opinion that the ending is way losery, then I can ask whether you, at seventeen, with no actual payment etc involved, hung out with a four year old for what looked like hours just playing :)

[Qrazy]

Was he babysitting? No.
So...question still stands. If people can questions whether I have brothers and sisters as a way of undermining my opinion that the ending is way losery, then I can ask whether you, at seventeen, with no actual payment etc involved, hung out with a four year old for what looked like hours just playing :)

Yes I have played with kids at their parents houses for no payment. Usually they're cousins but sometimes there may have been some other reason to be at the house of a friend of the family (dinner party, etc). You play with the kids so they have something to do and so that they'll have fun. In the film the character is giving his toys away to the younger kid. He wants to show her how great the toys are so that she'll 'give them a good home' and he's also allowing himself to be a kid again for one brief moment before parting with the toys. I know you're too cool to play with children and cold as ice so you wouldn't be caught dead playing with 'children's toys'. But for those of us who aren't those things the scene does not seem creepy.

[number8]

It's not like they're complete strangers. Not that there's anything wrong even if they were.

[Watashi]

I play with small little children all the time and have a fun time showing them my toys.

And I grew up to be completely normal.

[transmogrifier]

I know you're too cool to play with children and cold as ice so you wouldn't be caught dead playing with 'children's toys'.

I guess that must be it. How much do I owe you for the session, doctor?

[transmogrifier]

I guess the end of the movie just makes Andy out to be more of a loser than I thought was appropriate, I guess. We all had childhood toys, and we all grew out of them. I would have liked the movie to have focused on the toys themselves adjusting to a more natural situation, where they eventually just get discarded and forgotten by kids that have moved on to other things. The sentiment works better when it is the toys coming to grips with a new owner, and the lingering knowledge that it is going to happen again. By focusing so intently on the arrested development of Andy, I thought what was a pretty terrific film up until then tipped into overbearing sentimentalism, make doubly unbearable by Andy not acting like any seventeen year old I've ever known in my life.

And Qrazy mentions how I wouldn't have been caught dead playing with dolls at 17. Damn right.

[number8]

They're action figures. GOD.

[megladon8]

Just earlier this year I found the box of all my childhood toys - Transformers, Ninja Turtles, superhero figures and the like.

I spent several hours looking at them all and getting all nostalgic.

I really don't see why it's such a far stretch.

[transmogrifier]

They're action figures. GOD.

Buzz, Woody and that cowgirl are dolls. Buzz is also an action figure. The rest are toys.

[Derek]

And I grew up to be completely normal.

Well...more or less. ;)


By focusing so intently on the arrested development of Andy, I thought what was a pretty terrific film up until then tipped into overbearing sentimentalism, make doubly unbearable by Andy not acting like any seventeen year old I've ever known in my life.

I'm with you overly sentinmental ending, trans. 17 year old boys do not wax nostalgic over their childhood toys, but I don't think the film had any interest in bringing realism to the ending when something more maudlin would clearly please children and adults alike.

[Grouchy]

I'm 23 years old and just a few months ago I recall sitting down with my three-year-old cousin and playing with a toy jeep. True story. I guess that must be pretty damn terrifying for you, trans.

[Russ]

http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/5429/scarjopopcorn.gif

[transmogrifier]

I'd play with her for a few hours.

[Grouchy]

I'd play with her for a full week and then chain her to a bed forever and have my way with her any time I want to.

[Qrazy]

I'd play with her for a full week and then chain her to a bed forever and have my way with her any time I want to.

Dogville much?

[eternity]

I guess the end of the movie just makes Andy out to be more of a loser than I thought was appropriate, I guess. We all had childhood toys, and we all grew out of them. I would have liked the movie to have focused on the toys themselves adjusting to a more natural situation, where they eventually just get discarded and forgotten by kids that have moved on to other things. The sentiment works better when it is the toys coming to grips with a new owner, and the lingering knowledge that it is going to happen again. By focusing so intently on the arrested development of Andy, I thought what was a pretty terrific film up until then tipped into overbearing sentimentalism, make doubly unbearable by Andy not acting like any seventeen year old I've ever known in my life.

And Qrazy mentions how I wouldn't have been caught dead playing with dolls at 17. Damn right.The film focuses on the implications of what being discarded would mean for a toy that was able to talk and think. What it would really mean to "grow out of a toy" if the kind of films Pixar and Dreamworks make about inanimate objects or "lesser" animals were humanlike. Any less sentimental and the film would be Schindler's List. I guarantee that many a 17 year old who watched Toy Story 3 suddenly were filled with regret and the urge to play up a storm with their old toys, if they were still lucky enough to have them around. People project personalities and feelings towards the things that make them happy in another time; a teenagers love for the products of their childhood exist and are very strong, though they are certainly veiled.

Or at least that's just me.

[Ezee E]

Toy Story 3 Easter Eggs (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=67118)

I like how they fit all that crossover stuff in.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Watched this tonight with my son. It was good. Not great, but good. It aped too much from Brave Little Toaster, and that ending with Andy and Bonnie was laying it on too thick, but there was some genuinely emotional moments, especially the slide to the fire pit. Not sure I buy the "villain" or the entire situation at the day care, and the humor was fairly sparse, but the Cool Hand Luke reference and the Great Escape vibe gelled nicely with me. Certainly the least memorable and impressive of the trilogy, but not an altogether bad effort.

[DavidSeven]

I watched Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs and this on consecutive evenings. Cloudy was a lot better.

This kind of felt like a generic Hollywood sequel. Pretty dull even. The story was certainly nothing special. What makes this the holy grail? Don't call this backlash -- I compared it directly to Cloudy, and that film was more inventive, funnier, just as touching, and overall just a better time. I was surprised by how little imagination Toy Story 3 had. They handled their denouement very, very well; I'll give them that, but the rest struck me as fairly rote.

[transmogrifier]

I watched Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs and this on consecutive evenings. Cloudy was a lot better.

This kind of felt like a generic Hollywood sequel. Pretty dull even. The story was certainly nothing special. What makes this the holy grail? Don't call this backlash -- I compared it directly to Cloudy, and that film was more inventive, funnier, just as touching, and overall just a better time. I was surprised by how little imagination Toy Story 3 had. They handled their denouement very, very well; I'll give them that, but the rest struck me as fairly rote.

Toy Story 3 is better because it manages to dip into a supremely creepy vibe during the time at the childcare centre, and it's pretty inventive. Cloudy runs out of steam and the final sequence in the clouds is a repetitive bore.

That said, Despicable Me runs Toy Story 3 pretty close this year.

[DavidSeven]

Toy Story 3 is better because it manages to dip into a supremely creepy vibe during the time at the childcare centre, and it's pretty inventive. Cloudy runs out of steam and the final sequence in the clouds is a repetitive bore.

That said, Despicable Me runs Toy Story 3 pretty close this year.

Don't see the inventiveness of a creepy baby being used to creepy effect. Out of place, sure, but I don't see what was so special about it in execution. Or is the mere inclusion of genre elements typically excluded by Pixar to be considered inventive now? Not buying it.

I agree that Cloudy ran out of steam at the end, but Toy Story 3 never had that much steam in the first place.

[transmogrifier]

Don't see the inventiveness of a creepy baby being used to creepy effect. Out of place, sure, but I don't see what was so special about it in execution. Or is the mere inclusion of genre elements typically excluded by Pixar to be considered inventive now? Not buying it.
.

Two separate clauses there, boss. Creepy AND inventive.

[DavidSeven]

Two separate clauses there, boss. Creepy AND inventive.

You should be more clear in your writing, boss. Use separate sentences.

[transmogrifier]

You should be more clear in your writing, boss. Use separate sentences.

That's what conjunctions are for.

[DavidSeven]

That's what conjunctions are for.

Technical correctness doesn't save you from clarity. You say TS3 is better than Cloudy because it's creepy, but I'm failing to see how creepiness in itself is a virtue. You then go on to say that TS3 is inventive, but offer no evidence to back that up. I put the two together because that appears to be the strongest argument, but apparently, that's not the one you're making. There's no reason to include them in the same sentence if they're not related to the same idea.

[transmogrifier]

Technical correctness doesn't save you from clarity. You say TS3 is better than Cloudy because it's creepy, but I'm failing to see how creepiness in itself is a virtue. You then go on to say that TS3 is inventive, but offer no evidence to back that up. I put the two together because that appears to be the strongest argument, but apparently, that's not the one you're making.

Creepy is better in this instance because it reflects the impending abandonment or dismemberment of the toys, and the baby doll is an arresting embodiment of these things, as well as being a deeply sad character. Cloudy has nothing that even approaches those depths. Both films are probably equally funny, so guess what, creepiness wins it!

[DavidSeven]

Creepy is better in this instance because it reflects the impending abandonment or dismemberment of the toys, and the baby doll is an arresting embodiment of these things, as well as being a deeply sad character. Cloudy has nothing that even approaches those depths. Both films are probably equally funny, so guess what, creepiness wins it!

Fair enough.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Creepy is better in this instance because it reflects the impending abandonment or dismemberment of the toys, and the baby doll is an arresting embodiment of these things, as well as being a deeply sad character.

Hey now, his comparisons can often be quite nonsensical, and his constant need de maintenir les titres francais au lieu de les traduire can often be a bit eye-roll inducing, but that's no way to talk about one of our fellow posters.

[transmogrifier]

Hey now, his comparisons can often be quite nonsensical, and his constant need de maintenir les titres francais au lieu de les traduire can often be a bit eye-roll inducing, but that's no way to talk about one of our fellow posters.

:)

I wouldn't call him deeply sad. If anything, he is remarkably level-headed and content with himself in the face of often voracious opposition.

In fact, I can't imagine him having any emotion. He's a movie-viewing android developed in the labs of Hollywood to enable test audiences to be dispensed with.

But something went terribly, terribly wrong and he got loose, and now he has to roam the lands, watching movie after movie to unsuccessfully sate his neverending appetite for all things cinema. But his comparison console was never completed, and his cinematic reading circuit malfunctioned, and he now finds himself in conflict with hoards of human film-goers he can never understand, and never come to love. He is adrift. Alone.

But not sad.

[Derek]

:)

I wouldn't call him deeply sad. If anything, he is remarkably level-headed and content with himself in the face of often voracious opposition.

In fact, I can't imagine him having any emotion. He's a movie-viewing android developed in the labs of Hollywood to enable test audiences to be dispensed with.

But something went terribly, terribly wrong and he got loose, and now he has to roam the lands, watching movie after movie to unsuccessfully sate his neverending appetite for all things cinema. But his comparison console was never completed, and his cinematic reading circuit malfunctioned, and he now finds himself in conflict with hoards of human film-goers he can never understand, and never come to love. He is adrift. Alone.

But not sad.

:lol:

This is the best thing to come from Toy Story 3's existence.

[Dukefrukem]

Easter Eggs (http://geektyrant.com/news/2010/6/18/toy-story-3-easter-eggs-to-look-out-for.html)

edit: wow was posted on the last page....

[Dukefrukem]

7 year bump!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=71&v=zDxG9zzdB4w