Are films getting worse?

[Tom Moreno]

JohnDuncan:laserman16:I must get round to watching The Incredibles , been sat on the shelf for ages now.Cars for me was the worst but still watchable.Whereas for me, the Incredibles is the best of the lot...

That'll be one stonking Blu-ray whenever it makes its appearance!

 

[RodhasGibson]

JohnDuncan:laserman16: I must get round to watching The Incredibles , been sat on the shelf for ages now. Cars for me was the worst but still watchable. Whereas for me, the Incredibles is the best of the lot... Good shout JD Loved it.

 

[laserman16]

RodhasGibson:JohnDuncan:laserman16: I must get round to watching The Incredibles , been sat on the shelf for ages now. Cars for me was the worst but still watchable. Whereas for me, the Incredibles is the best of the lot... Good shout JD Loved it.

Thats it, I'm gonna spin it in a bit.

 

[The_Lhc]

laserman16:So right, all of Pixar's stuff is technically brilliant, you can see why Disney got involved with them. I must get round to watching The Incredibles , been sat on the shelf for ages now.

Parts of it are like the best Bond film you've never seen. I can understand why some people (mainly kids) might find the first 20 minutes or so, not boring, but maybe not exciting enough, but it's still one I sit and watch over and over again.

Cars for me was the worst but still watchable.

I just didn't want to have anything to do with the lead character and I just couldn't buy into the whole sentient cars thing. IT does look great though, but then all Pixar's films do.

 

[The_Lhc]

laserman16:So right, all of Pixar's stuff is technically brilliant, you can see why Disney got involved with them. I must get round to watching The Incredibles , been sat on the shelf for ages now.

Parts of it are like the best Bond film you've never seen. I can understand why some people (mainly kids) might find the first 20 minutes or so, not boring, but maybe not exciting enough, but it's still one I sit and watch over and over again.

Cars for me was the worst but still watchable.

I just didn't want to have anything to do with the lead character and I just couldn't buy into the whole sentient cars thing. IT does look great though, but then all Pixar's films do.

 

[The_Lhc]

JohnDuncan:laserman16:
I must get round to watching The Incredibles , been sat on the shelf for ages now.

Cars for me was the worst but still watchable.

Whereas for me, the Incredibles is the best of the lot...

I have to admit it's a toss-up between that and Wall-E but they're VERY different films (which is another thing Pixar have got over Dreamworks, Dreamworks never take a risk, they would NEVER have made Wall-E), so I'm happy to set them both at the same level.

 

[The_Lhc]

hmtb:the_lhc:I'd rate Wall-E as one of the top ten best films I've ever seen, on every level, Toy Story is a classic, Monsters Inc is a classic, The Incredibles is different class for me
I thought Wall E was incredibly boring. I recognise that technically it is superb, but in terms of the story and characters I found it very, very poor by comparison to the other films you mentioned and other animated films I've seen.

Seriously? You're actually saying that Wall-E himself had no character?

 

[The_Lhc]

professorhat:hmtb:That's precisely what it lacked in my opinion, magical and incredibly heart warming moments.
You mean when Wall-E sits close to a deactivated Eve, sadly holding an umbrella over her to keep her out of the rain, you felt nothing?! You heartless fiend!

Thank you Prof! It's nowhere near enough, but given the rules here it'll have to do.

 

[Anonymous]

the_lhc:hmtb:the_lhc:I'd rate Wall-E as one of the top ten best films I've ever seen, on every level, Toy Story is a classic, Monsters Inc is a classic, The Incredibles is different class for me
I thought Wall E was incredibly boring. I recognise that technically it is superb, but in terms of the story and characters I found it very, very poor by comparison to the other films you mentioned and other animated films I've seen.

Seriously? You're actually saying that Wall-E himself had no character?

No. What I said was that I thought the characters in the film were poor by comparison to others (e.g. toy story, finding nemo etc).

 

[Anonymous]

the_lhc:professorhat:hmtb:That's precisely what it lacked in my opinion, magical and incredibly heart warming moments.
You mean when Wall-E sits close to a deactivated Eve, sadly holding an umbrella over her to keep her out of the rain, you felt nothing?! You heartless fiend!

Thank you Prof! It's nowhere near enough, but given the rules here it'll have to do.

I understood (maybe mistakenly) the Prof's comment to be light hearted. I'm not sure if you're serious that my comments are worthy a response in breach of the rules.

 

[laserman16]

the_lhc:

laserman16:So right, all of Pixar's stuff is technically brilliant, you can see why Disney got involved with them. I must get round to watching The Incredibles , been sat on the shelf for ages now.

Parts of it are like the best Bond film you've never seen. I can understand why some people (mainly kids) might find the first 20 minutes or so, not boring, but maybe not exciting enough, but it's still one I sit and watch over and over again.

Right, spun it last night. Pq and sq technically brilliant (would not expect anything else from Pixar). Sound was very good in places with some very subtle stuff coming out of the surrounds.

The film itself was slow starting as you said but then starts to draw you in till like a good book you can't put it down.

One of my favourite Pixars? Well, for me its not quite up there with Monsters Inc and the Toy Story's but certainly it will be watched again.

BTW I see that Toy Story 3 is due to be released in the summer of 2010. Should be something to look forward to.

 

[Anonymous]

I watched The Uninvited last night and that was terrible as well

I hold better hopes for Terminator Salvation, Transformers 2 and Start Trek soon!

 

[professorhat]

hmtb:the_lhc:professorhat:hmtb:That's precisely what it lacked in my opinion, magical and incredibly heart warming moments.
You mean when Wall-E sits close to a deactivated Eve, sadly holding an umbrella over her to keep her out of the rain, you felt nothing?! You heartless fiend!

Thank you Prof! It's nowhere near enough, but given the rules here it'll have to do.

I understood (maybe mistakenly) the Prof's comment to be light hearted.

Absolutely - never take anything I say seriously

 

[The_Lhc]

hmtb:the_lhc:hmtb:the_lhc:I'd rate Wall-E as one of the top ten best films I've ever seen, on every level, Toy Story is a classic, Monsters Inc is a classic, The Incredibles is different class for me
I thought Wall E was incredibly boring. I recognise that technically it is superb, but in terms of the story and characters I found it very, very poor by comparison to the other films you mentioned and other animated films I've seen.

Seriously? You're actually saying that Wall-E himself had no character?

No. What I said was that I thought the characters in the film were poor by comparison to others (e.g. toy story, finding nemo etc).

Right and what I'm saying is Wall-E is one of the finest cinematic character creations, ever. For a character that doesn't speak the pathos, emotion and, well, character is virtually unsurpassed.

 

[The_Lhc]

hmtb:the_lhc:professorhat:hmtb:That's precisely what it lacked in my opinion, magical and incredibly heart warming moments.
You mean when Wall-E sits close to a deactivated Eve, sadly holding an umbrella over her to keep her out of the rain, you felt nothing?! You heartless fiend!

Thank you Prof! It's nowhere near enough, but given the rules here it'll have to do.

I understood (maybe mistakenly) the Prof's comment to be light hearted. I'm not sure if you're serious that my comments are worthy a response in breach of the rules.

The Prof probably was being light-hearted but he had a good point, if those parts of Wall-E don't move you then frankly there has to be something wrong with you emotionally.

Mods, sorry but that's as polite as I can make it without failing to make the point at all.

 

[Anonymous]

the_lhc:hmtb:the_lhc:hmtb:the_lhc:I'd rate Wall-E as one of the top ten best films I've ever seen, on every level, Toy Story is a classic, Monsters Inc is a classic, The Incredibles is different class for me

I thought Wall E was incredibly boring. I recognise that technically it is superb, but in terms of the story and characters I found it very, very poor by comparison to the other films you mentioned and other animated films I've seen.

Seriously? You're actually saying that Wall-E himself had no character?

No. What I said was that I thought the characters in the film were poor by comparison to others (e.g. toy story, finding nemo etc).

Right and what I'm saying is Wall-E is one of the finest cinematic character creations, ever. For a character that doesn't speak the pathos, emotion and, well, character is virtually unsurpassed.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. No problem at all with that. Difference of opinion is fine.

 

[Anonymous]

the_lhc:hmtb:the_lhc:professorhat:hmtb:That's precisely what it lacked in my opinion, magical and incredibly heart warming moments.

You mean when Wall-E sits close to a deactivated Eve, sadly holding an umbrella over her to keep her out of the rain, you felt nothing?! You heartless fiend!

Thank you Prof! It's nowhere near enough, but given the rules here it'll have to do.

I understood (maybe mistakenly) the Prof's comment to be light hearted. I'm not sure if you're serious that my comments are worthy a response in breach of the rules.

The Prof probably was being light-hearted but he had a good point, if those parts of Wall-E don't move you then frankly there has to be something wrong with you emotionally.

Mods, sorry but that's as polite as I can make it without failing to make the point at all.

No, nothing wrong with me emotionally. I am perfectly capable of being moved by film. My comments were made in comparison to other animated films I prefer. I don't remember what exactly I felt during each scene of the film, apart from an overwhelming sense of boredom which remained pretty much a constant throughout.

To deduce that I have to have something wrong with me emotionally because I might have failed to be moved by a silly robot who barely speaks, is quite frankly laughable.

 

[The_Lhc]

hmtb:To deduce that I have to have something wrong with me emotionally because I might have failed to be moved by a silly robot who barely speaks, is quite frankly laughable.

And that quote perfectly illustrates my point; that you see him simply as a "silly robot" is exactly what I mean by not connecting emotionally with the character and I just can't understand how you can sit there and watch it, with all the nuance of expression that just leaps off the screen and see nothing more in the character.

 

[laserman16]

the_lhc:

hmtb:To deduce that I have to have something wrong with me emotionally because I might have failed to be moved by a silly robot who barely speaks, is quite frankly laughable.

And that quote perfectly illustrates my point; that you see him simply as a "silly robot" is exactly what I mean by not connecting emotionally with the character and I just can't understand how you can sit there and watch it, with all the nuance of expression that just leaps off the screen and see nothing more in the character.

At times he seems a better actor than some so called human ones.

 

[The_Lhc]

laserman16:the_lhc:

hmtb:To deduce that I have to have something wrong with me emotionally because I might have failed to be moved by a silly robot who barely speaks, is quite frankly laughable.

And that quote perfectly illustrates my point; that you see him simply as a "silly robot" is exactly what I mean by not connecting emotionally with the character and I just can't understand how you can sit there and watch it, with all the nuance of expression that just leaps off the screen and see nothing more in the character.

At times he seems a better actor than some so called human ones.

Too right! And that's the REAL genius of Pixar, never mind the technical brilliance, it's the humanity (although that almost seems an insult at times!) they instill in the characters that sets them apart.

 

[laserman16]

the_lhc:laserman16:the_lhc:

hmtb:To deduce that I have to have something wrong with me emotionally because I might have failed to be moved by a silly robot who barely speaks, is quite frankly laughable.

And that quote perfectly illustrates my point; that you see him simply as a "silly robot" is exactly what I mean by not connecting emotionally with the character and I just can't understand how you can sit there and watch it, with all the nuance of expression that just leaps off the screen and see nothing more in the character.

At times he seems a better actor than some so called human ones.

Too right! And that's the REAL genius of Pixar, never mind the technical brilliance, it's the humanity (although that almost seems an insult at times!) they instill in the characters that sets them apart.

And your point earlier about Dreamworks is spot on , cannot hold a candle to Pixar.

In fact parts of the original Shrek seem to be a direct dig at Walt Disney World (you would have to go there to understand that statement).

 

[laserman16]

http://www.pixar.com/theater/trailers/ts3/index.html

 

[The_Lhc]

laserman16:the_lhc:laserman16:the_lhc:

hmtb:To deduce that I have to have something wrong with me emotionally because I might have failed to be moved by a silly robot who barely speaks, is quite frankly laughable.

And that quote perfectly illustrates my point; that you see him simply as a "silly robot" is exactly what I mean by not connecting emotionally with the character and I just can't understand how you can sit there and watch it, with all the nuance of expression that just leaps off the screen and see nothing more in the character.

At times he seems a better actor than some so called human ones.

Too right! And that's the REAL genius of Pixar, never mind the technical brilliance, it's the humanity (although that almost seems an insult at times!) they instill in the characters that sets them apart.

And your point earlier about Dreamworks is spot on , cannot hold a candle to Pixar.

I LOVE YOU MAN!!!

In fact parts of the original Shrek seem to be a direct dig at Walt Disney World (you would have to go there to understand that statement).

Couldn't comment I've not been there but Shrek sums up for me everything that's wrong with Dreamworks, they pick a famous person for a role with no regard for how they fit the character, whereas Pixar pick a voice to fit the character. Toy Story aside (which, as their first feature, you could argue they had to pick big names to get the funding), most of the actors in Pixar's films are virtually unknown, in fact some of them aren't even actors (oh yeah, and not including Monsters Inc. which had quite a stellar cast now I come to think of it...), they're just picked to suit the role.

Having said all that, one of my favourite animated films, which is bursting with stars, is Antz, which is basically an animated Woody Allen film! Just something about it which keeps drawing me back, I think in that case the stars do fit the roles though, whereas in Shrek, Shrek is just Mike Myers doing his awful scottish accent (who in god's name told him he could do scottish?), Donkey is just Eddie Murphy being Eddie Murphy and, well to be honest I can't even remember anyone else in it...

 

[laserman16]

the_lhc:laserman16:

And your point earlier about Dreamworks is spot on , cannot hold a candle to Pixar.

I LOVE YOU MAN!!!

 

[laserman16]

the_lhc:laserman16:the_lhc:laserman16:the_lhc:

hmtb:To deduce that I have to have something wrong with me emotionally because I might have failed to be moved by a silly robot who barely speaks, is quite frankly laughable.

And that quote perfectly illustrates my point; that you see him simply as a "silly robot" is exactly what I mean by not connecting emotionally with the character and I just can't understand how you can sit there and watch it, with all the nuance of expression that just leaps off the screen and see nothing more in the character.

At times he seems a better actor than some so called human ones.

Too right! And that's the REAL genius of Pixar, never mind the technical brilliance, it's the humanity (although that almost seems an insult at times!) they instill in the characters that sets them apart.

And your point earlier about Dreamworks is spot on , cannot hold a candle to Pixar.

I LOVE YOU MAN!!!

In fact parts of the original Shrek seem to be a direct dig at Walt Disney World (you would have to go there to understand that statement).

Couldn't comment I've not been there but Shrek sums up for me everything that's wrong with Dreamworks, they pick a famous person for a role with no regard for how they fit the character, whereas Pixar pick a voice to fit the character. Toy Story aside (which, as their first feature, you could argue they had to pick big names to get the funding), most of the actors in Pixar's films are virtually unknown, in fact some of them aren't even actors (oh yeah, and not including Monsters Inc. which had quite a stellar cast now I come to think of it...), they're just picked to suit the role.

Having said all that, one of my favourite animated films, which is bursting with stars, is Antz, which is basically an animated Woody Allen film! Just something about it which keeps drawing me back, I think in that case the stars do fit the roles though, whereas in Shrek, Shrek is just Mike Myers doing his awful scottish accent (who in god's name told him he could do scottish?), Donkey is just Eddie Murphy being Eddie Murphy and, well to be honest I can't even remember anyone else in it...

But you cannot imagine anyone but Tom Hanks doing Woody can you?