[QUOTE="ice144"][QUOTE="Lockedge"][QUOTE="Film-Guy"]Though I like them alot if you think about it they are really not that creative most of the time. They generally take either objects or animals that dont usually talk, and then make them talk and adventures and hilarity insues! Heck in terms of storytelling I think Anime is more creative. I cant see Pixar doing a film like Paprika or Princess Mononoke. Many people dont like anime because the animation quality is not very good and it doesnt look fluid enough. I can totally understand that, heck thats what I think sometimes when I watch crap like Inuyasha.
Also the over the top facial expressions like flipping upside down and twitching, blood spraying out of nose for some reason and stuff like that. That stuff annoys me too, thats why I dont watch alot of anime because the over the top expressions annoy me. There are gems though, Miyazaki continues to be more interesting than Pixar or any animation studio in America. What do you guys think? Oh I havent seen Wall E yet.
Lockedge
Yes. yes they are. I've made dozens of posts about how bad some of their movies are, so I won't go into a lot of detail.
Toy Story 1 was good. A Bug's Life was also pretty good, even if Antz was better.
THEN, Toy Story 2 came out and they had a template for story progression and character development laid out. Following up TS2 was Monsters Inc which blatantly followed the template. It caused a ripple effect that spread through the entire CGI movie scene, causing abominations like Ice Age. Finding Nemo followed Monsters Inc, and it was equally atrocious.
I don't care how pretty Pixar's movies are. It's like saying "The Day After Tomorrow" is an awesome movie throughout simply because it looked pretty. The story progression was beyond stale and rehashed. The character development was beyond stale and rehashed. They were pretty cash cows churned out with no substance. A small adult humour joke here and there and critics go raving about how it appeals to all audiences. Right. Like I'm going to compare Monsters inc to a gem like The Rescuers.
The Incredibles was pretty decent, and gave me hope unti CARS came out and dashed that. Ratatouille came around and it was pretty great. Not an animated classic, but it was definitely Pixar's best since Toy Story. WALL-E was ok, but it was nothing outstanding. A little bit better than The Incredibles.
It seems like Pixar is trying to provide that kind of dumb comedy riddling saturday morning cartoons with the old Golden Age of Animation kind of caricatures, and then adding in some kind of watered down stereotypical drama. They're a Disney studio, so I don't expect them to be too adventurous, but I wish they could do something to break the mold on CG movies. They have the funds and they could afford a risk. They've succeeded in pidgeonholing all 3D animated movies into a single genre, and studios with smaller budgets can't afford to take a risk that could bankrupt them.
Anyways, I'm getting off track. Yes, Pixar films are overrated because at the very least their characters are hollow shells and their stories predictable to a T.
You ask for them to break the mold....if a movie that's fully about robots that couldn't even talk is not breaking the mold. Then you have finding nemo...then you have Toy Story...what exactly are you expecting from them? Each Pixar movie is incredibly different from the other, yet still able to hold the incredible quality that they are known for.
Or did I read your point wrong? Are you blaming Pixar because they opened the CG scene for other companies, such as Dreamworks, whose movies arent on the same quality? If so, you can't blame Pixar because other companies make bad films...
P.S. You thought Finding Nemo was atrocious? Egad.
Oh trust me, Dreamworks is definitely no better in terms of their story variety. They've provided a handful of laughs with a few of their template movies, but they're pretty much handcuffed to Pixar's standard.
And you think Finding nemo is breaking the mold? Are you kidding me? It's Monsters Inc 2. It's Toy Story 4. It's the same basic story progression, with different character models and a randomly generated backstory. Pixar has mastered the Fetch Quest movie, and somehow keeps it marketable. I guess that's Disney's doing more than anyone, though.
Yeah. Robots that can't talk, being able to talk is breaking the mold. Also, CARS with eyes for headlights is breaking the mold, because real cars can't see, or talk. Pixar is amazing. *rolls eyes*
I'm sorry if you misunderstand me. Pixar have an incredible team of animators that leave me in awe when I watch their movies. It's just too bad that I have to mute them while I watch. Pixar opened the CG market, and they're the standard bearer. No one else is going to innovate because no one else has the marketing power or money to do it. I CAN blame Pixar for setting a bad standard in movie quality. People bashed the heck out of disney movies like "Brother bear" and "Lilo & Stitch" yet Pixar's movies are no better in terms of plot progression and character development...the bread and butter in movies if you're looking at substance. Pixar makes up for it with catered laughs, and skilled voice actors to bring some essence of life to the film's stories, but even they can't salvage it.
Finding nemo was a beautiful film, but it had a terribly stereotypical story, one dimensional characters, the voice acting was rough around the edges, and all in all it was a template fetch quest Pixar classic.
I'll stop hating on Pixar the minute they release a noteworthy film.
I must be one of the few who actually liked Lilo and stitch.
Log in to comment