This shit is STILL going on?! My god, Lawnboy, when did you turn into DNS 2.0?...
5/5 "To infinity and beyond."
4/5 "RIGHTEOUS! RIGHTEOUS!"
3/5 "Your stunned silence is verrry reassuring."
2/5 "They keep finding new ways to celebrate mediocrity."
1/5 "Stop with this space man thing! It's getting on my nerves!"
(Users Browsing this Thread: )
This shit is STILL going on?! My god, Lawnboy, when did you turn into DNS 2.0?...
Wasn't really picking on anyone here, though I guess after I wrote it I probably responded most to Lawn's points. Oh well.
For what it's worth, I do feel like it's a fair to point out that a lot of Pixar films and their various achievements are probably overly exposed when compared to what a lot of other movies succeed it. I mean, whenever a new Pixar movie comes out, it does not take too much effort to find some article highlighting, if not overstating some philosophical or political point they read in the movie. It doesn't matter if we're talking about the environmental/energy conservation commentary in "Monsters Inc.", the Nietzsche Superman argument about "The Incredibles", the debate about that food critic and how he relates to real critics in "Ratatouille", etc. I could go on.
It does make sense that these Pixar films draw that kind of attention though. Like it or not, Pixar is maybe the last company to produce reliably good mainstream films for families that actually have enough substance that people can have these discussions about them. This means they’re also a rare set of movies that both people that do and don't consider themselves movie can end up seeing and conceivably liking for a lot of the same reasons. Most other movies that I think would outdo them in most areas tend to fall into more predefined niches, or are reasonably obscure. So it makes it easy to debate whether the film could win best picture in some Time magazine article. It likely has enough substance to make it a contender, it's popular, and it would be trailblazing if it won. Don't know if that makes it fair, but then who should be placing any real stock in the Oscars anyway, or care that a likely good movie is getting this positive attention compared to the usual alternatives?
Yes, there are many better films than what Pixar makes. Pretty much every Ozu film I've seen is better than even Pixar's "Ratatouille" best, if people want to compare films like that. Of course, some Studio Ghibli films, which exist as an inspiration to Pixar, would beat Ozu's "Tokyo Story" best, and certainly Pixar's efforts. Still wouldn't use that as a reason to miss many Pixar films though, or Ozu for that matter. It's hard for me to imagine a backlog large enough to keep you away from missing one Pixar of their films for such a long period of time. Unless that is you don't want to see them now (which is fine, but a different point entirely).
I always thought it makes more sense to have the Best Picture category encompass everything, animated, foreign and whatever else included, and subdivide from there. Though, again, I'm not sure how much that matters.
I have not seen Wall-E. I just enjoy extending conversations that are irritating everyone involved, even if everyone's saying what everyone is saying is not that big a deal.
Movies shouldn't be unable to qualify for Best Picture simply because they are animated and/or foreign films.
It's far too early to be talking about the Oscars anyway.
I don't consider animation and live action to be the same medium. It is merely a coincidence that they happen to both run 70+ minutes and develop a narrative. I agree with you here:Originally Posted by lawnboy
Originally Posted by jamieThey are two different things and apparently, this isn't some outlandish comment since the majority of Hollywood seems to agree with me enough to even develop a separate category.Originally Posted by lawnboy
I don't hate this film... you know why? because I haven't fucking seen it. But, maybe we should also consider it for the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Louisville 89th Annual Gardening Award.
Heckling a Puppet show.
I don't really understand your reasoning here but okI don't consider animation and live action to be the same medium. It is merely a coincidence that they happen to both run 70+ minutes and develop a narrative.
they still share a lot of the same traits, like narrative tropes, characterization, mise en scene, editing, camera placement/movement and acting (to an extent) to name a few. the fact that the work is done in a different matter shouldn't deter an animated film from being part of the same medium; the production of a donald judd sculpture is different from the production of a michelangelo sculpture but they both share a medium. is shark tale really all that different from norbit?
Lawnboy, seriously, this condescending "oh noes the nerds have their feelings hurt over their toonz I'm more mature because of how I handle things" schtick you've got going is as ridiculous as anything else anyone is saying to you here and pretty much the only reason I bother saying anything. Your thinly veiled insults don't get a pass just because you're responding to someone else's question. homer5000 should've kept his mouth shut, yeah, and maybe you just shouldn't have furthered it in your post when you could've just cleanly responded to Jamie instead and dropped it from there. Like he said, nobody is winning this.
For the last time, I never said anything about you calling Wall-E bad specifically, nor did I say you questioned the quality of Wall-E. Yet you feel the need to quote something I specifically told you and then lump everyone together and insult them for the same thing. Even your last response to me showed that you didn't quite get what I was saying to you, still with the condescending "I matter so much to these insulted nerds" attitude to boot. Get over yourself.
And for the record the reason I even said "jesus fucking christ Lawnboy" is because you were pulling that "I'm going to act like I'm done with this argument just so I can insult people who keep talking to me while being JUST AS immature as everyone else, and then I'm going to act like I'm better than everyone for it!" tactic that I've seen as recently as that CW4Kids thread. Should I have said that to you? No. Do I apologize for it? Yeah, I do. I'm sorry I said that and sorry that you think I have a problem with you "bashing Wall-E" because I don't.
As I already said, I don't see what there is to get so butthurt about over TIME's speculation that Wall-E could possibly win Best Picture, and that was the ONLY stance I took on it. Nothing about "Lawnboy hates Wall-E but never saw it!" Yes I have read what you've been saying about considering picture and animated film to be separate et,c. I get what you're sayng. I also said I don't support the opinions of someone whose whole deal is "I don't like the hype and I can't stand this movie because of it." I said maybe you should just see the movie, because maybe seeing the movie will help you gain an opinion on it and you won't be so irritated by people possibly overpraising it.
Ridiculous joke comments like "maybe we should also consider it for the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Louisville 89th Annual Gardening Award" even furthers the reason that I just cannot possibly take you seriously over this or support your opinion or support...almost anything you are trying to say here. Especially when you start by saying you don't hate the film because you haven't even seen it then go on to insinuate how utterly ridiculous it would be for it to win so-and-so award. I know you care passionately about the film medium, but you're not making a very strong case for yourself here to me.
I mean really, we could go around in circles all day about how everyone is so hurt over everyone else's comments because they care too much about something even though it's not nearly that important, and I could hand out warning points to everyone involved. But frankly, if the next post coming from anyone is simply a post to fight more, or disguise more insults inside discussion, then this thread can just be closed...and warning points can be handed out to everyone involved.
If you want to be a big man about it, then be one. This is basically everyone's last chance to either discuss this topic maturely or get back to rating and reviewing. I don't really care if you have to go and make a new topic somewhere else about the best picture thing, just get it out of this thread already.
Whoa, my thread got pretty big.
In an attempt to get this back on-topic, I've noticed a lot of viewers feel a little split between the film's first and second halves (WALL-E's story [the romance] vs. EVE's story [the Axiom stuff]). Initially, I preferred the first half. Interestingly, however, after having seen the movie three times, the second half has really held up nicely on repeat viewings. Was this the case for anyone else who's seen the movie more than once?
Oh, and not trying to drag out the argument, but this must be said: Shark Tale is awful. It is an awful, awful movie and I urge anyone who sees it not to be turned off by animation in general.
EDIT: Nevermind...(read rest of Kupo's post)
fyi, lawnboy, when i consider everything i know about you and your taste in film, i could totally see you being just as into the pixar films as we all are. give 'em a chance, dude.
also, how do you know a lil lawnboy never got squeezed out of one of those 40ish vaginas? you never know.
Haha, I bet he has a couple little jack shepard's running around that he doesn't know about.
Anyway, cute movie. Although I gotta say I thought the first half was much, much better than the second. It was fine, kids movie material, but It didn't feel as... sophisticated, I guess as the first half. That's the wrong word there, I know. But my brain is mush right now, so I can't think of the right vocabulary to express what I mean. I'll elaborate on this post tommorow when I've gotten more sleep.
Kupo.. thanks for the post. I apologize for the sigh. I reread those few posts and it was uncalled for. You weren't the one misunderstanding what I was saying.
I was on a flight not too long ago and they were supposed to play Ratatoulie (sp), and it wouldn't work for some reason. I was disappointed. Especially since it got a screenplay nomination. I will see them someday.
In order to preserve the fanatical sanctity in which I hold Wall-E, I will not be seeing "Chimps In Space"
I saw it for the second time a few days ago with my brother and sister and they loved it. I renew my belief that it is my 2nd or 3rd favorite Pixar film.
The trailer pack that played before it was different than when I saw it the first time. This time around there were 5 trailers for CG movies: Madagascar 2, Space Chimps, Fly Me to the Moon, Star Wars, and Bolt. Thank God no Beverly Hills Chihuahua this time.
CG films have really lost their novelty now because there are so many of them. I don't go to see many of them, but I always watch Pixar's because they've never let me down. Even Cars, their weakest without a doubt, is better than the average CG animated film. But anyway. Back to Wall-E lovin'
Saw WALL-E last night.
Without a doubt a fantastic achievement and one of Pixar's best. Pixar took a very bold move making such a different and, at times, surprisingly dark film; I was intrigued the whole way through. Although the running commentary from the little kid a few rows back made me want to kill something.
...oh, and Presto was genius
Good morning! And in case I don't see ya: Good afternoon, good evening and goodnight!- - -
I'm not going to even try to say why this movie is so amazing. Disney--let alone Pixar--hasn't come up with a movie this great in many, many years. I honestly think it deserves a nomination for Best Picture, not a measly best Animated feature. 5/5
^You got the link wrong:
Last edited by TheForbiddenDonut; 07-24-2008 at 12:48 PM.
EDIT: Reading more of his stuff, he liked Madagascar more than WALL-E. Jesus, this man's an idiot...
Last edited by Ryan; 07-24-2008 at 06:16 PM.
Yeah, can't say I agree with that guy's review. He was dismissing the movie's entire premise (that a robot, after centuries, can somehow develop feelings) as completely ridiculous. Was he adamantly opposed to Toy Story's characters too? I mean, toys can't talk, mice can't own pet dogs, and rabbits can't outsmart hunters by dressing in drag.
Then he blasts the animation for not being human-like enough, for some odd reason (as if making oddly-shaped robots convey human body language is some sort of simple task). I could go on but meh. Didn't think much of that little synopsis.
according to the tie-in site robots have had empathy chips for 600 years
Kaaaaaaaaaaaayyy...all I can say is this guy's an idiot. I am completely setting aside the fact that he insulted a wonderful movie, and am just pointing out all the stuff that he said that was totally wrong.
Even if he is so closed-minded that he thinks robots can never have human feelings (100% Bullshit!), I can't see how anyone can not like the character of WALL-E. Next thing you know, he'll be saying R2-D2 is just a prop. Sure, WALL-E was a little kid's movie, but it wasn't just a little kid's movie. There were jokes and messages in it that were much, much cleverer than most of the crap I've seen this summer. And by the way, putting aside the fact that the animation of this movie was astounding, animation is not a tool of kid-appeal, nor is it just a form of art. It's just telling a story in a different manner than with real-life sets and actors. God, what a narrow-minded, stigmatized moron. I bet his main experience with animation were saturday morning cartoons from the '70s and the "cutesy" generation of Disney.
P.S. Speaking of Disney, I made up my mind, after seeing the trailer for "Beverly Hills Chihuahua", that Disney has utterly sold its soul. I have thought so for several years, and now I know so: it has sold its soul. Period.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)