Well apparently not all things created by Pixar are going to be spectacular. And I am even more confused by the worlds review system. How can Wall-e possibly attain the scores it is getting, and how can Speed Racer be so easily overlooked.
I think the fundamental issue is that when creating you can either simply make things and they turn out to be good, or you can make things that seem good, and most likely aren't.
I was watching a documentary about the making of the film Bambi, and they were reading transcripts of the story meetings that took place. And a one point, one of the storymen actually said something to the effect that "we are doing this to make the film look like a good movie". Many creators fall into the trap of simply thinking if they recreate what they think is great, they will make something great. This is simply not true.
For the first time in a Pixar movie I got the feeling that the creators thought more about what seemed great than what was right for the film.
Here are just a few of the things I thought were well done and not so well done.
Wall-e the character was extremely well done. The animation was funny, and his personality was enjoyable. But that was really all there was to him.
The story was disjointed. At one point I thought it was a love story, but it turns into a very badly resolved story about civilization that detracts from the love story. Pixar was able to make a perfectly good movie about cars that had no humans in it. What would be so hard about keeping the people out of it?
Many parts of the story were mainly focused on gross over-generalizations about the state of our world, but I never felt any real truth about the situation.
The thing I thought was most enjoyable about this film was actually the short that was played before the film. It is the first time in a long time that I have really felt I could appreciate animation entirely based off of the "gag".
Well at least there was one good film this summer. Can't say I am looking forward to anything else.
Kyler
3 comments:
The problem with Bambi wasn't that they were imitating anything, it wasn't that they used all sorts of flashiness to show off, it wasn't anything like that. The reason Bambi is a bad movie is that it's forty minutes too long. There's not enough vision there to sustain a full-length movie.
Aiming for greatness is a wonderful thing. It sounds like your problem is not that Pixar tried to be too great, but just the opposite: you wanted them to aim higher. You wanted them to not have humans at all, and believe in their vision to such an extent that the entire movie was a single-minded embodiment of that vision.
(I haven't seen the movie yet.)
I also haven't seen Speed Racer, but it sounds like an extremely focused vision. That it did not play well to critics should be no surprise- when all there is is the purity of the vision, the entire experience hinges on whether or not you happen to like the basic premise. Which is not a bad thing at all, to be sure, to be sure. Focus is good.
Just to clarify. I don't think Bambi is a bad movie. I was just trying explain the source of my information. The movie might have dragged a little at points, but overall I felt it was good.
I want Pixar to be great. I want them to be so darn good that I don't believe I could ever work there.
You are right, I suspect I would have preferred Wall-E if it had been so focused on Wall-E that I never saw a human.
Find a way to see Speed Racer if it is still playing in theaters where you live. I can't help but feel like a fanboy, but it is so good and has such little support.
Disjointed my foot. This movie is the beepin' poster boy for vision! (I point out that Kyler is wrong in more detail in the next WALL•E post.)
Hey kids! Haven't seen WALL•E yet? Go see WALL•E, and be exposed to greatness! On second thought, kids couldn't appreciate this movie. Hey adults! Run run run to the theater!
Post a Comment