|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Right, but then the actual problem: the film's literal message is that you should raise your child as as if she were a corporation. And vice-versa. It's corporate personhood taken to an extreme. So Boss Baby is the sequel, got it
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 00:59 |
|
|
# ? May 9, 2024 11:40 |
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Right, but then the actual problem: the film's literal message is that you should raise your child as as if she were a corporation. And vice-versa. It's corporate personhood taken to an extreme. This is certainly how you've chosen to interpret it, but in the real world a lot of people have used it as an object lesson in how repressing sadness and trying to just be happy all the time is deeply unhealthy, and that sadness is a primary driver of empathy. sure, every Disney movie is pro-corporate propaganda, from a certain angle, but it's also possible to just try to take a positive message unrelated to raising children like corporations. I mean, how is "sadness is an important emotion, and stifling it has been bad for society" a bad message? for most people that even bother thinking about Inside Out on more than a surface level, that's the big takeaway, and I think that's positive.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 01:02 |
|
https://youtu.be/1JG6f5_37tg Clip of the song "Gaston" from Beast '17 It's.... not very rousing.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 01:06 |
|
Spatula City posted:This is certainly how you've chosen to interpret it, but in the real world a lot of people have used it as an object lesson in how repressing sadness and trying to just be happy all the time is deeply unhealthy, and that sadness is a primary driver of empathy. That's not a contradiction; you're just simplifying what I wrote in an attempt to depoliticize it. The question is how you define 'healthy' - and the film uses the health of the father's tech startup as an example. Riley's maturity is conceived of in terms of growth, profitability, upsizing, etc. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 01:10 on Feb 28, 2017 |
# ? Feb 28, 2017 01:08 |
|
Hedrigall posted:So Boss Baby is the sequel, got it Boss Baby looks like a pile of trash. Ugly trash. Babies should not have incredibly punchable faces but Boss Baby does. It's worse that, when I was watching Rock Dog, there were adults in the audience proclaiming how Boss Baby looked good and some kid screaming "Mom!! Look! It's Boss Baby!!!" when the trailer came on. The Ninjago movie trailer got no laughs at all...in fact Boss Baby was the only trailer to get any laughs. Unfortunately, it might turn out to be like Trolls and look like absolute poo poo but actually be a decent movie. I mean, I don't want that to happen, but I could see it anyway.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 01:08 |
|
Pixar: "What if we made a movie where a person's emotions were anthropomorphised characters in their head?" some viewers: "It doesn't work like that! bleuuurgh!"
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 01:10 |
|
Hedrigall posted:https://youtu.be/1JG6f5_37tg I like some of the ideas that went into this -- LaFou having to poke and prompt the other singers into their lines, and Gaston coming off a little more like a dandy than a brute is something you could make work even if it's a bit of a departure -- but yeah, as a whole, it's not doing much for me.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 01:10 |
|
I... I do not think I live in a world where Boss Baby could be good.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 01:10 |
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:I like some of the ideas that went into this -- LaFou having to poke and prompt the other singers into their lines, and Gaston coming off a little more like a dandy than a brute is something you could make work even if it's a bit of a departure -- but yeah, as a whole, it's not doing much for me. Okay guys, we have this chance to make a honest-to-god LIVE-ACTION CARTOON! We have the resources, and the source material, and the technology, so let's bring this vibrant, energetic and musical world to life! *Josh Gad struggles to climb onto a bar*
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 01:12 |
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Right, but then the actual problem: the film's literal message is that you should raise your child as as if she were a corporation. And vice-versa. It's corporate personhood taken to an extreme. After seeing Inside Out I thought it'd be cool and good if Pixar made a movie called something like "Corporate Personhood" where the protagonists are personifications of (fictional) corporations. It'd be like Inside Out but in reverse. Probably would get a lot of people made because boo corporations hiss but as a fan of the concept of capitalism and a person who enjoys romanticizing corporations (like Disney, for example) I would enjoy it a lot if it were good
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 01:20 |
|
21 Muns posted:After seeing Inside Out I thought it'd be cool and good if Pixar made a movie called something like "Corporate Personhood" where the protagonists are personifications of (fictional) corporations. It'd be like Inside Out but in reverse. Probably would get a lot of people made because boo corporations hiss but as a fan of the concept of capitalism and a person who enjoys romanticizing corporations (like Disney, for example) I would enjoy it a lot if it were good Pixar's Barbarians at the Gate.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 01:21 |
|
K. Waste posted:a kiddie version of eXistenZ god if only
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 02:15 |
|
Please go see The Red Turtle.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 02:28 |
|
IShallRiseAgain posted:Ernest & Celestine ... mediocre at best. What in tarnation? Get outta here.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 02:59 |
|
starkebn posted:Pixar: "What if we made a movie where a person's emotions were anthropomorphised characters in their head?" The problem is that - no matter how many times one can stress that they actually do like and appreciate a film - to certain individuals all critical reading will be treated as repulsion or malice towards 'the intended audience,' which forces them to dance around the actual content of the film and form of its presentation, and willfully misrepresent it. The aspect of Inside Out being appraised is not that, "That's not how emotions work." What has been very straightforwardly addressed is the writing and production design of the film. It is not a coincidence that emotions are not reductively anthropomorphised, but more specifically presented as managers of one individual's consciousness. It is not a coincidence that Sadness is left with the thankless job of consulting technical minutia, which she uses to save and warn Joy numerous times as they interact with an environment which is conceived of explicitly as vast corridors of virtual files. It is not a coincidence that, besides these emotions, there are 'lower level' actors in this environment who literally wear hard hats and drive golf carts. It is not a coincidence that the different aspects of the girl's personality are conceived of as theme parks and generators.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 03:22 |
|
I'm the Boss Baby, gotta love me!
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 03:26 |
|
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 03:58 |
|
Skreh
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 04:02 |
|
Hemingway To Go! posted:Skreh bosses and babies are like onions
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 04:07 |
|
The brilliance of Joy as a character is that she is both simultaneously mother and child. She is literally an aspect of Riley and also Riley's caretaker. Like The Giver, Inside Out is a fable on the necessity of pain to children who are often very averse to suffering or unfairness. But it also does the harder thing of teaching parents that if you're to accept that lesson for yourself that means letting your child suffer. I think the idea of it being pro-corporate breaks down when you remember that the aesthetic isn't just reminiscent of a 50s corporate aesthetic, but also reminiscent of the Goofy shorts that constantly show Goofy trying to be what a modern man is supposed to be and failing. Joy essentially does run Riley's emotions like a corporation trying to maximize profit (Happiness). But the end of the film is about accepting the less pleasant and less marketable Sadness. Treating yourself like a brand and trying to maximize what you're supposed to be is flawed. And that's what the film speaks against. Like Ratatouille, I think you can also read into some metaphor about Pixar itself. Pixar exists as a part of Disney whose whole ethos is "Your dreams come true." But Pixar has literally made multiple movies about how that's not true (The Incredibles, Toy Story, Ratatouille, Monsters University). Pixar is literally part of the most saccharine corporation in the world, and they choose to make children cry. I think there is a read on Inside Out as being a meditation on why making children cry is necessary. Hedrigall posted:https://youtu.be/1JG6f5_37tg
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 04:07 |
|
Timeless Appeal posted:The brilliance of Joy as a character is that she is both simultaneously mother and child. She is literally an aspect of Riley and also Riley's caretaker. Like The Giver, Inside Out is a fable on the necessity of pain to children who are often very averse to suffering or unfairness. But it also does the harder thing of teaching parents that if you're to accept that lesson for yourself that means letting your child suffer. With the aside about Goofy, it behooves me to cite Father's Week-End: http://www.b99.tv/video/fathers-week-end/ Quite the contrary, this is not a short about how Goofy tries and fails to live up to the identity of the modern man. Rather, the short clarifies that the joke - as in Father's Day Off and Fathers Are People - is that modern man's sufferings are interpreted as ironic vindication of his sacred, patriarchal role. With that in mind, let's un-package your accurate assertion that Pixar's films are quasi-autobiographical, and its relation to your less stable reading that the films speak against a 'maximalist,' corporate ideology. As with Hedrigall's assumption that Inside Out is about helping children deal with their emotions (as opposed to unemotional children's films?), that 'sadness isn't marketable' is not an observable trend in Disney's works. Disney films are not only replete with tragic and traumatic scenarios, but highly dependent upon them as informing the generic fulfillment of their characters' aspirational fantasies. This is a quality that Pixar shares with and draws upon from Disney's legacy; working towards the parallel ends of sublime, optimistic conclusions that, while they may go against certain expectations of the protagonist, are never disruptions of the 'just world.' To write accurately about Inside Out, we have to contend with the fact that it presents a symbolic order that is at once explicitly inspired by corporate, managerial trappings, but in which there is explicitly no "profit" in conventional terms. Inspired by the capitalist culture into which they are conceived, they still fundamentally present capitalism without money. "Capital" is represented instead purely by the stable and continued functioning of the symbolic order. So Joy's position as a manager is not 'to maximize profit.' Her position is to 'keep the peace,' which she interprets as necessarily requiring her to take a dictatorial role, marginalizing Sadness and the other emotions, and unilaterally determining the progress of the corporation-as-person. Further, the lesson that she learns is not that she needs to 'take the loss' by including Sadness in order to enhance quality of life. Rather, she learns that sharing managerial duties - the synergy of different managerial philosophies - is an inevitable and necessary part of ensuring that the corporation-as-person not only survives, but continues to grow. She learns that she was actually inhibiting maximalization of what Riley could be. The essential deviation in our readings comes from what I feel is your erroneous perception that conventional, generic animated features avoid the depiction of suffering/sorrow/etc. in order to maximize profit; whereas I just think that most films are mediocre, but necessarily market these qualities just as deliberately and efficiently as they market the sublime ending. Pixar does not choose to make children cry any more or less than Disney does. The irony is that Pixar (now Disney Pixar) is valued for being more Disney than Disney. K. Waste fucked around with this message at 04:58 on Feb 28, 2017 |
# ? Feb 28, 2017 04:54 |
|
Corporate Skreh swamps his employees.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 05:18 |
|
M'Onion Shrekli
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 05:19 |
|
21 Muns posted:After seeing Inside Out I thought it'd be cool and good if Pixar made a movie called something like "Corporate Personhood" where the protagonists are personifications of (fictional) corporations. It'd be like Inside Out but in reverse. Probably would get a lot of people made because boo corporations hiss but as a fan of the concept of capitalism and a person who enjoys romanticizing corporations (like Disney, for example) I would enjoy it a lot if it were good Foodfight! is exactly the movie you deserve.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 05:20 |
|
In this day and age Foodfight is the only movie most of us deserve sadly
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 05:29 |
|
K. Waste posted:With the aside about Goofy, it behooves me to cite Father's Week-End: http://www.b99.tv/video/fathers-week-end/ im gonna cum dude keep going
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 05:52 |
|
I'm still watching Atlantis, I keep having to do other things so I only get through 20 minutes at a time. A lot of the plot contrivances are annoying me (like how they magically speak every modern language despite being isolated for thousands of years, because something something root words?) but overall it's still a fun adventure! This would make a reeeeeally good Uncharted-style game. Oh, and wasn't there some controversy back in the day about this movie ripping off some anime, Kimba-style? I remember reading about it on the internet 1.0 soon after I saw this movie in the cinema.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 05:55 |
|
Nausicaa, yeah. The similarities are only skin-deep, though. The plots are quite different.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 05:56 |
Not Nausicaa, it was Nadia: Secret of Blue Water, one of Gainax's earlier works.
|
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 06:00 |
|
Hedrigall posted:I'm still watching Atlantis, I keep having to do other things so I only get through 20 minutes at a time. A thing I keep saying when it's brought up, so much is crammed into the movie with it's huge cast that it could've been serviced better by making it a mini-series, but that's not something studios did at the time.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 06:04 |
|
The only part of Storks that is any good are the parts with the wolves. Everything else was sappy pro-heteronormative propaganda. Except some of the good meta gags. Mostly garbage though.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 06:07 |
|
Robindaybird posted:A thing I keep saying when it's brought up, so much is crammed into the movie with it's huge cast that it could've been serviced better by making it a mini-series, but that's not something studios did at the time. Totally agree, the supporting cast is fantastic. Oh man, the villain's death is one of the creepier ones in the Disney playbook
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 06:44 |
|
LeJackal posted:pro-heteronormative propaganda. Is this a joke post
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 06:47 |
|
The real joke is the complete lack of LGBTQI representation in modern animated films
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 06:48 |
|
Macaluso posted:Is this a joke post Hedrigall posted:The real joke is the complete lack of LGBTQI representation in modern animated films Didn't Storks actually go out of its way to not be totally straight (despite the premise) by having one of the couples receiving babies be same-sex?
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 06:49 |
|
mycot posted:Didn't Storks actually go out of its way to not be totally straight (despite the premise) by having one of the couples receiving babies be same-sex? A few different same sex couples (both two men and two women), a single mom, and several mixed race couples Like yeah the main child story was a mom and a dad but that doesn't make it "pro-heteronormative propaganda" I mean hell the entire message of the movie is that a family can be anything. In fact I think they literally say those exact words??
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 06:52 |
|
mycot posted:Didn't Storks actually go out of its way to not be totally straight (despite the premise) by having one of the couples receiving babies be same-sex? Yeah true, I'm just joshin' y'all
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 06:53 |
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:im gonna cum dude keep going To reach climax, you merely need to ask yourself: Where is the "crying time" in Cars 2? A Bug's Life? WALL-E? The Incredibles? What we've inadvertently come to in critically un-packaging Inside Out - because it is such a transparently honest film about storytelling and management philosophy - is that there is an entire meme about the perceived nuance and emotional depth of Pixar movies which is not supported by a consistent historical reading of the texts. Pixar does not 'want to make children cry' in order to enhance their quality of life. Pixar (or the abstract managers who are hired to coordinate the creative teams under them) are merely very adept at making conventional family cinema, and the extent to which they explore tragic themes and scenarios is motivated by the particular stories they want to tell. And to that end, none of them resolve themselves in a manner that could even be described remotely as, like, melancholy. There is always the sublime realization of a just world which is largely indistinguishable from the already naive one in which the characters began. Anecdotal British films such as Watership Down and Animal Farm illustrate succinctly the confrontation with trauma, mortality, and, most importantly, lack of materialist fulfillment which the Pixar meme selectively ignores. This isn't even a case of 'subversive vs. reactionary' films - both of those films are actually rather arch-reactionary. But at the same time, they are far more overt examples of precisely the kinds of stories (and aesthetics) that 'can't be made' in the contemporary climate which Disney-Pixar dominates, and which their major competitors won't even touch. The point of all Disney-Pixar movies - not just Inside Out - is that "sadness is good." But this is just a generic platitude, and part of an ideological fantasy.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 07:02 |
|
Hedrigall posted:Yeah true, I'm just joshin' y'all None of them included a cat as one of the parents, so I can understand your frustration.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 07:04 |
|
|
# ? May 9, 2024 11:40 |
|
K. Waste posted:To reach climax, you merely need to ask yourself: Where is the "crying time" in Cars 2? A Bug's Life? WALL-E? The Incredibles? It's necessarily a soothing form of storytelling, like having an emotional epiphany in a windowless Target.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2017 07:30 |