|
Das Boo posted:How much you wanna bet there's a scene where Christopher Robin is comically trying to prevent Tigger from ruining his business meeting, tee hee? Tired: Christopher Robin comically trying to prevent Tigger from ruining his business meeting. Wired: Christopher Robin comically trying to prevent Tigger from ruining his meth deal with the Mexican cartels.
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 17:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 19:29 |
|
|
readingatwork posted:Tired: Christopher Robin comically trying to prevent Tigger from ruining his business meeting. Cool World reboot?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:So... should Pixar keep going? It sounds like Pixar was pretty much Lasseter, people who suck Lasseter's dick constantly, and people who Lasseter chased out for not sucking his dick. Is there any reason why Disney shouldn't just shutter the studio and move all the grunt staff and IPs over to WDAS? There's too much invested in their production pipeline to ever shut down. Renderman, Presto software, etc. etc. As long as they can still make profitable movies there they will.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
Pixar movies have been generically "okay" since practically the beginning, I'm pretty sure they can make some more predictable emotionally-manipulative stuff for a while.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 03:33
|
|
|
Das Boo posted:I'm still a little baffled about everyone telling me how real/photorealistic/flawless Jungle Book was. Pure CG fantasy creatures are great because I have no real-world comparison to make. I know what a tiger, a bear and a wolf look like. Our current tech still can't fool me into thinking I'm watching a real animal, even when they're doing things their real world counterpart does. And then making them do anthropomorphic things just hits a weird uncanny valley vibe for me. I'm curious, and this goes for everyone that thought the CG was bad in the Jungle Book--did you only ever watch it in 2d? I've always been kind of baffled by people criticizing that part but it just occurred to me I only ever actually saw it in 3d which does a bunch to mask the imperfections. Still in 3d I thought it was a loving gorgeous movie. Not like, "flawless," but I couldn't point to a movie with better CG either. Honestly I kinda disagree with the fantasy creatures getting away with more thing too, but then I never studied real animals in any detail so maybe I wouldn't notice that so much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 03:36
|
|
|
Meeeeeeeeh. Due to my astigmatism, I can't use 3d glasses, they just don't work for me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 03:55
|
|
|
It did always seem odd to me how ubiquitous cinemas tried to make 3d movies considering a big chunk of the population physiologically can't watch them for various reasons. But that aside, 3d animated movies are the one place where IMO the 3d effect actually significantly enhances it and is worthwhile; there's a huge difference in the sense of depth. I mean, obviously, but it's in a way 3d-ified live action doesn't really do. Aside from Avatar I don't think I've ever watched a 3d non-animated movie and actually thought it was worthwhile, but for animated ones I haven't regretted it once.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 04:04
|
|
|
Koramei posted:It did always seem odd to me how ubiquitous cinemas tried to make 3d movies considering a big chunk of the population physiologically can't watch them for various reasons. Gravity
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 06:45
|
|
|
Pick posted:I've explained in the past why I think Newt was doomed thematically. I don't really disagree but dang it I just wanted a movie about newts and I was sad to hear it was scuttled. On top of that Zootopia specifically doesn't have any reptiles, and Good Dinosaur sucked. Pixar has a strangely bad track record with herps, sheesh.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 09:24
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I'm curious, and this goes for everyone that thought the CG was bad in the Jungle Book--did you only ever watch it in 2d? I've always been kind of baffled by people criticizing that part but it just occurred to me I only ever actually saw it in 3d which does a bunch to mask the imperfections. Robindaybird posted:Meeeeeeeeh. Yooooo. Revisiting some clips from Jungle Book, I think it comes down to good animation principles being in conflict with plain old reality. Just as an example, there's a scene where Bagheera is walking to the watering hole and it pinged me as not quite right. It was the precision of the steps and the curl of the tail; while it makes for an excellent silhouette and the taught curl of the tail emphasizes his S form, it's just a little more tuned than reality. The best comparison I can think of is contrasting traditional 2D with rotoscoping. The rotoscoping is more accurate, but the traditional 2D is typically more pleasing. It irons out the wrinkles and simplifies the gesture for clear communication. So I see it as good animation, but it doesn't convince me it's real. Weirdly, I remember having a hard time telling with the tiger in Life of Pi, though? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 09:50
|
|
|
Pigbuster posted:I don't really disagree but dang it I just wanted a movie about newts and I was sad to hear it was scuttled. On top of that Zootopia specifically doesn't have any reptiles, and Good Dinosaur sucked. Pixar has a strangely bad track record with herps, sheesh.  ?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 10:50
|
|
|
Up was pretty cool in 3D because of the sense of height. And there was one Pixar short, I think the one for Toy Story 3, where they actually really played with the sense of depth in an interesting way. But I do think it's probably a dead-end in terms of ever becoming the normal way to watch movies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 13:23
|
|
|
Also Zootopia wasn't Pixar.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 13:38
|
|
|
Das Boo posted:How much you wanna bet there's a scene where Christopher Robin is comically trying to prevent Tigger from ruining his business meeting, tee hee? I was reading this thread on my phone while tired as hell before my morning coffee, and misread this as Christopher Walken. Which is now a mental image that will serve only to disappoint me with whatever this movie actually ends up being, no matter what that is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 18:52
|
|
|
Deep in the Hundred Acre Wood Where Christopher Walken stays You'll find the enchanted neighborhood Of Chris Walken's childhood days
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 19:08
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GXMsxgdZx0 edit: Never forget Jagger 
Digamma-F-Wau fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Apr 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 19:41
|
|
|
The Ayshkerbundy posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GXMsxgdZx0 We did not deserve Pinky and the Brain.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
The Ayshkerbundy posted:
Poo-oo-oo-oo-oo-oo-oo-oo-oohs like Jagger
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
That's amazing, though I wouldn't have gotten any of those references as a kid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2018 22:59
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:Gravity Easily the greatest theatre experience I've ever had was watching this in 3D and being blown away by the effects work, it was intense. It also doubles as the worst when I went back to see it with friends and the 3D was hosed and blurry and completely ruined the movie. 3D movies can be really, really good when done right, but if the effects are bad, or the projection is bad, it can really ruin a movie in ways that just watching the 2D version can't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 01:10
|
|
|
Did people actually like The Jungle Book? I caught it on TV recently and was amazed by how bad it was. It's just utterly joyless and bleak, feeling completely inauthentic whenever it tries for an emotion other than fear (which it reaches for with odd intensity and frequency for a family movie). All the action sequences feel like a Transformers movie, but slightly darker and with jump scares for some reason. There are basically no fun character moments or humour so everyone is unlovable and bland. Songs that were once delivered with some of the most dynamic, fun animated dance sequences of any Disney movie are now delivered by completely static characters.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 13:27
|
|
|
It sounds more like you didn't enjoy the tone than the movie actually being bad. The one exception I will admit is that Kaa's song was completely forgettable, and her(?) entire role in the story was kind of pointless in this version. But I love that it's a weird, dark children's movie about the protagonist fleeing for his life until he can use his cleverness and innate advantages as a human being to turn things around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 17:01
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:It sounds more like you didn't enjoy the tone than the movie actually being bad. That's probably the thing I hated the most about the movie. Human's are kinda clever and curious and that makes them a bit more likely to, say, be able to use fire effectively when they find it, like in the animated Jungle Book. But a kid raised by wolves is not going to have the engineering knowhow to make a complex pulley system to heft himself up a cliff face for some honey. Human's are not innately gifted with knowledge, like, there's a reason we have parents look after children and put kids through school for fifteen years before we expect them to live on their own. Curiosity =/= Knowledge. Also the movie loves to frame Mogli's knowledge as an active threat against the jungle, even when doing benign stuff like harvesting honey it's pointed out that he's doing stuff that normally wouldn't be possible for the animals of the jungle, but then the movie basically slaps you in the face with that message when the jungle is on fire and everybody looks on at Mogli in fear because he started the fire. But then he stays in the end so I guess it's alright? Really the ending felt like it was just being contrary to the animated version, which is something I can say for most of the differences between the two.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
Moon Atari posted:Did people actually like The Jungle Book? I caught it on TV recently and was amazed by how bad it was. It's just utterly joyless and bleak, feeling completely inauthentic whenever it tries for an emotion other than fear (which it reaches for with odd intensity and frequency for a family movie). All the action sequences feel like a Transformers movie, but slightly darker and with jump scares for some reason. There are basically no fun character moments or humour so everyone is unlovable and bland. Songs that were once delivered with some of the most dynamic, fun animated dance sequences of any Disney movie are now delivered by completely static characters. I agree with this but some people did actually like it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:The one exception I will admit is that Kaa's song was completely forgettable, and her(?) entire role in the story was kind of pointless in this version. But Kaa doesn't have a song in the new one, barring the credits.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 23:45
|
|
|
It was so forgettable, it never existed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2018 23:48
|
|
|
Waffleman_ posted:It was so forgettable, it never existed. And yet it went on to make almost a billion dollars worldwide at the box office, so you can expect Disney to pump a film in the exact same mould every year or two from now until the heat death of the universe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 00:36
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:And yet it went on to make almost a billion dollars worldwide at the box office, so you can expect Disney to pump a film in the exact same mould every year or two from now until the heat death of the universe. Forgettable films are palatable to all despite being completely worthless to the development of human culture. See Jummaji 2. what's crazy is it drives home how deep the original Jumanji was. Like wow, if only we could have films as emotionally intense and fulfilling as Jumanji. That's the bar. That's my bar today.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 00:42
|
|
|
I liked the Jungle Book well enough. But it is a bummer that Favreau is also doing The Lion King. The original film has a sense of elegance and awe that I can't really see Favreau pulling off. I'm sure it ill be fine, but The Lion King is supposed to be beautiful.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 00:58
|
|
|
Jumanji 2 was disposable as hell but I had fun with it anyways. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 01:32
|
|
|
Jungle Book is good
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 01:35
|
|
|
I'm not going to say Jumanji 2 was deep, but acting like the original was any deeper is nonsense
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 01:40
|
|
|
The original has a ton going on and is deeper than the average modern drama flick.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 01:48
|
|
|
Pick posted:The original has a ton going on and is deeper than the average modern drama flick. Try to be less obvious with this kind of trolling
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 01:50
|
|
|
Unmature posted:Try to be less obvious with this kind of trolling Here's eight pages of Jumaji discussion. And as usual, I am right about literally everything. quote:That's the thing, the new one will probably have lame "lessons" but none of them as sinister as Jumanji's, or Casper. quote:people in the town thought the kid's dad murdered him. poo poo. Oh I was also super right about Toy Story in that thread. quote:Exactly, although it would undercut the pathos of Woody's speech (one of my favorite moments in cinema) when he admits his self-destructive behavior was motivated by his terror and grief at being no longer loved by his god. Pick fucked around with this message at 01:56 on Apr 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 01:54
|
|
|
But Jumanji 2 also has a kid who disappeared, who the town think the parents did something to and has led to them become bitter shut ins and the kid has to hear about it while realizing all he did was sit around drinking rather than doing anything because he was afraid. I mean it's not terribly deep but neither is the stuff you just quoted.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 02:02
|
|
|
That kid literally couldn’t progress without teammates arriving.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 02:24
|
|
|
Pick posted:Oh I was also super right about Toy Story in that thread. I mean, I think it works either way. The sequels kind of recontextualize Woody's lesson to be less about "losing his god" and more about accepting his place as part of an ever-changing group, with an ever-changing position within it. Woody learns to, essentially, let go and embrace the chaos of life a bit instead of trying to ultra-structure his existence. You're not wrong that, taken in a vacuum, TS1 has that message, but that message sort of precludes more movies, and TS2 and 3 found a good way around it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 02:33
|
|
|
Pick posted:That kid literally couldn’t progress without teammates arriving. He doesn't stop trying because the game blocks him. He's free to try and lost two lives doing so. Even if it is true he needs to others to progress, the reason he actually did stop trying is because he's on his last life and is afraid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 02:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 19:29 |
|
|
glam rock hamhock posted:He doesn't stop trying because the game blocks him. He's free to try and lost two lives doing so. Even if it is true he needs to others to progress, the reason he actually did stop trying is because he's on his last life and is afraid. So what? The movie devotes like 3 half-assed minutes to this and assuring him that Christina Ricci (?) is still bangable. The original Jumanji sets up larger, human conflicts for like 25 minutes before the game even begins, and then another similar amount of time to the new kids and their unhealthy coping mechanisms for recent trauma. The question as to what any of the characters are like can be boiled down to two or three generic adjectives in Jumanji 2, and they never really move beyond these trite archetypes--they only pass into other trite archetypes. In the original Jumanji, the characters are far more multifaceted and we get far more time with them as humans instead of awkward members of action setpieces. Pick fucked around with this message at 03:07 on Apr 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2018 03:05
|
|