|
loving faux-ironic meta bullshit to cover over the basic fact that the movie is a giant commercial.
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 17:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 15:33 |
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:"Show me the coolest most intense thing ever" I mean yes obviously hey should've cut to Pornhub but maybe in the actual movie
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 17:43
|
|
|
Macaluso posted:I mean yes obviously hey should've cut to Pornhub but maybe in the actual movie Somebody wrote this. It is a project that was conceived and marketed. Acting as if it's just a consequence of its target audience...there is some seriously bizarre ideology at work here. Mechafunkzilla fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Jun 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 17:45
|
|
|
I don't really know what to make of this. The jokes are quite good, but it doesn't yet feel like it builds off the original in a terribly meaningful way, and the self-aggrandizement is indeed a bit high.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 17:53
|
|
|
Ralph saves the Internet with a subscription to Disney’s new streaming service
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 17:54
|
|
|
Will Aubrey Plaza play Grumpy Cat again
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 17:58
|
|
|
Honestly it's not even the princesses or Disney jerking off to how cool they are that bothers me, but all the name-dropping of companies like Google, Amazon etc. It really does feel like a giant advertisement. The joke about the princesses was fun but I really dont want to watch something so corporate-driven. I have to endure enough of that stuff in my everyday life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:03
|
|
|
How the hell is this movie going to age? Oh, I forgot, it only has to perform for 1Q 
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:08
|
|
|
Yeah, the blatant advertising and brand placement for various internet giants is more than a little reminiscent of the Emoji Movie.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:09
|
|
|
I just don't really see how it's much different from the first one with all the IPs, only difference is its their own instead of other video game companies. It's something like Kingdom Hearts. I don't think it's a problem. I understand feeling like the websites make it feel like the emoji movie but I also don't think you could've done a movie where they go to the internet without showing some of those companies. That being said, I'm also a person who doesn't care about literally any kind of product placement in a movie so 
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:14
|
|
|
IPfight!
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:17
|
|
|
I love all the Brands. Gotta get more of those Brands. Fill me up with Brands. I want a Brands enema.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:21
|
|
|
What if this whole movie just leads up to a stealth launch of the Disney streaming service?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:25
|
|
|
glam rock hamhock posted:What if this whole movie just leads up to a stealth launch of the Disney streaming service? And will you be able to stream it directly into your veins?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
glam rock hamhock posted:What if this whole movie just leads up to a stealth launch of the Disney streaming service? I will laugh so hard
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:29
|
|
|
Macaluso posted:I understand feeling like the websites make it feel like the emoji movie but I also don't think you could've done a movie where they go to the internet without showing some of those companies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:40
|
|
|
Even accounting for Disney trailers being pretty bad, it's really not grabbing me - it just feels incredibly unfocused.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:43
|
|
|
Like you have to remember that while WIR1 had real IPs in it, they were a very small part of the movie, regulated to brief background jokes, and the movie mainly focused on fake IPs. Maybe WIR2 will not be as blatant as this is making it look but that trailer sure is laser focused on that
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
That trailer is extremely Cursed
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 18:53
|
|
|
glam rock hamhock posted:Like you have to remember that while WIR1 had real IPs in it, they were a very small part of the movie, regulated to brief background jokes, and the movie mainly focused on fake IPs. Maybe WIR2 will not be as blatant as this is making it look but that trailer sure is laser focused on that Yeah, the most obtrusive a real IP got was goddamn Q-Bert, who isn't exactly part of a staggering media machine like every single Disney IP that is in that trailer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 19:14
|
|
|
glam rock hamhock posted:Like you have to remember that while WIR1 had real IPs in it, they were a very small part of the movie, regulated to brief background jokes, and the movie mainly focused on fake IPs. Maybe WIR2 will not be as blatant as this is making it look but that trailer sure is laser focused on that And the references feels like they came from a place of love/affection, like the reason Zangief was in Villain Anon was to a little kid who couldn't beat him, he was a bad guy. Here it just kind of feels hollow? Like the focus is on these things, and not the actual characters. Robindaybird fucked around with this message at 19:49 on Jun 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
If Elsa isn't married to Spider-Man in this movie then what's the point?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
Robindaybird posted:And the references feels like they came from a place of love/affection, like the reason Zangief was in Villain Anon was to a little kid who couldn't beat him, he was a bad guy. Here it just kind of feels hollow? I don't see how that's any less hollow though, because how does one even infer that over another person's experience. Like, I feel bad for Gief relative to that experience because you could beat him in World Warrior by jumping up and down and hitting hard kick/roundhouse over and over. A non hollow reference would be to actually incorporate something about the character, not just defer to someone's experience and assume that was universal. Like, how does that translate to Gief feeling like he suddenly is evil/bad guy. By that logic the entire cast of SF2 should be in therapy (they probably should, like CE Blanka is evil).
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
Corrosion posted:I don't see how that's any less hollow though, because how does one even infer that over another person's experience. Like, I feel bad for Gief relative to that experience because you could beat him in World Warrior by jumping up and down and hitting hard kick/roundhouse over and over. Well, that's not actually how the Zangief thing happens at all: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxeR95aYer0 The entire premise of the "good guy/bad guy" is central to the story being told, and is investigated and explored throughout the movie, though maybe not terribly deeply. In Wreck-It Ralph 2, though, we have zero indication of any kind of conflict or story, all we've seen is "they go to the internet!! Here are a bunch of things you know about the internet, except personified!" Like, drat, just compare the synopses as posted with their respective trailers on youtube: quote:Wreck-It Ralph (voice of Reilly) longs to be as beloved as his game's perfect Good Guy, Fix-It Felix (voice of McBrayer). Problem is, nobody loves a Bad Guy. But they do love heroes... so when a modern, first-person shooter game arrives featuring tough-as-nails Sergeant Calhoun (voice of Lynch), Ralph sees it as his ticket to heroism and happiness. He sneaks into the game with a simple plan—win a medal—but soon wrecks everything, and accidently unleashes a deadly enemy that threatens every game in the arcade. Ralph's only hope? Vanellope von Schweetz (voice of Silverman), a young troublemaking "glitch" from a candy-coated cart racing game who might just be the one to teach Ralph what it means to be a Good Guy. But will he realize he is good enough to become a hero before it's "Game Over" for the entire arcade? quote:“Ralph Breaks the Internet: Wreck-It Ralph 2” leaves Litwak’s video arcade behind, venturing into the uncharted, expansive and thrilling world of the internet—which may or may not survive Ralph’s wrecking. Video game bad guy Ralph (voice of John C. Reilly) and fellow misfit Vanellope von Schweetz (voice of Sarah Silverman) must risk it all by traveling to the world wide web in search of a replacement part to save Vanellope’s video game, Sugar Rush. In way over their heads, Ralph and Vanellope rely on the citizens of the internet—the netizens—to help navigate their way, including a webite entrepreneur named Yesss (voice of Taraji P. Henson), who is the head algorithm and the heart and soul of trend-making site “BuzzzTube.” ALFbrot fucked around with this message at 20:27 on Jun 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 20:22
|
|
|
I don't think using old arcade characters and a Facebook logo are the same.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 20:29
|
|
|
I'm more fascinated that Disney Princesses are finally allowed to look at each other, much less have conversations
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 20:31
|
|
|
So there's currently a debate among my friends about what makes someone a Disney princess. Some think Mulan's in the line-up just because she's marketable to little girls. Some think because she's Asian and they have a quota to fill. Some think the entire line has nothing to do with princesses and actually just female leads. Some are calming it's all about being marketable thus Anna and Elsa. So is there an official reason or just because Disney feels like it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 20:31
|
|
|
"Disney Princesses" is a marketing concept, it doesn't have any meaning within the creative process that actually created the movies. I'M MAD
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 20:37
|
|
|
It is a formal categorization, arbitrary not strictly taxonomical
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 20:48
|
|
|
All that really needs to be said. https://youtu.be/K_hfOSLrvKA Also talking about Mulan as 'they have a quota to fill' is the sort of thing that makes me eyeroll so hard I almost forgot I came in here to gush that The Breadwinner was really good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 20:49
|
|
|
Pick posted:It is a formal categorization, arbitrary not strictly taxonomical Disney Princesses do not make a clade
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 21:19
|
|
|
ALFbrot posted:Well, that's not actually how the Zangief thing happens at all: You haven't explained how the Zangief thing doesn't happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 21:37
|
|
|
Corrosion posted:You haven't explained how the Zangief thing doesn't happen. What? The quoted post was about Zangief being a bad guy because some little kid couldn't beat him. so he was a bad guy to the little kid. I posted the scene, in which no little kid is ever mentioned. In the text, Zangief realizes he's a bad guy because he's crushing a person's skull between his thighs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 22:14
|
|
|
Zangief is a bad guy in the JCVD movie, but in the games, he's traditionally just there for the tournament, like a good chunk of SF's characters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
Even though the 2nd WIR movie is covering current internet trends it already feels dated. That was fine in the first movie, since that stuff was meant to be old school and nostalgic, but this time it shows how whenever mainstream media depicts current technology it already feels out of touch. It's showing me everything I already interact with, and with a smarmy "Hey we know about this too, and we know you know about it! Get it?" It's not the story artist's fault. They were given the brief to make it about the current internet so this is probably the best anyone could come up with. I liked the joke that Pocohantas' hair is flowing in nonexistent wind. Good visual gag. Other parts just looked like a more colorful and pleasant version of Ready Player One.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
Pablo Nergigante posted:Disney Princesses do not make a clade They’re clearly paraphyletic but that doesn’t mean functional categorizations are invalid. Fish, limpets, Disney princesses.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
ThermoPhysical posted:So there's currently a debate among my friends about what makes someone a Disney princess. Mulan and Pocahontas are both very fluid in terms of “Disney Princess”. They are definitely not in the main line-up when the shirts only fit 5 or 6 princesses, but are allowed in sometimes. It would have been a great* meta-joke to have the two of them inexplicably appearing and disappearing throughout the scene with no commentary or reaction, but there was never a chance that would have made it in. *”Great” for me and a handful of other nerds who would even care or get it. I don’t pretend like it’d be all that clever or inspired. Edit: Just rewatched the trailer. And even as a fan of this style of writing and comedy JESUS CHRIST DISNEY STOP LAMPSHADING! You can only lean on that so much. dirksteadfast fucked around with this message at 22:54 on Jun 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 22:43
|
|
|
Macaluso posted:https://twitter.com/UGPeteWilliams/status/1003445049135435777 I'm not a big fan of Undergrads but Pete Williams in inspiring for the lengths he went to get his intellectual property back from a giant corporation that wasn't doing anything with it, and just wanted to sit on the rights indefinitely. He gave a talk in Toronto about how the series came to be and everything he learned from the pitching process, negotiations, storyboarding, the editing process, and focus groups. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJhBjLgnHKk Theres a lot of funny bits. One thing I liked is how since the series was being sent overseas the storyboards had to be really really accurate. There was no time for retakes. But nobody at the network told him that, so he would draw some messy boards. This led to characters looking happy even when they were supposed to be sad, because the overseas animators were used to animating kids shows and thought "well, if we're not given specific direction then we'll just have the character smile." It's also crazy how labor intensive animation was back then. He spent an entire summer with a small crew producing a pilot animatic at MTV headquarters in NYC. Giant flatbed scanners, professional avid studios, etc. Meanwhile the finished product looks far inferior to what amateur animators on youtube can do with a decent microphone and copy of Adobe Flash today.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 22:57
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm all for celebrating a creator regaining ownership of their property that was being sat on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 23:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 15:33 |
|
|
ALFbrot posted:What? The quoted post was about Zangief being a bad guy because some little kid couldn't beat him. so he was a bad guy to the little kid. I posted the scene, in which no little kid is ever mentioned. In the text, Zangief realizes he's a bad guy because he's crushing a person's skull between his thighs. This isn't in the clip at all, it's Zangief saying he has accepted his role as a bad guy who crushes "men's heads like sparrow egg." Where in the film is it at all apparent he's talking about a self-aware interaction with the player? Granted, the premise is that all of these characters are self-aware, but then that again begs the question why use Zangief as a reference to this other than for the funny accent? How is this any better or worse than 2? And I think as Waffleman_ alluded, it's more of a reference to the JCVD movie, but both M.Bison/Dictator and Zangief are drawn more like their video game counter parts, so I'm still not sure why, getting back to where we began, why either 1 or 2 have any better or worse "references" in terms of some kind of emotional connection to the material being displayed. It's not especially clear.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 23:14
|
|