|
Andorra posted:"Overprotective mother having a hard time dealing with the fact her kid is getting older" isn't really a concept unique to a foreign culture, and it's certainly not a new one. Yeah, that's what the people in our theater gathered. I'm surprised so many other white people are so  about it.
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 17:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 14:59 |
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Calling everything Randian is the new calling everything Lovecraftian, I've noticed. This is so Kafkaesque.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 17:34
|
|
|
Haha well played!
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 17:34
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:His belief seems to boil down to “if you can do something exceptional, you should a: be encouraged to develop your skills and b: use those skills philanthropically”, which comes with the necessary flip side of “if you can’t do anything exceptional, accept and encourage those who can”, and both elements fly in the fundamentally selfish and anti-altruistic face of Randian objectivism.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 17:57
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Honestly the very notion of family is kind of a huge blind spot for Rand's entire work. That's where Stephan Molyneux comes in.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 18:06
|
|
|
I got the message of Bao just fine (I'm Chinese  ), but the part I didn't quite get was which parts were supposed to be...the mother's hallucinatory perspective? Or whatever? Like...how does the timeline go, precisely? Is it:Lonely woman is lonely -> has a real live son, who she imagines as a cartoon bun -> "eats" him, aka drives him away with her smothering -> reconciles with his real human self, the delusion of the cartoon bun shattered at this point Or is it Woman had a falling out with her actual human son, is lonely -> starts dreaming of a life with an imaginary, cartoon bun as a surrogate for her affections -> recreates the exact same dynamic she had with this imaginary bun that she had with her real son, ending in the same sort of falling out -> reconciles with her real human son, the delusion of the cartoon bun shattered at this point ?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 21:10
|
|
|
^ I think it could go either way, but I took it as the latter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
She dreams about eating the bun as a metaphor for her smothering him preventing him from living his life. I’m not a smart guy when it comes to the arts but I felt it was pretty blatant.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2018 23:41
|
|
|
They should have taken the metaphor to its logical conclusion and had her poop out a little turd baby at the end.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 00:20
|
|
|
I think the whole "only chinese people will understand bao!!" thing is uh, kinda massively wrong? Three or four idiots on Twitter aside, what culture doesn't have overprotective mothers? It could have been a matzoh ball is all I'm sayin'
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:I thought it was decent and I'm glad people are enjoying it, but honestly it's TYOOL 2018 and I'm way past bored of "Hey check it, yo, hey what if...listen, what if...what if people......don't trust superheroes? Eh?? Ehh?????" plots in muh muvies. I'd like to see someone try that sort of plot with a realistic exploration of the ramifications of getting rid of superheroes. After all, the bad guys they once fought aren't going anywhere. And in most superhero works, they're capable of either evading or overpowering anything the authorities have available. Either the government would have to scramble to find some way of dealing with them, or they'd be running wild like Mexican drug cartels. There'd be all kinds of different ways to have fun with this. After the fight with the Underminer, it was claimed that the government had infrastructure in place to handle guys like him. Except we never see the authorities mobilize anything that might plausibly have stopped his machine. It's possible that military weapons might have worked, but at greater risk of collateral damage than Mr. Incredible on crystal meth. Speaking of getting political, I just realized that that idea bears a striking resemblance to the case against gun control. The best defense against a bad guy with superpowers is a good guy with superpowers, amirite?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 23:11
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:After the fight with the Underminer, it was claimed that the government had infrastructure in place to handle guys like him. Except we never see the authorities mobilize anything that might plausibly have stopped his machine. It's possible that military weapons might have worked, but at greater risk of collateral damage than Mr. Incredible on crystal meth. I understood the claim to be that society can deal with the outcome, not necessarily prevent anything or fight back. "Our insurance will make us whole", not "drat the torpedos".
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 23:29
|
|
|
Yeah, the bank's money was insured, so let him rob the place with a minimum of fuss then track him down and arrest him where there's less chance of collateral damage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 00:18
|
|
|
General Dog posted:I think the movie is a lot more interesting if it entertains for even a second the idea that maybe the supers actually have historically caused more damage than they're worth. And i wonder why underminer needed the heist money. We need more underminer
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
My thoughts during the short: That bun man thing looks like drew carey.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 07:21
|
|
|
got any sevens posted:And i wonder why underminer needed the heist money. We need more underminer Upside down on his volcano lair mortgage. He's just trying to dog his way out of debt!
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 09:22
|
|
|
The confusion around Bao makes sense considering most people are crap at figuring out the simplest metaphors, especially when they come to expect to take weird cartoon stuff at face value. A lot of cartoons tend to be basically extremely extended and flexible metaphors, especially every Pixar movie, where you don't actually have to understand the subtext to enjoy it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 10:54
|
|
|
lizardman posted:I'll admit I found myself a little disgusted with the mother's attitude in the short. It's nice that she got over herself in the end but I was put off that the film seemed to want me to sympathize with her. Part of me wanted the short to end just after she devours her food-son because it'd be a pretty good encapsulation for how terrible she's acting. Well if it makes you feel better, as a person of Chinese Heritage I spent most of that short silently screaming into my significant other's shoulder and crushing their forearm. The "optimistic" ending of reconciliation didn't really sit well with me either, especially how it put the burden of making up on the kid. I totally agree it ending on her eating the kid would've been more emotionally realistic from my and my friends experiences.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2018 23:44
|
|
|
She couldn't stand to see her son grow up and leave so she murdered him
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 00:00
|
|
|
Doesnt the teen titans movie involve all the adult superheroes getting mind controlled too? I wonder if they have time to redub some lines to joke about the coincidence, before that hits theaters
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 00:20
|
|
|
got any sevens posted:Doesnt the teen titans movie involve all the adult superheroes getting mind controlled too? I wonder if they have time to redub some lines to joke about the coincidence, before that hits theaters That's basically Young Justice season 1 finale. I don't think it's at all an uncommon plot for teen heroes forced to fight the adult ones.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 07:02
|
|
|
howe_sam posted:Yeah, the bank's money was insured, so let him rob the place with a minimum of fuss then track him down and arrest him where there's less chance of collateral damage. The problem with that policy is that throughout pop culture, many (if not most) A-list supervillains aren't just in it for the money. They're either trying to dominate the world (such as Doctor Doom), advance some [possibly well-intentioned] agenda (such as Poison Ivy, Magneto, and Killmonger), or just gently caress poo poo up for their own amusement (such as the Joker). "Stay out of their way and file an insurance claim afterwards" is kind of not an option there. Even the Underminer, when he introduces himself at the end of the first movie, strongly implies that he's more interested in showing off his power than stealing things for personal use. got any sevens posted:And i wonder why underminer needed the heist money. We need more underminer That giant drill tank thing must have been crazy expensive to build and maintain. Edit: And doesn't the second movie end not too long before a major oil crisis? That thing must burn a lot of fuel. Cockmaster fucked around with this message at 19:21 on Jul 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 19:18
|
|
|
lizardman posted:I'll admit I found myself a little disgusted with the mother's attitude in the short. It's nice that she got over herself in the end but I was put off that the film seemed to want me to sympathize with her. Part of me wanted the short to end just after she devours her food-son because it'd be a pretty good encapsulation for how terrible she's acting.  ). She (my mom) was basically venting to me about all the big and small things that she found disrespectful about the relationship and how my brother's being so disrespectful to them, and at one point I said to her "Y'know, he probably expects you to be supportive of him no matter what," and I'll never forget the response my otherwise smart, level-headed, fair-minded mother gave, which was a very incredulous "Why should I be supportive of him no matter what?"There's definitely an ingrained sort of...well, it comes across as pompousness or self-importance from certain Western perspectives, but for Asian-American parents, it's this ingrained cultural expectation that you are the single most important thing to your kids and they absolutely owe you more than you owe them. It comes across in a lot of different ways, and there seems to be a specific version of this mindset that really comes across in regards to a mother and their sons' girlfriends and wives. (And it's not that this doesn't exist in Western families either, particularly in more fundamentalist demographics that also share this "unconditional love? Pfft nah, our love is totally conditional" mindset, but it's usually called out as the sort of toxicity that it is.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
If Brad Bird had written Toy Story, Sid would be the hero.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 05:04
|
|
|
But would he have had Woody as the totalitarian ruler of Andy's toys like Katzenberg wanted?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 11:08
|
|
|
Aces High posted:But would he have had Woody as the totalitarian ruler of Andy's toys like Katzenberg wanted? As opposed to the benevolent dictator he ended up being in the final product
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 15:02
|
|
|
General Dog posted:As opposed to the benevolent dictator he ended up being in the final product Yeah, it's actually a strength of the movie that they kept Woody's authoritarian and selfish traits as character flaws and issues he had to overcome, since the plot of the first Toy Story was basically all his own fault. Hell, isn't that a recurring theme that the plots of all three movies basically wouldn't have happened if he'd gone with the flow?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 16:01
|
|
|
But then wheezy would have been sold off! And stinky pete, jessie and bullseye would still be in boxes
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 16:23
|
|
|
He also uncovered the living hell inside psychopath Sid's house and scared him straight, thereby saving dozens of lives he would have taken as a serial killer. And human lives too I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 16:33
|
|
|
The Toy Story series has a lot of religious themes. Woody basically puts the fear of God into Sid. I love the bit where he goes from speaking through his recording thingy to suddenly animating his face and speaking 'normally'.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 17:21
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Yeah, it's actually a strength of the movie that they kept Woody's authoritarian and selfish traits as character flaws and issues he had to overcome, since the plot of the first Toy Story was basically all his own fault. I do wonder what a movie with the original rear end in a top hat, rules the toys through fear Woody would have looked like
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2018 19:53
|
|
|
Aces High posted:I do wonder what a movie with the original rear end in a top hat, rules the toys through fear Woody would have looked like Lotso?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 03:10
|
|
|
I took my 5 year old today to see it. I’m not going to dissect it. It was fun. It felt a little samey in some of the broader strokes, but it was good. My only complaint is that Bob and Helen ( but moreso Helen) sound like they are old as gently caress. Helen is crazy raspy and has what sounds like denture-lisp. Bothered me for a while but I got over it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 05:53
|
|
|
Feenix posted:I took my 5 year old today to see it. I’m not going to dissect it. It was fun. It felt a little samey in some of the broader strokes, but it was good. My only complaint is that Bob and Helen ( but moreso Helen) sound like they are old as gently caress. Helen is crazy raspy and has what sounds like denture-lisp. Bothered me for a while but I got over it. I'm surprised there weren't more weird issues with how a sequel to a movie from at least 10 years ago takes place literally immediately after its ending. At least it being an implied period piece helps the setting not be dated.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 06:16
|
|
|
Feenix posted:I took my 5 year old today to see it. I’m not going to dissect it. It was fun. It felt a little samey in some of the broader strokes, but it was good. My only complaint is that Bob and Helen ( but moreso Helen) sound like they are old as gently caress. Helen is crazy raspy and has what sounds like denture-lisp. Bothered me for a while but I got over it. This is what weirded me out about having it be a direct sequel vs having a plot that took place a decade or so later; the voice actors sounding more aged would've made sense. In many late live action sequels that's what they did- Harrison Ford for example reprised roles in sequels that closely matched his age.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 06:26
|
|
|
Feenix posted:I took my 5 year old today to see it. I’m not going to dissect it. It was fun. It felt a little samey in some of the broader strokes, but it was good. My only complaint is that Bob and Helen ( but moreso Helen) sound like they are old as gently caress. Helen is crazy raspy and has what sounds like denture-lisp. Bothered me for a while but I got over it. Helen had that lisp in the first one too
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 07:36
|
|
|
I mentioned finding Helen's voice weird earlier in the thread, apparently that's just how she talks and everyone probably forgot since the first movie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 07:47
|
|
|
It is a little odd that it picks up immediately after the first one, but the choice makes sense when you consider (A) There's simply no way they were going to make a movie where Dash and Violet are in their mid-20s and even Jack is a teenager, it just wouldn't have the same family dynamic and this kind of movie wouldn't feel right if it didn't have any kids (B) The movie was likely always destined to open with a big action set piece involving the whole family, so rather than come up with a whole new set up, why not just go with the perfectly good one offered at the end of the first one? An interesting thing was the little clip before the movie started where the cast reflects on the 14 year wait and thanks the fans for their patience, etc., which I think was done partly because there wasn't any real way to address the long absence or generate pathos over it within the film itself. It's also a little weird to think that no children today were alive when The Incredibles was released, so this video was apparently talking to the adults in the audience. And I dunno maybe I'm just weird, but I stopped waiting for Incredibles 2 a long time ago and though it's nice it's finally here it doesn't mean the same thing to me as it would have, say, 8 years ago. Like I pretty much presumed I was not even in this movie's target audience but here it was addressing me directly as if I were. Ah, I'm overthinking it. And besides, someone who was 5 when The Incredibles came out is 19 now and that's still in the range where pop culture is important to you, so *shrugs*
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 08:02
|
|
|
I found it weird that they decided Incredibles 2, of all Pixar sequels, needed that "thank you for your patience" when we got nothing like that for Finding Dory (though I guess if you pay attention to Ellen DeGeneres you knew she'd been demanding one since the beginning) or Monsters University. What makes The Incredibles 2 more special?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 08:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 14:59 |
|
|
^ This is all just my impression but I always felt like there was this mass expectation from the get-go that there would be an Incredibles 2 that people didn't necessarily have with Pixar's other works. I don't know if it was just because the superhero format lent itself to be sequelized or if the filmmakers had stated a desire to do one that early, but until Cars 2 I think most people figured a Pixar sequel would be a rare exception like Toy Story. So while many were thrilled that they made Monsters University, I don't think people necessarily were waiting for or demanding it in the interim like with Incredibles 2. I remember the late 2000s in particular every Pixar announcement had at least some responses like "Hmm ok but what about Incredibles 2, where is it, it's been like 4 years already let's go". Of course, the simplest and most likely explanation is that they simply hadn't thought of doing a pre-feature video like that at the time. I can only think of one other time I saw an intro like that in a major theater release (randomly enough, it was Star Trek Beyond, with Simon Pegg on the set being all "hope you enjoy the show" etc.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2018 11:17
|
|