Slashdot Mirror
Pixar's Next Movie: The Incredibles
An anonymous reader writes: "The trailer for Pixar's next film, The Incredibles, is on the web. It's available from the official Incredibles site, the Apple trailers page, and Pixar's website. Lots of info on the official page as well! Enjoy!"
This really isn't meant as flamebait. Pixar's movies are extremely cool looking but I really wish they'd make some movies that weren't oriented towards children. I recognize that there's a lot of content in them that is geared towards adults. Besides keeping the parents mildly entertained while their kids enjoy the movie I'm it also has to do with the reason pixar's movies do so well. But even so, why no adult content? THere's definitely this pervasive attitude that animation is the domain of children only in America. (I'm probably pegging myself as an anime nerd here. :) )
And btw, by 'geared towards adults' I certainly don't mean sex and explosions, that doesn't hurt though if the plot is interesting and supports it.
Ansi's and stupid tricks!
Pixar was never "in" the Disney empire. They merely worked with each other. Basically, their agreement to work with each other is terminated in the sense that they aren't going to make any more movies jointly. As for why, Pixar wanted more money and Disney didn't want to lose profits.
Washington Post story covering this
Aside from the fact that this looks like it'd be just as funny as Toy Story, Finding Nemo, etc... What are they running for web services - seriously?
The 2 trailers loaded extremely fast (on the main site) and the Flash loaded faster than I could click "Skip Intro." Over all, a very well made site.
Disney without Pixar is going to be like Apple without Steve Jobs... Oh, wait...
Also, does anyone else think it's odd from the trailer that it's like Pixar wants to disown A Bug's Life?
Schnapple
I saw the teaser trailing a while ago on the Finding Nemo DVD. Looks hilarious - superhero coming out of retirement.
However this new trailer makes the movie look completely different - a superhero team all very much in the now.
Either way,it's PIXAR so I'll be seeing it and when the kids get the DVD, I'll be seeing it again and again. About the only thing that may make this different is the characters are people as opposed to talking animals and toys etc...
The superhero interview 'bit' in the trailer looked like it was lifted straight from the The Tick animated series. *tap, tap, tap--is this thing on?* Now Pixar doing a Tick movie, THAT would be Great!
I think you hit the nail on the head - but not how you intended. I love Pixar's movies, but they are clearly written for kids. Like you said, they WRITE IN CONTENT FOR ADULTS. I agree with the parent poster, that I would like to see a movie from Pixar where the adult content wasn't an afterthought. Think "Spirited Away". It is appropriate for adults and kids, but doesn't feel like a kids movie with a few jokes thrown in for the parents. Finding Nemo was good, but it was still a kids movie.
Sure, they are a kickass animation studio, but let's not forget that they make movies to MAKE MONEY. Where is the money? Product tie-ins. Granted, if the movie tanks their products sit on the shelves, so they do have to make a decent movie first. This has been the MO for kids moviemakers for quite a while now. It has been very obvious for a long time and is starting to become pathetic (Cat in the Hat anyone?). But parents lap it up. There is already Shrek 2 merchandise on the market.
Hey, that is the movie business, not much room for integrity.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Um... that piece of music you're thinking of, from the beginning of the trailer, that's "On Her Majesty's Secret Service", from the movie of the same name. Still Bond, but different Bond film.
Zagreus sits inside your head, Zagreus lives among the dead, Zagreus sees you in your bed and eats you in your sleep.
But for the Lion King 1-1/2 (which I haven't seen, so I won't comment), there's an Aladdin II... and an Alladin III.
My pet peeve with Disney is that they take stuff in the Public Domain (Cinderella etc) then start sending legal threats to anybody who does the same, claiming that they are cashing on the Disney investment. Of course, many claims are baseless, but who can defend themselves against the legal might of Disney?
The last straw was when they pulled out of the production of the recent "Peter Pan" movie, because they didn't want to pay royalties to the orphanage that owns the rights (they received them in the will of the Author).
Disney claims because they already paid once for their animated production of Peter Pan, they shouldn't have to pay again.
Hmm.. Billion dollar multinational refusing to give a tiny percentage of one fucking movie to a group of kids without parents. Walt would be spinning in his grave if he wasn't frozen into it.
Norman Cook's Ode to Sl
There was a trailer for The Incredibles in the cinema when Finding Nemo came out. It's also on the DVD.
And it's still 174 days until it comes out according to the website. Hurry up! I lost interest when the film didn't come out within a week of seeing the trailer. Stop tempting with things that are years away, damn you!
That's not strictly true. Disney have a reputation of legally threatening people over this sort of thing but it has nothing to do with protecting its investment. So long as you avoid using Disney inventions that were used in conjunction with the public domain story then Disney can't do a thing.
For example, it's perfectly legitimate for someone to stage a play based on Snow White but Disney would come down hard if you used the names and/or appearance of the Seven Dwarves as seen in the movie (the seven dwarves appear in the original public domain Snow White but the characters of Grumpy, Sleepy, et al, are Disney inventions and not in the public domain).
Is this right? Well, it's a strict and traditional application of copyright so it's difficult to complain about, unless you want to argue against copyright in general. What isn't right, and this relates to your original pet-peeve, is the retroactive extension of copyright so that the Disney inventions never fall into the public domain.
Well, I was going to flippantly comment that it is the correct numerical equivalent to writing out the date as, say, "November 5th, 2004", but then I realized that many (non-American) people write "5 November 2004". Do the the people who write it the latter way say "5 November" or "November 5th"?
-- stream of did I lock the front door consciousness
Well it's more than that - in the Nemo trailers they didn't mention Bug's Life either. Perhaps Bug's Life is in that situation where it's both not their most recognized brand and it's also not their most recent bankable work. Too bad really.
Schnapple
The trailer begins: "From the makers of 'Toy Story', 'Monsters, Inc.', and 'Finding Nemo'". It's like everybody forgot that "A Bug's Life" was released in there somewhere and made Pixar a ton of money as well. Yeah, I know it wasn't the success it could have been because "Antz" was released a month before, but still... surely Pixar believes they deserve some credit for it?
I dunno, maybe the fact that it's the only Pixar movie where the villain dies at the end is working against them, or something. I still think it's as good as any of Pixar's other outings, even if they don't.