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!"

92 of 435 comments (clear)

  1. Adult films by Black_Logic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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!
    1. Re:Adult films by _PimpDaddy7_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No adult content? Go watch Pixar's movies again. They CLEARLY have written in content for adults in all of their movies. Pixar is obviosly gearing movies for mainstream, that involves children and adults. Why limit a movie to one crowd(adults or children)? The super success of Finding Nemo was BECAUSE it was aimed at children and adults.

    2. Re:Adult films by XMyth · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Mmmmmmm Pixar Porn......

      But seriously, I think this is a good idea. Anime nerd or not (the only anime I like is Ronin Warriors, do I count?) a adult-oriented *good* cg movie would probably do good.

      And no, Final Fantasy doesn't count because the story line was just plain boring. FF is good at gameplay not stories.

      Maybe we could petition Pixar?

    3. Re:Adult films by bentini · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Because of the Final Fantasy CG movie.

    4. Re:Adult films by aborchers · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wish I hadn't wasted all my mod points busting down FP trolls, because you've definitely earned a boost. Finding Nemo is one of the best films I've seen in recent years and I still see new things in it every time I watch it (which happens a lot because my two year old also loves it!)

      I'm no G-Rated wuss when it comes to film taste either. I'm a big fan of Quentin Tarantino, Sam Raimi, and pre-LOTR Peter Jackson, for example. Nonetheless, Pixar can make the kind of movies they want to make and I wish them success at it because they make truly excellent films.

      --
      Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
    5. Re:Adult films by 0123456 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "The super success of Finding Nemo was BECAUSE it was aimed at children and adults."

      Actually, I'd say that 'Finding Nemo' was the least adult movie that Pixar have made. I've watched 'Toy Story 1/2' and 'Monsters Inc' numerous times, but have no great desire to see 'Finding Nemo' again.

      Maybe this is why they quit Disney, so their movies weren't dumbed down for kids.

    6. Re:Adult films by Black_Logic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Admittedly, I haven't seen Finding Nemo. I understand what you're saying, as I said in my previous post, I recognize that they've got some really talented writers working for them. Clearly we're getting into a subjective debate here, but I'd really like to see a completely CG movie geared towards adults. For instance, a whole lot of sci-fi storys could be done extremely well in this medium. A lot people complain about the special effects in movies because they're not real enough. Nobody has ever complained about the special effects in a pixar movie not being real enough. There'd be much more freedom to have big environments that fit the atmosphere of the movie well. Suspended disbelief works so much better in a cartoon. At that would really help a sci-fi flick.

      --
      Ansi's and stupid tricks!
    7. Re:Adult films by FortKnox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Like TitanAE? Animated movies for adults ONLY appeal to the anime geek, and its not enough business to recoup the costs of making it. The only way to make a profit is to make a kids movie with adult jokes and stuff to appeal to the parents. Pixar knows this formula, and uses it perfectly.

      --
      Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    8. Re:Adult films by Deusy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

      You evidently didn't see the Final Fantasy movie, to see how hard it is to produce a good adult oriented CG film.

      CG is still cartoony. How many adult cartoons do you know of? Viz?

      --

      Free Gamer - Free games list and commentary

    9. Re:Adult films by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

      I have two words that would make them GOBS of fricking cash....

      Heavy Metal

      the first teaser of Titan AE looked as if it was going to be in the style of Heavy Metal and I was fricking GEEKED but it tanked out to be a kiddie movie.

      If Pixar were to have the guts to make a R rated Heavy Metal style film they would absolutely clean up.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    10. Re:Adult films by nikster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Pixar movies are always not only amazing miracles of technology (though that is a great excuse for geeks to see each and every one of them), the always also have a great storyline behind that as well.
      And the storyline is what sets them apart, release after release.

      And i am a huge anime fan myself - it's fun that there is blood and gore (impossible not to mention tentacle rape) etc and a lot of them are art in their own right.

      But Pixar has a great story, every time, and then the story is well told. Despite all the high tech and geekery involved, that is one of the oldest skills in the world: the art of story-telling. A great story doesn't need to be targeted at a certain age group, and it doesn't need sex and explosions to make it work - it can stand by its own.

      That's also the reason Pixar doesn't make more than 1 movie per year: They "can't find talented enough story tellers", according to Steve Jobs.

    11. Re:Adult films by NTmatter · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not a movie, but a show geared towards adult audiences. Tripping the Rift is CG featuring adult-oriented content. No actual sex or nudity so far, but lots of adult humour. A few choice quotes from the show would be:

      "Just once when I moan 'Oh God...Oh, God!', I really want to mean it."

      "Well, you know what they say: You can lead a horse to water, but you can't get over how big its genitals are."

      "How'd you like to take a free ride on a girl with four gams and no gag reflex?"

      It's coming to a television near you. Watch it.

    12. Re:Adult films by Mateito · · Score: 3, Informative

      Just a note: Shrek wasn't pixar. It was Dreamworks (I think).

    13. Re:Adult films by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 3, Insightful



      > But even so, why no adult content?

      I think it's 99% due to the personalities *behind* the movies. Have you ever watched the behind-the-scenes stuff on Pixar dvd's or listened to the commentary? Pixar's core is John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton, and a couple of other guys, and they've been the driving force behind each and every Pixar movie. It's not like 20th Century Fox where they'll put out 50 movies a year and each one is directed by someone different. Pixar's library is entirely representative of a tiny handful of personalities, and there's not an ironic, detached, black-clad cyberpunk fan among them. I agree with you that it would be *awesome* to see an adult-oriented CG film with Pixar's skills behind it, but that would be like asking George Romero to direct the sequel to "You Got Served." Plain and simple, they just don't roll like that.

    14. Re:Adult films by orcrist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'll just respond to you though this applies to a good number of the posts in the thread. I must be a mutant, since I seem to be the only one I know who found Monsters Inc. to be the *worst* movie Pixar has made so far. I am even a Billy Crystal fan, but the movie just felt too much like any other Billy Crystal movie, with a bunch of standard formulas for animated flicks.
      For me Monsters Inc was the most child-oriented (simplistic) of the bunch. That's not to say that Pixar's worst isn't still above average, but I was disappointed compared to the other movies Pixar had produced, and relieved to see Nemo raise the standard again.

      -chris

      --
      San Francisco values: compassion, tolerance, respect, intelligence
    15. Re:Adult films by aborchers · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd certainly concur on the Toy Story films, but I can't say I was all that floored by Monsters Inc. You're definitely right that Nemo doesn't have the kind of character development that Toy Story does. I just thought it did an excellent job of packing in the adult-satisfying details (obscure marine science references, subtle references to the other films, etc.)

      --
      Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
    16. Re:Adult films by Belgand · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Frankly Finding Nemo seemed so vapidly childish to me that I could be bothered to see it. A fish travels to find his missing son. *Yawn* I'm sure it might have had some adult-oriented content, but honestly most of what I saw in previews and such didn't really inspire me to have any interest that it would be much beyond the formulaic nature of such an enterprise.

      One of the very, very few films that was successfully aimed at children and adults equally in my mind was The Princess Bride. Neither talking down to kids or adults it can be enjoyed by both at the exact same level for an entire lifetime.

    17. Re:Adult films by acroyear · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the disconnect with disney was solely for financial reasons.

      the deal with disney was kinda like a deal with a record company. disney provided seed cash, in return for "ownership" (technically speaking, exclusive monopoly rights in perpetuity; legal ownership remained in pixar's hands) of the films, plots, and characters for distribution and merchandising purposes. it also set a specific royalty rate for how much of the gross pixar would get (and that wasn't very high).

      worked fine when pixar didn't have any cash, and didn't know if their films would be hits or not.

      now, with pixar having more than enough cash from the IPO and the gross profits on monsters and nemo, pixar simply doesn't need that kind of relationship anymore. pixar has the seed capital it needs to fund its movies directly, and has no interest in any deal that sees it give up its rights under such terms.

      pixar could reasonably accept a deal where buena vista distributes the movie, disney home video sells the dvd/video, and disney's toy department does the merchandise, IF the deal puts the majority of the gross into pixar, as they deserve for coming up with the material.

      eisner refused to see it this way, and would only approve a deal that kept the lion's share of the profits to disney.

      I see pixar in the right here. for disney to claim that they should take the majority of the profits simply because they did the manufacturing and distribution is absurd.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
  2. They still ... by Augusto · · Score: 5, Informative

    ... have to release this and their next film "Cars" with Disney. After that, they no longer have to have their films distributed by Disney.

    Also Disney gets the rights to any sequels for these films, if Pixar refuses to make sequels for them. (Like Toy Story 3)

    --

    - sigs are for wimps.
    1. Re:They still ... by Schnapple · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Also Disney gets the rights to any sequels for these films, if Pixar refuses to make sequels for them. (Like Toy Story 3)
      But it's even more fun than that - Disney owns the rights to the characters in Toy Story, but Pixar owns the rights to the new characters introduced in Toy Story 2, so none of them will be in a Pixar-less Toy Story 3.

      Also, does anyone else think it's odd from the trailer that it's like Pixar wants to disown A Bug's Life?

    2. Re:They still ... by JosefK · · Score: 2, Informative

      I seem to recall reading or hearing an interview with John Lasseter where he said that they weren't really interested in sequels as a general principle. They want to to fresh stories every time. Toy Story 2 was an exception, first because they were still early in their deal with Disney, who want nothing but sequels, and because they felt the story was good enough and distinct enough from the first movie.

      The issue of knockoff sequels (like the direct-to-video Buzz Lightyear thing) was a major issue in the negotiations with Disney. Pixar wanted to get out early and take their next two films home, but Disney threatened to make up for the two movies by doing their own sequels to the earlier movies. I never saw what the final deal was.

    3. Re:They still ... by Schnapple · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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.

  3. Re:What the??? by grub · · Score: 3, Informative


    This picture was in production before the split.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  4. Hooray! by alexatrit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The previews make the movie out to be rather humourous. Samuel L. Jackon screaming "WHERE is my SUPER-SUIT, woman?!?" It'll make millions off that line alone, nevermind the killer renderings.

    --

    Nothing but the finest in meaningless drivel
    1. Re:Hooray! by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 2, Funny


      > Samuel L. Jackon screaming "WHERE is my SUPER-SUIT, woman?!?"

      I hate to recycle this joke again, but...

      Pixar trailer downloaded from web = $0

      FOSS audio editor from SourceForge = $0

      Alone at home on a Friday night = $0

      Bringing the web to a crawl with your "WHERE
      is my SUPER-SUIT, BITCH?" video being sent
      to every workplace mailbox in existance: Priceless.

  5. Re:What the??? by grape+jelly · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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

  6. Re:What the??? by Black_Logic · · Score: 4, Informative

    They plan on not renewing the contract, but they didn't break it. More info here

    --
    Ansi's and stupid tricks!
  7. i-tunes by Walker2323 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What's with the mandatory i-tunes requirement to see the large screen? Very annoying for those of us that don't want yet another multimedia viewer clogging the machine. Isn't Quicktime good enough?

    1. Re:i-tunes by brauwerman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Typical cross-promotional marketing crap. ...

      Some of us gave Apple $30 for a Quicktime Pro license specifically to get access to full-screen Quicktime movies.

      Just another reminder why deciding to pay any company for a license instead of a product is a pathetic leap of faith.

  8. Re:What the??? by Mateito · · Score: 5, Informative

    > I thought that Pixar split from the Disney
    > Empire? What's up with that?

    Disney will still release one or two movies more (The Incredibles plus the next one). Pixar had a 6 film deal with Disney, but Disney contested that "Toy Story II" counted as it was a sequel. (This is one reason that Pixar don't do sequels).

    So we have

    Toy Story I/II
    Bugs Life
    Monsters Inc
    Finding Nemos
    The Incredibles
    One more. .. and then Pixar will go with somebody who gives them more than 10% of the takings. Pixar weren't looking to "screw" Disney, just be paid a fair price for what they are now worth in the market.

  9. Craig T. Nelson by AtariAmarok · · Score: 2, Funny

    Looking forward to this one, with the underrated Craig T. Nelson providing voice talent for one of the main characters.

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  10. Re:Disney by pavon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They chose not to renew thier contract, but they are still obligated to produce a few films for Disney under the current contract, this being one of them. Also Disney still has rights on any sequels to the movies made under the original contract, so I wouldn't be surprised to see some some "release to video" craptaculars comming out of disney using the pixar characters.

  11. Torrent by AIX-Hood · · Score: 3, Informative

    Don't know if people care since Apple is fast, but here's a torrent: http://www.filerush.com/torrents/the_incredibles-t lr_m480.mov.torrent

    1. Re:Torrent by GlynDavies · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Very much appreciated. With all the use of flash and embedded players these sites insist on using these days, it's non-trivial to find an actual download link for the .mov file, at least using my bog-standard MDK9.1 KDE install at work.

      Your torrent lets me just ssh home, and kick off the download so it's waiting for me when I return. I imagine plenty of others would feel the same.

      As I say, much appreciated.

      (A bunch of posts explaining how stupid I am for not being able to do make MDK "just work" will, no doubt, follow!)

  12. Tech? by KaiserZoze_860 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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...

  13. "In Theatres 11-5-2004" by Minwee · · Score: 5, Funny

    Apparently, this movie was released three days ago.

    Why are we just hearing about it now?

    1. Re:"In Theatres 11-5-2004" by shadow303 · · Score: 2, Informative

      On the off-chance that you are being serious, that would be November 5th, since Americans list month before day when writing dates.

      --
      I've got a mind like a steel trap - it's got an animal's foot stuck in it.
    2. Re:"In Theatres 11-5-2004" by syntax · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If only people would use ISO 8601 (YYYY-MM-DD for dates), the standard for representing date time. It's extremely hard to confuse it with any other formats (as I've never seen anyone write YYYY-DD-MM), and it has the added bonus of being able to sort it chronologically by sorting it numerically.

    3. Re:"In Theatres 11-5-2004" by jherekc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can never understand why the americans insist on writing mm-dd-yy, it's like writing mm:hh:ss which would just be stupid...

      --
      "lack of quality control is one of the pillars of slashdot"
    4. Re:"In Theatres 11-5-2004" by theEd · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why not the epoch?
      The release date would then be: 1102226400

      --
      "And now you shall learn the secret of boot to the head"
    5. Re:"In Theatres 11-5-2004" by cmpalmer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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
    6. Re:"In Theatres 11-5-2004" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Here in Australia (dd-mm-yyyy land) at least, people say it in lots of ways:
      * five november
      * fifth of november
      * november the fifth
      * november five

      Frankly though, I don't think that the "write it the way it's said" reasoning makes for a good justification. After all, when you talk about time you might say "a quarter past four", but you'd always write that 4:15

      I can't think of any other countries which use mm-dd-yyyy (except for Canadians, who I've heard use both dd-mm and mm-dd!) or the reverse being yyyy-dd-mm. Nevertheless, when I write a date down I'll put 5/Nov/2004 for clarity - doing it that way avoids any more y2k-like issues also :-)

    7. Re:"In Theatres 11-5-2004" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      On behalf of American everywher I would like to apologize for this. We are very sorry. I was a mistake from the beginning, and now we're stuck.

    8. Re:"In Theatres 11-5-2004" by RatBastard · · Score: 2

      After I got a digital camera I switched to YYYYMMDD. Now all my pictures sort themselves.

      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
  14. hold still by ejort79 · · Score: 2, Funny

    ok ok already, I'm holding still

    --
    The Internet couldn't tell a good bit from a bad bit if it bit it on its naughty bits.
  15. Re:What the??? by Mateito · · Score: 5, Funny

    > so Disney could make their own Toy Story 3, if they chose.

    Which they will.

    And it will be straight to video.

    And it will be crap.

  16. The thing most people don't get... by slappyjack · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...about this mediu is that Pixar isn't simply a digital rendering company.

    They're a MOVIE company. The reason their stuff is so well loved by the general populace is that they're first and foremost moviemakers. All of the stuff Ive seen from them so far is incredibly well written. That goes for not only their features but their shorts, too. Even the ones with no dialog in them.

    The fact that they take these scripts and make them happen in a totally rendered environment is more than a creative choice than anything else. The script HAS to be good, and dead on, and not have a lot of slop, because the rendering proces is so time consuming and expensive (for now.) The medium in a sense culls out the shit material, because no matter how much you polish up a peice of shit, it's still going to be shit.

    Films like Toy Story and Monsters Inc. COULD have been made in the traditional way, with actors and such, but by doing the whole thing as animation they get away from moments in the film where the audience would mentally break off with the thought "Holy Fuck, that's a coolass special effect."

    IMHO, The fact that these are marketed and skewed towards a younger audience is mainly because, as a culture, the US isn't ready to accept animated ANYTHING as a serious medium for carying adult themes. If Pixar was a Japanese company, half the stuff they made probably wouldnt be viewable by children. Take Cowboy Bebop as an example. Anime, purely cartoon, but NOT for kids. I wont even go into things like Ghost in the Shell. This cultural disconnect in the States is why you see things like a row full of nine year olds sitting in a theater watching Terrance and Phillip sing songs about how the other likes to anally rape his uncle.

    1. Re:The thing most people don't get... by wheresdrew · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "This cultural disconnect in the States is why you see things like a row full of nine year olds sitting in a theater watching Terrance and Phillip sing songs about how the other likes to anally rape his uncle."

      Now, now. They only sang about how they like to "fuck" their uncles. Rape isn't mentioned at all in the song. How do you know the uncles in question haven't consented? =o)

    2. Re:The thing most people don't get... by Jonas+the+Bold · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Um, its more than that. Animated movies are different from live action movies in that nothing is real to begin with, so doing rediculous things is much more easily accepted. If toy story had been live action, and the toy soldiers were live action actors, for example, it would have been dumb. Same with the rest of their movies, none of them would have "worked".

      And yeah. They are a movie company. They make brilliant movies with great writing and characters. But also great is the character animation.

      The character animation in these movies is simply better than anything anyone else does. The animators are roughly equivelant to the actors in a live action movie, without them, it just isn't believable. What's nice about Pixar movies is that because their animation is so good, every one of their movies is like having an all-star cast, which keeps people watching. The visual gags in those movies are so funny because of the skill of the animators. The fact that you can forget you're watching animation and just watch the characters and the movie are a testament to their skill.

      This is what disney used to do, but Pixar is now the new disney. It's not about the CG vs 2d cartoons, as disney seems to think, its about the quality. Pixar is doing the best animation every done.

      --
      Everything seemed to be going so nice
      'till the end of all beings punched right through the ice
    3. Re:The thing most people don't get... by catbutt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well that doesn't explain why animated movies are more likely to be kid oriented that other movies. After all Lord or the Rings and the Matrix etc made a lot of money too, and I doubt they would have made more money if they somehow made them more "little kid friendly". If making family fare was really a safer business model, you'd see a lot more live action family oriented movies than you do.

      Personally I think there is something about animation -- especially non-realistic looking animation -- that appeals to kids more than it does to adults. However, the lines are blurring between animation and live action. Many movies (new Star Wars movies, Lord of the Rings, the Matrix, etc) are heaviliy CG to the point that soon nothing but the actors will be live action (or, in the case of Dinosaur, nothing but the backgrounds). And while Final Fantasy was probably before its time, soon photorealtic humans will be possible, allowing fully animated movies that don't "look" animated. As that happens, I think you will see a lot more adult fare that is fully animated.

  17. Movie hits too close to home for comfort... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I don't really want to see a movie about a guy who used to be great but got fat and old...

  18. Teaser and new trainler look like two movies by Sabalon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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...

    1. Re:Teaser and new trainler look like two movies by CaseyB · · Score: 2, Informative

      The plot summary on IMDB sounds more like that indicated by the teaser. The trailer must be showing just scenes either recalling the old days or after the team has gotten their steam again. Maybe both, hence the red suit/blue suit differences?

  19. Finally!... an adult film by SilentChris · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I looked at the trailer than read through the comments before I got here, and was surprised to see a +5 saying Pixar only writes for children. Did he even watch the trailer?

    This movie is for the Adult Swim crowd. It's got nothing "adult" in it (sex, violence -- well, there's explosions), but not every show on Adult Swim does either. It's the writing. Are children going to laugh at a character yelling "Where is my super suit, woman?!?" Probably not. But I laughed out loud more than a few times watching it.

    Disney braves a thin line between children and adult entertainment (except for their refusal to distribute Michael Moore's latest movie, which is just dumb). Some stuff bridges the line rather admirably (like the Muppets, which they more or less acquired). Ditto on ABC after hours. A Bug's Life, though? Very little for adults to laugh at. Children will laugh at The Incredibles, but I have a feeling adults will get the most out of it.

  20. Superhero Interview by SamSpectre · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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!

  21. tries to get people into iTunes 4.5 by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Insightful
    What's with the mandatory i-tunes requirement to see the large screen?

    Apple finally figured out "full screen" wasn't enough to get people to buy Quicktime Pro. However, it will probably be more successful at getting users to install iTunes, update to the latest version, or open it if they've never opened it before.

    It is pretty stupid, but in a twisted way makes sense from a marketing standpoint.

  22. Re:Stupid Flash requirement by chryso · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Running Gentoo with current emerges for libflashplayer and mplayerplug-in I can run the site great and view the trailer right inside of Firefox.

    I saw comments similar to this several times already for this article. It seems a lot of people complain about the lack of availability on non-Windows machines for these websites without actually checking to see if their OS is capable of playing it first.

  23. Re:Stupid Flash requirement by Benabik · · Score: 2, Funny

    Really?

    *looks at his Mac OS X laptop*
    *looks at the Incredibles web page loaded on it*

    Huh. Never knew my Powerbook was running WindBlows. I thought it was Panther. Good to know.

  24. Pixar is no different than anyone else by gosand · · Score: 4, Interesting
    No adult content? Go watch Pixar's movies again. They CLEARLY have written in content for adults in all of their movies. Pixar is obviosly gearing movies for mainstream, that involves children and adults. Why limit a movie to one crowd(adults or children)? The super success of Finding Nemo was BECAUSE it was aimed at children and adults.

    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.

    1. Re:Pixar is no different than anyone else by Robotech_Master · · Score: 3, Informative

      Uhm...Miyazaki-san himself has said that he wrote Spirited Away for 12-year-old girls. You're confusing the cultural disconnect with audience. Granted, Japanese animated films in general tend to have a higher degree of maturity than American ones do...but that doesn't mean they're for an older audience.

      And even if that weren't the case, Miyazaki has made quite a few movies "written for kids" himself. For instance, look at My Neighbor Totoro or Panda, Go Panda. Enjoyable by adults (just as Pixar's films are), but clearly aimed right squarely at the little kid market.

      --
      Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
    2. Re:Pixar is no different than anyone else by meringuoid · · Score: 4, Insightful
      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.

      Pixar are a Western firm, and have to live with the Western idea that all animation is for children. Ghibli are Japanese, and things work differently there.

      But Pixar's kids' films bring parents into the cinema too. And they see that the films are in fact good, despite being 'for children'. And then the next time a Pixar film comes out those parents use the children as an excuse to go and see it. Pretty good business for Pixar, eh?

      I remember seeing the start of A Bug's Life, watching this film for a while and then sitting up with a jolt because I realised that I was in fact watching Seven Samurai. Blimey.

      Spirited Away you mention as an example, but I think it's more of a child's film than, say, Mononoke or Nausicaa. It reminds me of the books Through the Looking-glass or The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe - certainly intended for children, but not limiting itself to what is normally supposed to be 'childish'.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    3. Re:Pixar is no different than anyone else by gosand · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Uhm...Miyazaki-san himself has said that he wrote Spirited Away for 12-year-old girls. You're confusing the cultural disconnect with audience. Granted, Japanese animated films in general tend to have a higher degree of maturity than American ones do...but that doesn't mean they're for an older audience.

      Hmm. Didn't know that. Interesting though, how a movie written for a 12-year old girl in another country can seem so mature, while movies written for 12-year-olds in the US seem vapid and utterly childish. I plead ignorance on the cultural disconnect, but I am giving Miyazaki no more credit than he deserves. Spirited Away was a great movie, whereas Finding Nemo is a great kid's movie. For some reason, I find the need to qualify it.

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    4. Re:Pixar is no different than anyone else by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Interesting though, how a movie written for a 12-year old girl in another country can seem so mature, while movies written for 12-year-olds in the US seem vapid and utterly childish.


      It's not the audience; it's the director. Try picking a few fansubbed anime at random and watching a few episodes. You'll find that what they pump out in Japan is every bit as worthless as American children's shows/movies. Spirited Away was a great movie because a brilliant man created it, not because it was released in Japan.
      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    5. Re:Pixar is no different than anyone else by RatBastard · · Score: 3, Insightful
      But Pixar's kids' films bring parents into the cinema too.

      And that does not diminish their quality in any way. I'm an adult with no children and I go to every Pixar film as soon as it comes out. They are among the best written movies being made today in America.

      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
  25. Re:The Incredibles Soundtrack vs Die Another Day by AceCaseOR · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.
  26. Re:What the??? by Mateito · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  27. Oooh! OOOH! by Hot+Soup+LD · · Score: 3, Funny

    Quick! Log on to City of Heroes and reserve their names! I already got xxMr.Inviinciibaalxx! OMFG!

    --
    Hot Soup - Lethal Doses
  28. Re:Quicktime? iTunes? by mosschops · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm going to wait until the trailer is in a video format that doesn't require me to run bloated software, before I see it.

    My dear Cinderella, you shall go to the ball.

  29. Re:What the??? by multimed · · Score: 3, Insightful
    and then Pixar will go with somebody who gives them more than 10% of the takings. Pixar weren't looking to "screw" Disney, just be paid a fair price for what they are now worth in the market.

    I don't know about that--you can't tell me Jobs hasn't gotten a fair amount of pleasure over having Michael Eisner over a barrel. I mean honesty, who on this planet wouldn't enjoy the chance to really put the screws to that guy. Who knows what motivates Steve Jobs these days, but he's clearly in an extremely powerful position right now--with a company full of insanely talented people who are creating movies millions of people just can't seem to find their wallet quick enough to see.

    It will be very interesting to see what happens over the next couple of years.

    --
    Vote Quimby.
  30. Re:The Incredibles Soundtrack vs Die Another Day by goober · · Score: 2, Informative

    I have no idea why they're recycling soundtracks. Maybe that's a starting trend...

    This is a very common practice. Music soundtracks are one of the last things done in movie post-production. (You need a near-final cut of the film before you can score it.) Trailers, which come out months in advance, will use other appropriate music as place holders until then.

  31. Direct Download by kajoob · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here is a direct link to the large trailer. Just right click, save as.

    I don't have itunes so I couldn't get the fullscreen version, someone wanna post that (if it's even possible - fairplay maybe)?

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
  32. Re:The Incredibles Soundtrack vs Die Another Day by cjpez · · Score: 2, Informative

    ... and practically every third trailer ever made uses either Carmina Burana or the Stargate theme. :)

  33. Syndrome = Heat Miser? by Titanium+Orc · · Score: 2, Funny

    Interesting how the super villian Syndrome bears a startling resemblance to Heat Miser from the old christmas claymation show "The Year Without Santa Claus".

    I'm Mister Green Christmas
    I'm Mister Sun
    I'm Mister Heat Blister
    I'm Mister Hundred and One
    They call me Heat Miser,
    What ever I touch
    Starts to melt in my clutch
    I'm too much!

  34. Re:Even better, the incredisize version by G�tz · · Score: 4, Informative

    Oops, that was the old one, the new one is here.

  35. Ahh finally... by Ingolfke · · Score: 3, Funny

    Advertisements posing as Slashdot articles. What's next "Proctor and Gamble release new soap with digital readout in hopes to targetting the unwashed masses."

  36. Isn't this old? by gkelman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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!

  37. Soundtrack: Propellerheads by tbmaddux · · Score: 2, Informative

    I was pleasantly surprised to hear "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" from decksanddrumsandrockandroll, playing in the background of the trailer. This album also has "Take California," used in an iPod commercial, "History Repeating," used in "Something About Mary," and "Spybreak," used of course in the lobby shooting spree of "The Matrix."

    --
    Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?
  38. Re:What the??? by Gumshoe · · Score: 3, Interesting
    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.


    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.
  39. Trailers _always_ crib music by LairBob · · Score: 2, Informative

    That's just standard industry practice (q. 4). By the time an early trailer like this one needs to be ready, the soundtrack's still probably being _composed_. Even "coming next week" trailers often use music that has nothing to do with the actual film. (How many times have you heard the "Carmina Burana" during a trailer?)

  40. Re:Quicktime? iTunes? by khuber · · Score: 2, Informative

    Quicktime isn't a video format. It's just a container for various codecs. The Incredibles trailer is using a Sorenson video codec and a QDesign audio codec.

  41. Re:pixar != disney by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Pixar was never a part of Disney -- Disney just had an agreement to distribute the pictures and take half the profits.

    From their recent annual report:

    Relationship with Disney

    A critical component of our objective to maintain our position as a leading brand in the animated feature film market is to secure strong promotion, marketing and distribution of our films and related products. We believe that Disney is among the leaders in the marketing and distribution of animated feature films and related products and is one of the industry's most widely recognized brand names. We have enjoyed a long relationship with Disney that dates back to 1986, when we entered into a joint technical development effort with Disney that resulted in the Computer Assisted Production System ("CAPS"), a production system owned and used by Disney in some of its two-dimensional cel-based animated feature films. Disney first used CAPS for The Rescuers Down Under and has continued to use it for its subsequent animated feature films, such as The Lion King and Tarzan. In 1992, certain employees of Pixar and Disney were jointly awarded an Academy Award® for Scientific and Engineering Achievement for the development of CAPS.

    In May 1991, we entered into the Feature Film Agreement with Walt Disney Pictures, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Disney, which provided for the development, production and distribution of up to three feature-length motion pictures (the "Feature Film Agreement"). It was pursuant to the Feature Film Agreement that Toy Story was developed, produced and distributed. In 1997, we extended our existing relationship with Disney by entering into the Co-Production Agreement. This agreement generally provides that we will be responsible for the development, pre-production and production of each Picture, while Disney will be responsible for the marketing, promotion, publicity, advertising and distribution of each Picture. The profits from the Pictures are shared equally between Pixar and Disney after Disney recovers a distribution fee and pre-agreed distribution costs. The term of this arrangement continues until the delivery of Cars to Disney, which we expect to occur in mid-2005.

  42. Cliff Claven by Bonewalker · · Score: 4, Funny
    Any studio who uses Cliff in every single one of their movies, and produces multi-billion dollar hits out of those movies, must sure as hell know what they are doing.

    Can you spot Cliff in every feature-length Pixar movie?

    Well you see, Norm, it's like this...A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Now, as we know, excessive intake of alcohol kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. And that, Norm, is why you always feel smarter after a few beers.

    1. Re:Cliff Claven by RatBastard · · Score: 2, Informative
      • A Bug's Life - P.T. Flea
      • Toy Story / Toy Story 2 - Hamm
      • Finding Nemo - School of silvery fish
      • Monster's Inc. - Yeti (Want a snow cone?)
      That's all I can remember.
      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
  43. Re:What the??? by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 2, Informative
    FYI It's not an orphanage, but Great Ormond Street Hospital.

    It has a unique status, that it is specifically named in UK law, and has a perpetual copyright.

    As for Walt, a recent documentary I saw painted him in a very different light to the "uncle Walt" image that was created.

  44. Re:What the??? by Mateito · · Score: 2, Informative

    Point is Toy Story III is 0wn3D by Disney, and unless Pixar make it without Buzz, Woody and anybody appeared in the first episode, Disney can, and will, go it alone.

    Read grandparent.

  45. But they ARE designed/written for adults by snStarter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One of the great things about the Pixar films is their extraordinary reach. They talk to BOTH children and adults - different depth - something for the kids all the time but in the background are stories that resonate with adulthood.

    Pixar understands how to write, how to make wonderful artistic settings, and how to blend those two together.

    I wonder if the folks who find Pixar films the most unsettling might be adolescents who are disturbed by the simultaneous response of both child and adult within themselves.

    I don't miss Pixar films. They have always been worthwhile. And their shorts are pretty darn wonderful also! And they certainly rate as "serious film" even though they have a G rating.

  46. Seen proto-Incredibles; loved it (NO SPOILERS) by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Some months ago, my wife and I were randomly lucky enough to catch a free invite to a test screening of The Incredibles.

    Disclaimer:
    A lot of the CGI work was half done (and parts of the movie were storyboards), so I haven't seen the whole finished thing. So I am not sure how those parts finished up.

    All of that said...

    The pacing even of the half done version was excellent. The plot held together, the characters were thought out and had depth, they developed throughout the film. Pixar knows how to make movies; it's quite something to be watching a scene that's half storyboards still and still feel it's gripping.

    This movie is aimed at both adults and kids. There are child characters, who help save the day, but the adults character development is the main theme of the film in my opinion.

    I liked. I expect the finished product is going to entirely live up to the promise of the half done version I saw.

  47. Uh...are you serious? by bonch · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Finding Nemo was the most adult movie Pixar has made. The mother dies in a scary scene, and all the babies are eaten but one. I remember people gossiping about it online, wondering why they would have such a scary scene in a "kid's movie."

    The whole film is about parenthood. You seriously didn't get that? To a kid, it's a fun flick about colorful fish, but to an adult, it touches on adult emotions as well. I thought Finding Nemo was the most strangely tragic of all their films--the guy loses his wife, all his other kids, and has to raise one all by himsef, and he's freaked out about anything happening to him.

    Toy Story 2 touched on growing older and losing childhood. I mean, come on. Pixar's movies aren't really "geared" toward anybody. They just are what they are. An adult film doesn't mean it has guns, blood, or serious drama. It can just as well be a comedy with a bunch of CG animated fish and still be adult-enjoyable as ever. People who think otherwise are just embarrassed that they watch movies with CG animated fish and want to be cool.

  48. You are a trendy counterculturalist by bonch · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The same reason Brits write "colour" even though it's not pronounced "col-hour." It's how your culture writes it.

    Any person who calls the cultural differences of another society stupid is ignorant. Stop being a trendy counterculturalist.

  49. What about "A Bug's Life"? by mblase · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

  50. Re:What the??? by Monkey+Angst · · Score: 2, Informative
    Point is Toy Story III is 0wn3D by Disney, and unless Pixar make it without Buzz, Woody and anybody appeared in the first episode, Disney can, and will, go it alone.
    I believe they also wouldn't have the rights to the title. So they would have a sequel with a different title and none of the same characters.
    --
    stripShow - Where WordPress meets webcomics
  51. URL of "fullscreen" (640x272) movie file by Michael+A.+Lowry · · Score: 2, Informative

    For those of you who choose not to use iTunes 4.5, and those who wish to save the movie to disk, here is the URL of the "fullscreen" movie file:

    http://movies.apple.com/movies/disney/the_incred ib les/the_incredibles-tlr_ifs.mov

    P. S. The movie is 640x48 pixels in size, but the video track is only 640x272 pixels in size.