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!
... 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.
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?
> I thought that Pixar split from the Disney
.. 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.
> 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.
Norman Cook's Ode to Sl
Apparently, this movie was released three days ago.
Why are we just hearing about it now?
> 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.
Norman Cook's Ode to Sl
...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.
s'wut i sed.
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