ROTTEN TOMATOES: Cannes 2009: The Tomato Report - Up Soars With Cannes Critics Comments

Cannes 2009: The Tomato Report - Up Soars With Cannes Critics

by Joe Utichi | May 13, 2009

Summary

It's opening night tonight in Cannes, as Pixar's latest, Up, receives its world premiere at the Grand Theatre Lumiere -- the main stage, as it were, for all films playing in the main competition - and marks the start of the 2009 Cannes Film Festival. The film screened for press first thing this morning and Rotten Tomatoes was on hand to gauge reactions from critics on the ground. Renowned a studio focussed on quality cinema, every one of Pixar's nine films have received generally exceptional reviews, and all eyes are on Up to see if it could make the tally 10. Fortunately, things seemed to go well as this morning's press screening. Back to Article

(1-68 of 68 posts) | Reply

Sputnik99 writes:
on May 13 2009 09:56 AM

I have to admit, this movie looks kinda weak, but I also said that about Star Trek, and frankly, I'm sick of chewing on my foot. I think I'll raise my expectations for this one and not worry about it.

(Reply to this)

Bob S. writes:
on May 13 2009 10:46 AM

I have faith in Pixar. Of all their movies to date, this one seems the least "kid friendly," but I'm not gonna bet against guys whose worst work received better reviews than most movies can dream of. Pixar has been nothing but awesome, and I will definitely be waiting for UP.

(Reply to this)

whiskeyriver writes:
on May 13 2009 11:10 AM

Hey RottenTomatoes...I think you got your left hand and your right hand mixed up when labeling that first picture. Remember...your watch is on your LEFT hand. Heh heh heh. ;)

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on May 13 2009 12:06 PM

I don't see why this should be anything other than great. There's only one Pixar movie that I found mediocre, and that's "The Incredibles". But hey, last year had "WALL-E" which is their best in my humble opinion, and a year before that they had "Ratatouille", and before that "Cars"! Damn, they're good.

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on May 13 2009 12:12 PM

In reply to this comment (#2473581)
Meh, I didn't like Cars, it was enjoyable I but it's not a "good" pixar movie aka excellent/great.

(Reply to this)

whitey_mcwhite writes:
on May 13 2009 12:22 PM

In reply to this comment (#2473581)
You seriously thought The Incredibles was mediocre?! Are you kidding me? You liked Cars better?! Go watch it again, I hope you don't have the same opinion!

(Reply to this)

JojoTR writes:
on May 13 2009 12:25 PM

In reply to this comment (#2473587)
Cars was weak but still Pixar weak as we all know is fantastic. I don't know why you are walking on Mr. Bird's toes. The Incredibles lived up to its name.

(Reply to this)

Feat747 writes:
on May 13 2009 12:59 PM

All hail the mighty Pixar. There's no comparison between them and the competition(Dreamworks).

(Reply to this)

digitalrelic writes:
on May 13 2009 01:22 PM

How the hell does this seem less 'kids friendly' Crazy adventures all around the world from a house being solely suspended by a ton of balloons? Sounds a lot more kid-friendly than, say, WALL-E. Either way, count me excited.

(Reply to this)

Racer Z writes:
on May 13 2009 01:28 PM

Pixar hasn't fumbled yet. They're always, ALWAYS exploring new avenues of storytelling and UP looks to continue the standard. Dreamworks has yet to equal the mastery that Pixar has made routine. Looking forward to another. :)

(Reply to this)

talan7 writes:
on May 13 2009 01:40 PM

Not one of my nieces or nephews like Wall-E. Yeah, it got a lot of critical acclaim but either Pixar lost track of who they were creating it for or it was created for adults and conservationists not kids. I liked it but I also thought it was boring, where as The Incredibles captured the kid in me and had me grinning from ear to ear. The market proves it. Look at Wall-E grosses below. Pixars latest film its lowest grosser. Still a nice gross nevertheless.

Domestic gross;
Finding Nemo - $864,625,978
The Incredibles - $631,442,092
Ratatouille - $621,416,583
Monsters, Inc. - $525,366,597
Toy Story 2 - $485,015,179
Cars - $461,981,604
A Bug's Life - $363,398,565
Toy Story - $361,958,736
WALL-E - $223,749,872

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on May 13 2009 01:46 PM

In reply to this comment (#2473608)
"The Incredibles" lacked wit, a good message, and John Ratzenberger. (Who was apparentley in it, but I don't remember him.) Look, I've seen "The Incredibles" twice, the first time my reaction was a shrug, then I saw it a few years later and remembered why I shrugged. It's just too boring. It's not terrible, the beginning showed promise, but it was just an action movie about the importance of family, and I just didn't care anymore. 5/10.

As for "Cars", I didn't see that until recently because I didn't really want to watch it, but I forced myself, and the first 15 minutes I said to myself "Man, this stinks. It's just a racing movie." Then he got in that town, and Paul Newman showed up and I found myself loving the characters. Even Larry the Cable Guy's truck, and I hate Larry the Cable Guy! (outside this film.) Plus, the message is a good one, "It's the journey, not the destination." That's better than "Be yourself" or "Stick with your family" because they're soooo familar. 9/10 for "Cars". It was FAR better than "Happy Feet", which was roughly on par with "The Incredibles".

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on May 13 2009 01:49 PM

In reply to this comment (#2473802)
And you're saying "WALL-E" is boring? And I'm the one on trial? "WALL-E" is beautiful, and behind "Spirited Away", one of the best animated movies I've seen this decade. And so what if "WALL-E" didn't make as much cash as "The Incredibles", just remember "The Phantom Menace" made more money than "The Matrix".

(Reply to this)

spiraleye writes:
on May 13 2009 02:33 PM

Hilarious someone thinks Cars is better than The Incredibles. Cars was the closest thing to a Dreamworks movie that Pixar ever came. The Incredibles is one of the best family movies ever made! And one of the best superhero movies ever, as well! Mix in the spy movie elements, the wonderful action sequences, a realistic family dynamic, and you have a great movie. But then again, there's always someone, somewhere who hates on great things.

(Reply to this)

Alex Vo writes:
on May 13 2009 02:39 PM

In reply to this comment (#2473802)
Your list is false. The gross you have for Wall-E is domestic, while all the other movie grosses are worldwide. Wall-E's worldwide gross was $534,149,703, which would place it as 4th highest grossing Pixar movie overall.

(Reply to this)

SuckitBaby writes:
on May 13 2009 03:21 PM

Thanks to Alex and Jokerboy for echoing my sentiments exactly!
Cars was boring and probably Pixars worst film (which isnt really a bad thing). Wall*E was the exact opposite (ok, maybe I coulda done without seeing clips from Hello Dolly over and over again).
And if you're gonna put up stats or numbers talan7, make sure you get the straight first!

(Reply to this)

rebranded001 writes:
on May 13 2009 04:05 PM

Up looks like shi t and I hope it goes rotten and manages to cram all this Pixar love right down fanboy throats out there.

The only reason that Pixar and Disney merged was the monetary ability to buy off every critic that wanted to take a bite.

And the mindless gutless public follows in lockstep as their Pied Piper critics tell them what movies to like and have led them to Pixar's stable of crap time and again.

(Reply to this)

inversecoma writes:
on May 13 2009 04:12 PM

In reply to this comment (#2473836)
talan, you're only showing the domestic results from WALL-E. Worldwide WALL_E grossed $534,767,889, which isn't bad at all considering it had extremely tough competition from Kung-Fu Panda. And you also left A Bug's Life off of your list. Try to show the real numbers the next time you try to make a point.

(Reply to this)

inversecoma writes:
on May 13 2009 04:12 PM

In reply to this comment (#2473836)
oh sorry you didnt leave a bugs life off.

(Reply to this)

Nick H. writes:
on May 13 2009 04:20 PM

I saw a prerelease screening at Pixar last Saturday-wonderful, noncloyingly sentimental and laugh out loud funny. Great short-"Partly Cloudly" preceded film- don't miss it. The film spans all your emotions and has many scenes like Wall-E that evoke beautifully emotional responses without one word of dialoque. The music,boy, the old man, and all those dogs were terrific. I only wish my dog would get one of those collars. It will be a huge hit even though some scenes may make you cry.

(Reply to this)

ZigBallistic writes:
on May 13 2009 04:28 PM

In reply to this comment (#2474041)
You are entitled to your opinion but don't presume to think everyone watches their movies cause people listen to "bought off critics", that statement is a largely ignorant one and shows your lack of intelligence regarding the art of film.

Pixar mostly makes fantastic movies and you are pretty much in the minority about hating them.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on May 13 2009 04:29 PM

I liked both The Incredibles and Cars for different reasons. I thought Incredibles was more exciting and entertaining and I loved the family first feel and I liked Cars because it appealed to my sentimental side. Anybody who's ever driven a classic car into the Western US I think would have trouble not liking that movie and I agree with Ledawg on that point loved that point in the movie where Sally the girl car says "Cars didn't used to drive on it to make good time, they drove to have a good time" It kinda made me well up a bit. Of course having Paul Newman in your movie never hurts either.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on May 13 2009 04:30 PM

As for UP, I've never been terribly impressed with Pixar movies based on their trailers, but they always deliver in the theater. More films would probably be better served if that was true for them.

(Reply to this)

Fizzy P. writes:
on May 13 2009 04:39 PM

It's obvious that all Pixar films are masterpieces, but what so many members of the audience don't understand is the message in each film. Like ledawg explained, Cars may have seemed like a dry movie to some, but the message, "It's the journey, not the destination," can change the entire mood of a story when thought about while watching. To me, Cars was a huge succcess, maybe not in the box-office, but Cars merchandise has sky-rocketed in the past years and is still making money. Also, how would Cars be Pixar's worst film, as few comments have said, if it will be only the second Pixar movie to have a sequal, and will have it's very own 12-acre section committed to the movie in Disneys California Adventure? The merchandise, Cars 2, and Carsland. They are all strong evidence proving that Cars was by far an outstanding success, and will store a promising future for Disney and Pixar.

(Reply to this)

steve a. writes:
on May 13 2009 05:02 PM

In reply to this comment (#2474041)
You are not John B. You are Armond White.

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on May 13 2009 05:46 PM

In reply to this comment (#2474041)
Oh shut up Johnny b.

(Reply to this)

ARTaylor writes:
on May 13 2009 05:57 PM

I saw the first 40 minutes at WonderCon. What I saw was fantastic. But...

"Even the dissenting voices found it hard to be overly critical of a solid, family film. Kaleem Aftab, who will review for The Independent, told us after the screening that he generally liked the film. 'It had a fantastic start but a slightly disappointing ending. It's typical of Pixar -- nostalgia falls into sentimentality. [But] the first 50 minutes are great.'"

That's the same problem I had with Wall-E. The first half was spectacular, but all the stuff on the ship didn't live up to that. Certainly everything about it looks amazing so I'll go in hoping for the best.

(Reply to this)

TheCaptain of TeamLoyalty writes:
on May 13 2009 06:23 PM

Is it just me but i thought that A Bugs Life was the worst Pixar movie and even that was still 1000000 times better than any DreamWorks movies.

(Reply to this)

Nathanael writes:
on May 13 2009 09:47 PM

i work at a cinema in Australia, and generally audiences liked Kung Fu Panda, and Madagascar 2 better than Wall-E, and both made more money in Australia than Wall-E. Parents told me as they walked out that their kids at points thought it was a bit boring, and even the parents said they didnt like it as much as previous Pixar movies. So while it may be a very good movie in the eyes of critics, that doesnt mean that the public felt the same way about it. i would say that Wall-E is a good movie, but for a kids movie Kung Fu Panda was better. Ask almost any kid you know and also many adults, and they will tell you that.

this is just what i have observed, and i am sure that there are many people who love Wall-E. But i think the general public did like Kung Fu Panda better.

(Reply to this)

knowingtoast85 writes:
on May 13 2009 09:55 PM

Pixar teaser trailers, curiously enough, have a habit of being TERRIBLE in my opinion. Cars' teaser followed a bumblebee into the windshield of 'Mater, who coughed. Ratatouille's had Remy talking to us about how much he wanted to cook, and had some lame banter with his offscreen dad. WALL*E's sneak peek trailer was literally about a lunch.

And Up's teaser bored the hell out of me. The addition of Doug the Dog to the previews couldn't come soon enough, and by now I've learned my lesson not to ever count Pixar out on some bad promo material, not when they've amassed the greatest batting record in the history of film.

(Reply to this)

Mike B. writes:
on May 13 2009 10:08 PM

In reply to this comment (#2474041)
It's not 'Pixar fanboys' who praise Pixar movies. It's practically everyone. Think what you want, but films do not get those kind of grosses *and* tomato meters again and again simply by paying off critics. If that were possible, don't you think 20th century Fox could manage to crank up the tomato meters on a couple of their turds? I suppose it's far easier to figure out what's popular and hate on it than it is to actually learn something about movies and base your appreciation of movies on something that actually has to do with movies instead of just their popularity.

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on May 13 2009 10:13 PM

I'll say it. Pixar is better than Dreamworks. That being said "Kung Fu Panda" and "Shrek" are great movies, that are Pixar level of quality. And in "The Incredibles" case, better. Sure Dreamworks gave us "Shark Tale" (ugh)and "Bee Movie" (ugh-er), but most of their stuff is really good, with, as I mentioned "Panda" and "Shrek" being great. "Shrek 2", "Antz", "Chicken Run", good stuff people. So, you can say Pixar is better (because it's true), but no bashing Dreamworks, seriously.

(Reply to this)

Almost.Famous writes:
on May 13 2009 10:20 PM

In reply to this comment (#2474275)
Don't spread Armond White's fame please. He just wants attention and you're giving him it.

(Reply to this)

Nathanael writes:
on May 13 2009 10:33 PM

mike b, i agree that its a good movie. but surely even the money made can show that Kung Fu Panda was better received by the general public all over the world, than Wall- E. Kung Fu Panda made just over $630 million worldwide, compared to Wall- E, which made just over $530 million worldwide, which is a big difference. both made tons of money so both were obviously liked by lots of people, but i still believe that Kung Fu Panda was liked more by the general public, and surely the money that the two made backs up this claim. and certainly in my cinema, Kung Fu Panda was a lot busier than Wall- E. Having said all this, i still believe Pixar has a much stronger track record than Dreamworks, but Dreamworks is certainly capable of making great movies, like Kung Fu Panda.

(Reply to this)

askingseven writes:
on May 13 2009 10:51 PM

Alex,

Thank you for calling Talan out on that misleading info. That was some bull****.

Pixar is one of the most reliably excellent studios producing films today. They keep it real by producing high-quality adult fare like Wall-E, but they also know how to cater to their base as evidenced by the upcoming Toy Story 3 and Cars 2. Although their "base" should be everyone at this point, IMHO. It's sad that anyone would want Pixar to falter. Why would you want any studio to produce a crappy movie? Just sit back and enjoy that fact that some people still enjoy their work, and believe in producing a high-quality product. Cars is the weakest of all the Pixar films so far, but I still enjoyed it in the theater, and I own it and watch it from time to time. All this talk about the quality of The Incredibles is ridiculous. The Incredibles was a huge step forward for animation as a medium, Pixar as a company, and the film industry as a whole. Anyone who says that The Incredibles was not a good film is just wrong. It's not even a subjective argument at this point.

As far as Up goes, I was skeptical at first, but now I'm fully on the bandwagon. Up has become one of my most anticipated movies of the year. I'm eagerly looking forward to it release, and I was happy to see that it got a warm reception in Cannes. I hope it's like Wall-E. Maybe not the most kid-friendly, but wonderful and touching nonetheless. Mostly I hope to see excellent Pixar films for years to come.

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on May 13 2009 11:00 PM

In reply to this comment (#2474554)
Well excuuuuuuse me for saying that "The Incredibles" is less than average.

(Reply to this)

Bob S. writes:
on May 13 2009 11:36 PM

I thought CARS was the weakest Pixar film (still good), but had a story that felt like it'd been done before without the infusion of anything new. That said, it's still very good, but I don't think it's up to snuff with the rest of Pixar's pantheon - visually, I found it the most boring of them all. As for the reason that it is the only Pixar movie to get a sequel (apart from TOY STORY), it is distinctly *because* of the merchandising - nothing else. It was not the biggest or most successful of the movies, but it sold a lot of toys and blankets, and the movie business is unfortunately about money first and quality second.

THE INCREDIBLES took a familiar theme and addressed it in a unique way. Infinitely superior to drivel like FANTASTIC FOUR and its abhorrent sequel. Pixar's superhero family has real chemistry together, and manage to mix humor and action in a way that the FF films never could. I really did love WALL-E, though - the fact that the main robots lacked faces, had barely defined eyes, and minimalist limbs didn't stop the Pixar animators from imbuing the characters with life and didn't stop them from emoting. It is one of the greatest accomplishments in animation that I've ever seen. Michael Bay, take note - you could have left Optimus Prime's faceplate on and still let a robot convey emotion.

I say that UP is less kid-friendly than other Pixar movies because it's about an old man at the end of his life, pining for his deceased wife. There are some very adult themes involved, as opposed to the whimsical nature of a rat being a chef, or a cute robot, where the underlying themes are more appeasing to children. I am wondering if they're going to make Carl die in the end. There's a lot of stuff that will appeal to children, like the talking dogs, but at its core, the central theme isn't something that would appeal to a kid. I believe, though, that the tradeoff will result in a film that is going to have the ability to connect with entire families, from grandparents to kids. If there's anyone out there that makes true family entertainment the way that Pixar does, I don't know who it is.

(Reply to this)

Bob S. writes:
on May 14 2009 12:15 AM

In reply to this comment (#2474543)
Well, the problem is that for every gem like KUNG FU PANDA, there's middling fare like MADAGASCAR 2. SHREK is still a worthwhile film, but SHREK 2 is horribly dated - those pop culture references make the movie less relevant now than when it was raking in 400 mil at the box office. And SHREK THE THIRD was, well, not very good. Am I excited about KUNG FU PANDA 2? Sure. But am I looking forward to SHREK GOES FOURTH? Not really. The track record is 40% good/60% bad (I'm being generous) for Dreamworks, and 100% good for Pixar. Dreamworks deserves a lot of the criticism lobbed at it, especially when compared to Pixar, whose works are by and large a lock. That consistency alone deserves respect.

(Reply to this)

cinemascribe writes:
on May 14 2009 12:29 AM

I have to agree with ledawg about "The Incredibles". While I enjoyed the film (it certainly wasn't a bad movie), I just didn't find it as entertaining as I had expected. Personally, I think "Finding Nemo" and "Wall-E" are the best films I've seen come from Pixar to date, but that's just my own opinion.

As to the impending "Up"? They had me at "Squirrel!"

(Reply to this)

tfortier writes:
on May 14 2009 01:51 AM

Who said Pixar make movie for the kids? I really dont expect my kids to get all the script subtilities when watching a Pixar flick. Its funny to see how different people are on this board. I am more on the sophisticate edge myself, prefering a good Ozu over the last blockbuster but I can appreciate a nice slice of cheesy flicks when I feel for it.

The incredibles look like flying over the heads of some people here... maybe they just dont have enough life experience or genetic baggage. Sad indeed. Wall-E was excellent too, very sensible and one should not expect the kids to understand most of it.

As for Dreamwork, Kung-fu panda had very good qualities and deserve the good ranking it got on rottentomatoes. Its not subtil subtil but the script and comedy acts are fine. I guess it all depend on the producers and director.

(Reply to this)

Warheart1188 writes:
on May 14 2009 05:35 AM

Can't wait for this one in 3D! Pixar has yet to disappoint! Well, "Cars" wasn't too great...

(Reply to this)

martinscorsese25 writes:
on May 14 2009 05:42 AM

good, now that Pixar's UP is confirmed great, let's now stasrt preparing for 'Basterds'

(Reply to this)

Andrew K. writes:
on May 14 2009 06:22 AM

Cars was the weakest from pixar...but EVERYTHING else has been amazing. Especially Wall-E! that was just amazing...loved it!

can't wait for UP!

(Reply to this)

JojoTR writes:
on May 14 2009 06:48 AM

In reply to this comment (#2473802)
Yeah...that's not right.

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on May 14 2009 09:53 AM

In reply to this comment (#2474615)
Okay, I'll agree that "The Incredibles" was far better than the Fantastic Four movies. But what does that say? Not much. It's a homage to the far superior FF comics, and it worked for most (including Stan Lee, who loves "The Incredibles"), but not me. Like I said, not bad, not good, it's just fair to mediocre.

(Reply to this)

mouse_clicker writes:
on May 14 2009 11:07 AM

In reply to this comment (#2473836)
The Incredibles lacked a good message? You mean besides that really obvious message that at one point Syndrome actually says aloud? That once everyone is special, no one will be? The point of The Incredibles was recognizing your strengths and not trying to hide them.

You can break down the family unit in it, too, and look at how the roles are subverted. Bob is the father and fathers are supposed to be strong and providing, which is why his super power is super strength. And yet it's his moment of weakness that endangers the family and gives Syndrome his chance, and then his ability to adapt and work with others that helps save everyone in the end. Helen is the mother and mothers are supposed to be flexible and able to meet anyone's needs, which is why her super power is elasticity and stretchiness. And yet it's her committed stance to her beliefs and her strength that set into motion Mr. Incredible's rescue. Violett is a teenage girl, often seen as insecure and unsure of themselves, which is why her super powers are invisibility, so she can disappear from the world, and force fields, so she can block herself off from everyone. But it's her ability to stand her ground and be visible and imposing that helps out the rescue later on. Dash is a small boy, extremely energetic and always wanting to move ahead, which is why his super power is super speed. But it's his ability to calm down and use his powers in a more reserved, refined way that also aids in the rescue attempt. And finally Jack-Jack is a baby, who represents unlimited potential and unknown possibilities, which is why he has so many super powers that no one even knew existed. And it was that unrecognized potential and ability that ultimately saved the day at the end. And then Syndrome! He has no physical super powers, but he has incredible creativity and incredible resolve and determination. His downfall was letting himself believe that he was less of a person just because his abilities weren't so obvious. And the scene in the jungle when the family works together for the first time, at once banishing their issues as a family as well as physically realizing their powers, and then combine to defeat Syndrome.

So, whatever, say you don't like the movie, but do NOT so it didn't have a message. It and Ratatouille probably have the strongest, most pronounced messages of any Pixar films.

(Reply to this)

mouse_clicker writes:
on May 14 2009 11:12 AM

In reply to this comment (#2475458)
Also, I found the actual feel of The Incredibles to be much more an homage to James Bond films. Just because you have a group of super heroes doesn't make it The Fantastic Four (which I've always found to be among Marvel's weakest comic properties).

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on May 14 2009 11:59 AM

In reply to this comment (#2475607)
You say the FF are weak, and I get attacked? C'mon.

(Reply to this)

megelizabeth13 writes:
on May 14 2009 12:27 PM

In response to the user who said The Incredibles is boring. Well you're entitled to your opinion. This is my opinion: the only thing dry about the incredibles was its sense of humor. It was the most grown up movie of them all. And I do have to recall you on one matter. How could there not have been a moral to the movie? Did you not understand the criticism made on the American Dream? What about the importance of family?

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on May 14 2009 01:15 PM

In reply to this comment (#2475703)
In fairness, you're more level headed than the other people who have adressed me. Now I saw the critism of the American Dream at first, before they got to that island and it just became an action flick. And the importance of family is overdone, in my opinion.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on May 14 2009 01:31 PM

your Mom is overdone. :)

(Reply to this)

pughtastic writes:
on May 14 2009 01:37 PM

I was fortunate enough to see an early screening of Up and while it is not Pixar's best, it is a very good movie. Like Wall-e, the first half hour of setup is easily the best part of the movie.

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on May 14 2009 01:53 PM

In reply to this comment (#2475819)
LOL!

(Reply to this)

Sparr0wni writes:
on May 14 2009 06:35 PM

In reply to this comment (#2473802)
The only reason that Wall-E did worse at the box office was because of the film that came before it, Ratatouille. Now I well NEVER say that Pixar can't make a great film, because well...I work for Disney...plus all their movies ARE fantastic. But I also worked in a movie theatre at the time Ratatouille came out. Many people came out bored from that movie while I found it to be a masterpiece. I think that movie can lend itself to the reason that Wall-E did so poorly in the box office. Look at the other titles and how much they made, they all made more and more money because the movie before it was so good and people were really loving Pixar. Ratatouille made $620 million.....and Wall-E only made $200mil? I think it's a trend...not the movie. People realized that Wall-E was such an amazing movie afterwards which I think will bring tons of people to see UP.

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on May 14 2009 07:08 PM

In reply to this comment (#2476398)
A lot came out bored? Huh?

(Reply to this)

mouse_clicker writes:
on May 14 2009 11:28 PM

In reply to this comment (#2475669)
I know it's really easy to pick out just a single, unrelated comment from my post and make a weak reply, but I was kind of hoping you'd write more. =/

(Reply to this)

mouse_clicker writes:
on May 14 2009 11:34 PM

In reply to this comment (#2476398)
I think there are a few reasons for that. Ratatouille was a lot more dialogue heavy than most animated movies, especially Pixar movies. Not that I have a problem with that (Ratatouille was my favorite Pixar movie before WALL-E), but I can understand where, when animation is still viewed as primarily aimed at kids, a movie with less visual action and the more adult themes of discovering your life's purpose and not submitting to outside pressure would put a few people off to the studio.

On the other hand, WALL-E has much LESS dialogue than the typical modern animated movie (although I think it's very much in line with Disney's own theatrical cartoons from decades past), and that was a bit too much of a swing in the other direction, leaving many kids with little to keep them interested, especially when you add in abstract ideas like artificial beings feeling human emotions.

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on May 15 2009 09:03 AM

In reply to this comment (#2476720)
Hey, don't say controversial things! *Says ledawg, the one who didn't like "The Incredibles"*

(Reply to this)

Bob S. writes:
on May 15 2009 10:57 AM

In reply to this comment (#2475607)
I can't say that I agree with the James Bond homage. There are certain aspects that are similar to old Bond tropes (the villain with the volcano lair, the secretive nature of the mission, the uniformed flunkies, etc.). However, the main protagonist has super powers, whereas in this, the villain is the only gadget-driven character. Bond is a loner, rarely working with other double O's, or occasionally receiving assistance from the bumbling CIA. One of the most fundamental aspects of this movie is the importance of the family and how necessary it is for them to work together to save the day. The main hero cannot do it on his own, which is contrary to the core of Bond: one man saves the world and gets all the women. However, the family theme is the central one in Fantastic Four, and Dr. Doom has the *exact same* elements that are similar in nature to the aforementioned Bond tropes. Bond is a machismo-driven fantasy, and THE INCREDIBLES is quite nearly the opposite, featuring family values. Bob starts out really apathetic towards his family, but by the end, he's being a good dad. The very notion of Bond-style womanizing is anathema to Bob and Helen.

Your observations about the powers manifesting themselves as roles within the family is astute - however, the more obvious point to be made is that their powers are quite nearly a shuffling of those of the Fantastic Four. Bob gets Thing's super strength, Helen gets Reed's stretchiness, Violet gets Susan's invisibility and force fields, and though Dash doesn't get Johnny's outward fiery appearance, he does get the same hothead personality that acts without thinking. That shuffling is brilliant, IMO, and it works so well on a lot of levels - particularly in the way that you described.

Either way: PIXAR, MAKE THE INCREDIBLES 2, STARTING OFF WITH A BATTLE AGAINST THE UNDERMINER!!!!!

(Reply to this)

mouse_clicker writes:
on May 15 2009 02:05 PM

In reply to this comment (#2477479)
Or, if you want, you could say The Thing gets Superman's super strength and Mr. Fantastic gets Plastic Man's and Elongated Man's stretchiness. The world of comic book super heroes has very little originality in concept, its all in the novel ways they use old ideas, which I think is what both Fantastic Four and The Incredibles have done.

Oddly enough, no one says Dash is a ripoff of the Flash, or Syndrome is a ripoff of any number of gadget laden super heroes and villains. It's always just the F4 thing that pops up.

I like your points about its dissimilarities to Bond, but I'd still say that overall action-based plot (not the themes and ideas) is more inspired by Bond, and is set up on a scene-to-scene basis more like a Bond movie, with the mysterious villain, the secret lair, the infiltration, the battling out through the minions, the hero getting captured and then explained the devious plot, etc. It's certainly not as deep a connection as the obvious, and primary, comic book connection, but I still think it's pretty pronounced.

(Reply to this)

Bob S. writes:
on May 15 2009 02:57 PM

In reply to this comment (#2477833)
Your argument would hold a little more water if THE INCREDIBLES didn't lift quite so literally in the cases of Violet and Mrs. Parr. Additionally, the reason that the Fantastic Four keep coming up is because they're a superhero family - just as we see here. It's tough to argue the overall similarity when the specific powers are added. If one of them had Frozone's powers, for example, the translation wouldn't be nearly as literal. But Bird et al. knew what they were doing here, practically inviting that comparison.

The first act of the movie is radically different from Bond - there's a lot of backstory and exposition that occurs, and we get the distinct impression of the out-of-shape fighter who has his spark re-ignited; the superhero who is still righteous in his menial job, trying to help out victims instead of swindling them as his insurance company wants him to. The second and third acts, admittedly, do follow some of the Bond structure, but again, the infiltration and such is hardly unique to Bond movies themselves. The idea of a mask killer appears in comics such as Watchmen. The Bond film invariably has a female interest introduced early, and a second one who is vital to the unraveling of the villain's plot. Those are key elements to Bond exposition, and while we do get to see a femme fatale here, in the employ of Syndrome, and implicitly, perhaps, his lover, it's turned on its head. Bob doesn't sleep with her to get her on his side - she just realizes what a jerk Syndrome is and understands that he doesn't care for her, that she's just a minion that he's willing to sacrifice like his dozens of others. Similarly, the suspected adultery angle is played up for Helen, and when it collapses, it's a moment that makes the viewer smile. Bond is a bad guy who's trying to be good; this is a good guy who can't dream of being bad. Although thematic, it's a pretty fundamental difference between the plot structures. Additionally, the ideas of the base infiltration and such are again driven by family, and as a team effort, which alters the narrative structure. We're shifting between what's going on with Dash and Violet, Bob's imprisonment, and Helen's secretive investigation, splitting what is normally one man's arc into several.

(Reply to this)

CatalystSaint47 writes:
on May 15 2009 04:58 PM

hey talon, check your sources, because your list is wrong.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on May 16 2009 06:41 PM

I think Dash is more a ripoff of Quicksilver. he's not as fast as the flash and has the same hairdo. Of course Quicksilver is a poor man's Flash, so he's being ripped off by proxy. Anybody hear when we're going to get a Flash movie. For my money to make the most of it it's gotta be a Wally West Flash. Don't get me wrong I love Barry, Bart and Jay, but for me Wally was always the cut above as a character.

(Reply to this)

Bob S. writes:
on May 16 2009 10:42 PM

In reply to this comment (#2479968)
Heh, well I'd like to see a Flash movie, but I don't know if he's strong enough to carry his own movie. Characters like the Hulk haven't yet been able to show that they are going to draw audiences in the numbers that studios like to see, so I think a guy like Flash is definitely on hold for his own movie. More likely, we'll see him in an ensemble movie of the Justice League, where I'd love it he was like the cartoon version of himself. I think right now DC's priorities are Martin Campbell's Green Lantern movie and finding out how to reboot Superman. As soon as Nolan finishes up INCEPTION, they're going to do everything possible to get him to come back to direct the follow up to TDK, of course.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on May 17 2009 08:12 AM

Oh I don't know I think Flash has enough character to carry his own film. Just focus on his comedic elements and differences from other superheroes i.e. the Flash isn't just the guy who beats up the bad guy and leaves cleanup to everyone else. He actually is a part of the community besides stopping supervillains and natural disasters he helps guys get to work when they're late, clears traffic for people trying to get to the hospital and is essentially the polar opposite of Batman. I Think Iron Man and Superman have shown us it's not necessarily the characters popularity alone which makes a film successful. Any of these characters can be a successful franchise if the studio's care enough to make a quality movie that people can relate to.

(Reply to this)

Bob S. writes:
on May 17 2009 06:03 PM

In reply to this comment (#2481004)
He might be able to carry his own movie, but playing up his comedic elements while still taking the material seriously is a hard act to pull off. IRON MAN had comedic elements, but the writers, actors, and director still took the core story seriously, which is key. Also, I'm not sure who the main villain would be for his movie - Gorilla Grod would just invite laughter and make taking the movie seriously all but impossible. Professor Zoom? Zoom? Reverse Flash?

(Reply to this)

bijio writes:
on May 18 2009 03:43 PM

wow John B., did you lose your janitorial post at Pixar or something? Take a valium or something, Yeeesh.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on May 18 2009 06:33 PM

In reply to this comment (#2482070)
Could use Mirror Master, Capt Boomerang, Capt Cold. I think the movie would probably be best served with multiple villains with The Flash in a save the city overrun by rogues scenerio. I think with a character like the flash you have a bit more leeway to use comedy since that's part of his character. That's one thing I was really disappointed with in the Spiderman films. His jokes were so lame and he wasn't witty or funny in the way he is in the comics. I really thought Sam Raimi would have done that aspect justice, but I don't think Tobie could pull it off. His most obvious shortcoming as Peter Parker for me. Anyway back to Flash. Utilize the comedic elements then finish it off with the big emotional Flash almost kills himself to save the city he loves finale to add gravitas and you've got yourself a kickass summer blockbuster that can go a long way to proving WB can do fun movies as well as dark, gritty stuff.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Cannes Film Festival 2009

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links