Pixar's New Movie: Wall- E

bookmosaic · Post by **bookmosaic** » Jul Wed 02, 2008 6:58 am

My husband and I saw it 3 times. Well, he is in the CGI field and planned on seeing it twice, anyway. I wanted to eat out on Sunday and, well, hey the restaurant was so close to the theater. This is the best movie I have watched this year. The first half is like a silent movie. The story is told perfectly through Wall e's movements and huge panoramic shots. I am marveled by Pixar's CGI progression in every one of their movies. In this movie they made piles of trash a thing of beauty. And I have never fallen in love with a character faster than I did with this earnest little robot.

bamato · Post by **bamato** » Jul Wed 02, 2008 7:58 am

Saw it last night, what an awesome movie!! I loved all the satire they used to deomstrate certrain things

And wall e was adorable and funny. I plan to see it again

:):)

GreenFairy · Post by **GreenFairy** » Jul Wed 02, 2008 3:08 pm

I loved this movie. It's amazing how many emotions are evoked because of this little robot. Especially since most of the movie has no dialogue. The creators did a great job!

disneydreamer58 · Post by **disneydreamer58** » Jul Wed 02, 2008 3:19 pm

Captain Schnemo wrote:I called Pixar (510.922.3000) and left messages for Lasseter and Stanton (the film's director), so hopefully someone checks those and will do something about it.

I hope they listen to your message and take it to heart and mostly act upon it.

I also totally agree with you about how refreshing it was not having jokes about bodily functions, etc in the movie!! A nice change!

wxwiz · Post by **wxwiz** » Jul Thu 03, 2008 11:00 pm

Finally saw it today. I liked it. It was a different kind of Pixar movie. I loved the animation and graphics which were top notch and seemed so life like. Although it was funny it proved you don't have to have a lot of dialogue for it to be that way. It did what movies are supposed to do (unlike some of the movies today where it is all about special effects) it made you feel the character and think. My only complaint is it seemed to be a little bit too long. But I give it 3 to 3 1/2 stars.

JWG · Post by **JWG** » Jul Sat 05, 2008 10:47 pm

I'm not a huge CGI fan, I miss the art of the hand drawn animation and getting to watch animator's do their work at MGM/DHS. I vividly remember watching animators work on Tarzan during my 1993 visit.

Anyway, that being said, I thought the CGI in this movie was amazingly real looking. Probably their best effort other than maybe Sully in Monsters Inc.

Sharonofwindham · Post by **Sharonofwindham** » Jul Sun 06, 2008 4:00 pm

I love Disney/Pixar movies with the exception of Cars, and I probably didn't give it a chance because I am not a Nascar fan. Wall-E is just an amazing film in every way! Pixar has out done themselves this time!! Incredible visuals, sound, story, and message, ending with a beautiful piece of music written and performed by none other than the amazing Peter Gabriel!! Thanks Disney/Pixar for a wonderful experience, one that I may have to relive before Wall-E exits the big screen

DisBeamer · Post by **DisBeamer** » Jul Mon 07, 2008 10:27 am

Definitely Pixar's best in a while. The story was really strong and well-executed. My only issue with it was kind of a big one (to me), considering Pixar prides themselves on top-notch animation. The fact they put 'real' human actors in alongside the CG... just incredibly lazy. I was really shocked by that. As great as their animation is, putting in real people beside the CG humans was just a terrible choice. No matter how 'life like' their stuff looks, it really breaks the illusion of reality they're creating by tossing a real person in there.

I'm more the 'writer' in my group of friends, so I give Wall*E the edge over Ratatouille - my past favorite - in terms of story but my 'artist' friend was beside herself for most of the movie because of that particular choice of theirs.

Still, an excellent film.

DIAC1987 · Post by **DIAC1987** » Jul Mon 07, 2008 3:29 pm

DisBeamer wrote:Definitely Pixar's best in a while. The story was really strong and well-executed. My only issue with it was kind of a big one (to me), considering Pixar prides themselves on top-notch animation. The fact they put 'real' human actors in alongside the CG... just incredibly lazy. I was really shocked by that. As great as their animation is, putting in real people beside the CG humans was just a terrible choice. No matter how 'life like' their stuff looks, it really breaks the illusion of reality they're creating by tossing a real person in there.

I'm more the 'writer' in my group of friends, so I give Wall*E the edge over Ratatouille - my past favorite - in terms of story but my 'artist' friend was beside herself for most of the movie because of that particular choice of theirs.

Still, an excellent film.

I personally wouldn't call it lazyness as much as it was an artistic choice. Considering that Pixar is more detail-heavy than any other animation studio this past century, I am sure they were trying to deliver a message by placing a human talking in the year 2100ish next to the humans of 2700ish.

Captain Schnemo · Post by **Captain Schnemo** » Jul Mon 07, 2008 5:37 pm

I was about to say the same thing, DIAC. Considering these guys take the time to animate dust in a sunbeam, I don't think laziness is the cause at all.

When I first saw that newspaper at the beginning of the movie, I thought "Huh, that looks just like Fred Willard! I wonder if someone who works there just likes him and put that in as a gag."

It didn't bother me at all, and it made it seem like the messages from the past were really from us to this now alien (but familiar) culture.

In general, I like that Pixar is still making cartoony humans, although I remember thinking the humans were not so great in Toy Story the first time I saw it. In retrospect, I think it's the right choice, since most "realistic" CGI characters still look like puppets who are dead inside. I'm sure this will all improve in time, although I'm not sure that's a good thing.

I liked Wall-E a lot, but when I think of the whole experience, I think Ratatouille is a richer film. I do like that Pixar is going out of its way to make different kinds of films, and they aren't falling into any sort of princess/hero rut. They're really trying to make art, as opposed to whatever that thing the Shrek movies is.

I guess Lasseter is their popcorn movie guy, but it's great that others have the freedom to experiment.

Sleeping Beauty 5 · Post by **Sleeping Beauty 5** » Jul Mon 07, 2008 6:08 pm

I saw Wall-E last night and it was great! I loved the story so much that I cried at the end it was so endearing. I strongly recommend, A+ Pixar!

DisBeamer · Post by **DisBeamer** » Jul Mon 07, 2008 6:47 pm

DIAC1987 wrote:I personally wouldn't call it lazyness as much as it was an artistic choice. Considering that Pixar is more detail-heavy than any other animation studio this past century, I am sure they were trying to deliver a message by placing a human talking in the year 2100ish next to the humans of 2700ish.

I can buy that as what they were going for (also referencing Schnemo's familiar-but-alien culture idea), but I don't see any reason they couldn't have animated that present culture (er, our present culture) guy in addition to the 700-years-from-now people. The future human characters were all basically one frame design. I know in the past Pixar has been limited budget-wise in how many character frame types they're allowed to use, but in this case I don't see why one set wasn't 'future people' and one wasn't 'message from the past guy'. They certainly have the talent to have made the two visually distinct without having to resort to using a live actor.

That said, maybe it was a budget issue rather than out and out laziness (and I admit I was perhaps being glib in the original assessment), but I still think it was a surprisingly poor choice on their part. In trying to create a believable CG universe with cartoony humans (which I liked) that we're supposed to buy as real - albeit futuristic - I find the addition of a live actor really disruptive to the whole idea 'suspension of disbelief'.

It didn't, like, ruin the movie for me or anything, but since we know what they're capable of I find it hard to give them a pass on that particular move as an 'artistic choice'. They still get props for the rest of it.

Captain Schnemo · Post by **Captain Schnemo** » Jul Tue 08, 2008 2:34 am

I don't think it was an issue of budget either. I really think it was just them trying something new. It takes them years to make these movies and I've seen the director talk about how they work over every single detail again and again until it all works out (much different from the classic Walt or Miyazaki style). It could hardly have taken much time (relatively speaking) to animate the few live action scenes.

I can see disagreeing with the choice, but I'd hesitate to apply any sinister rationale to it.

DisBeamer · Post by **DisBeamer** » Jul Tue 08, 2008 1:33 pm

True; it's possible I'm looking for another place to lay the blame because the Happy Feet-ian decision was such a let down to me. Maybe they'll clarify the thought process that went into it when the dvd comes out. They've been good about going into detail like that on past ones (the Incredibles additional stuff was particularly thorough). I'll be interested to see what they have to say.

packwingfn · Post by **packwingfn** » Jul Tue 08, 2008 10:19 pm

Saw WALL-E last night and thought it was great. Wall-E and Eve had a great romance story and I admit I got teary eyed near the end. I must admit it was little weird seeing live humans in certain scenes but it's not that big of a deal.