_Cars_, the newest one from Pixar

Further to comments above, I'd argue they've painted themselves into a corner both artistically and dramatically by making all the characters into vehicles - pretty much everything in terms of visual character expression is going to have to be done from the slightly daft looking faces on the cars, unless they plan on pulling some Transformers style shit.

Apart from Monsters Inc. I've loved all of Pixar's output to this point though, and nothing would make me happier than for this to be another triumph.

(on an unrelated note, anyone here see the Pixar 20th Anniversary show at MoMa? The massive zoetrope was one of the coolest things I've ever seen!)

Don't get me wrong, collectively that alone beats the crap out of everything Disney's done since The Lion King several thousand times over,

You haven't seen Lilo & Stitch, have you? That's like the liberal alternative to the The Incredibles' conservative family values.

toy story is still great, though

I think it's worthy of mention, since the main theme in Lilo & Stitch is that you can make your own family, and it doesn't necessarily have to consist of mom, dad, and kids. Admittedly, the conservativeness in The Incredibles was more between the lines, which is why I could still enjoy it (even though I had other objections about it as well, such as how lightly it dealt with violence and killing).

&

http://images.supersport.co.za/stich001s.JPG

Which it isn't. It's a great anarchic Looney Tunes of a film. It's the perfect end to hand-animated Disney, which put out some interesting stuff in it's last few years (eg The Emperor's New Groove) to make up for 300 tasteful monstrosties in the previous decade.

It's also blatantly emotionally manipulative. And it's really good at it!

Actually this is probably nonsense, there are probably a few films which have an interesting political idea inside them, but are rubbish as films. I just can't really think of any. The Fountainhead, maybe?

that might be the opposite, even

lol Red Dawn amirite?

Everytime I think Owen Wilson as a talking sportscar is a dumb waste of talent and certain to be totally unfunny I have to remind myself that John Goodman as a talking big blue furry thing was also a dumb waste of a talent that had no chance of being funny, until I actually watched the film.

Andrew: you realize that by bringing it up, you have effectively guaranteed that V for Vendetta will now be the perfect example for you of a rubbish film with an interesting political idea inside. Good job.

In general I think it is important and necessary to think about the political and moral implications of family films, not in spite of them being "for kids", but exactly because of that. The Iron Giant is great-looking, touching and funny flick, but it is also a pacifist tract, and it would be a lesser film if it wasn't. Ditto for reversal of fairy tale gender expectations in Shrek.

I really had a LOT of misgivings watching the Incredibles, actually, because of its superficial appearance of being some kind of family-values white people are awesome bullshit, but that's not how I felt it played out at all. The white suburban middle-class 50s family model is a plot device, mostly played up for haw haws, like Buzz Lightyear's ruthless paranoid militancy, it's not a goddamned political statement.

Well, okay, let's say more-than-implicit but not totally explicit.

My main objection with The Incredibles was how lightly it dealt with people dying - a lot of Syndrome's henchmen died during the forest chase scenes, but no one seemed to pay any attention to that. Children's films if anything is the one place where I'd like killing and dying not to be treated lightly. In fact, in many cases the deaths are totally unnecessary, there just seems to be some sort of moral that the bad guy "must" die at the end (but unlike in grown-up flicks, the hero can't kill him, because that would be "wrong" - which leads to a lot of "accidental" deaths in animated features). That's one more difference in Lilo & Stitch: no one dies, and in the end there isn't even a bad guy. I think that's a nice moral for the kids.

Obviously I don't agree with CSM, but I'd say the pacifism in The Iron Giant or the critique of fairy tale gender morals in Shrek is pretty explicit and intended by the filmmakers. Just because they're cartoons doesn't mean they're innocent.

And so reflective of how the world really works, too.

So you want the kids to learn that in real life there are bad guys who deserve to die?

That's not the same as bad guys deserving to die. In The Incredibles, for example, the bad guy could've just as easily put to prison, but for some reason the bad guy always needs to die, even in children's animated features. Or Western children's animation at least - Miyazaki's films, for example, are a totally different thing.

Tuomas would you disagree that celebrating the transition from fourth to fifth grade as a graduation of some sort is almost the definition of celebrating mediocrity? Or would you say that it's a good thing that in a desperate attempt to give everybody an equal playing field we've managed to make even baccalaureate degrees next to completely worthless?

And I'm with Tuomas about films that don't say "there are good people and evil people and the evil people deserve to die".

As far as the "celebrating mediocrity" stuff, I think it's more a criticism of Harrison Bergeron-ism than any specific thing.

x-post Well, yeah, I'm not going to defend eye-for-an-eye-ism, but the bad guys meeting deaths that are (or appear to be) just, or ironic, or both, is a part of literature going back umpteen thousand years. What's more, the deaths in The Incredibles, with a few exceptions, are pretty much a direct result of people placing themselves in harm's way or otherwise participating in circumstances in which death is a likely outcome.

xxpost but [Syndrome's] mistreatment as a(n albeit annoying) kid helps to form him.

Mistreatment? The way I saw out was that Mr. Incredible was trying to protect him from things he was clearly unequipped to deal with and from which to protect himself. And he admits later that he was overly mean about it.

-- TOMBOT (tombo...), June 7th, 2006.

gabba gabba we accept you
one of us

I think I just sprained my eyes, they rolled so hard.

Anyways as ILX's A-#1 car dork I am actually not really planning on running out and seeing this immediately (in part for the same reason Dan ain't; fuck a Cable Guy -- I'm just glad they didn't get Carlos Mencia to do the lowrider's voice). Maybe if they have a constantly wired and sniffling De Lorean or a PT Cruiser with Down's or any sign of an AMC Gremlin in the supporting cast I'll go see it.

Also, holy shit, I vaguely remembered seeing that "What on Earth" cartoon when I was like 4. Amazing stuff.

I talked to bandmate who saw a pre-screening of this and she says the cars just exist in this human world with no humans and everything is magically automated or something (ie, gas pumps, doors, etc.). It isn't dealt with explicitly. She also said this is the worst of the Pixar movies. She's a film editor for ILM, has done lots of work with/on the films of PDI, Pixar, etc.

I'm stickin to my guns that this idea is stupider and much less engaging than pretty much all their other premises.

I'm on the verge of posting that anyone who willingly gives Larry The Cable Guy money is contributing to the downfall of America and should be deported so maybe I should get off this thread.

I hate to be a pooper but I think such films as the Fast/Furious franchise, Gone in 60 Seconds, and at least 20 heart-stopping edge-of-your-seat minutes of every action movie ever fit into the "glorifying car culture" mold.

xpost that's easy for you to say Mr. Dan "No Kids" Perry

In fact, I want to annoy all the Tuomas-esque car haters here and see it AT A DRIVE-IN! (the Mission Tiki in Montclair!)

um, nick, I love ya but A) I was referring to Pixar films only which was kinda obvious dude B) plz to read the other thread where Ethical Vegan Tuomas admits to using a pig heart in some faux sacrifice but 'only once in ten years' so it's ok!!!

WTF?!?

ratatouille is the one i'm excited for.

Kind of touching (total sucker for the way the final race ended), the Monument Valley CGI is wicked awesome, Larry the Cable Guy is actually pretty funny (I guess he's OK if you keep him away from standup comedy?). Movie cliche built on movie cliche, but it works.

Also, this film was very pleasant, totally NOT a romantization of speed glorious speed NASCAR culture, and in fact might just encourage huge swaths of those same NASCAR esconced American families to try out ol' Route 66 for themselves.

Also also also, there were some exciting previews: Monster House! How To Eat Fried Worms! Charlotte's Web! Ratatouille! And some not-so-exciting ones: Santa Claus THREE, ugh. Something else that somehow looked even more painfully retarded, double ugh.

Way way way better than Monsters Inc, Bugs Life and... what other not-great Pixar movies are there? I'd put it above Nemo, as well. (but below Toy Story 1+2, and The Incredibles).

I didn't like the pre-feature short though :(

http://cartoonoveranalyzations.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/insidelightning.jpg?w=450&h=263

Saw this recently, after avoiding it due to boring-looking subject matter. Much, much better than I'd expected, though maybe a bit overlong. Not quite up to Nemo level greatness, but close. (Wish they'd put the eyes in the headlights, though.)

HOW DID THE CARS MAKE ALL THE BUILDINGS?

still haven't gotten around to seeing the thing, but that's a pretty good soundtrack, excepting the james taylor excrescence (oh i get it - two-lane blacktop - haha very funny, can we have mary-chapin carpenter back now?) and a couple of mrholland-isms among the pretty good faux-copland of the score.