Cars 2

OPENING: 06/24/2011

STUDIO: Pixar Animation Studios

RUN TIME: 112 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
We rejoin all our Radiator Spring friends as they jet-set around the world.

Opening Statement
I am a Pixar apologetic at heart. I absolutely love any, well most, Pixar films. Their motto of “Story is King” is the battle cry I let out before every film I watch. I own most of their films, which is much more then I can say for any other studio putting out all animation. So when they give me something sub-par I wince, I sob, I cry like there’s no Santa Claus. The original Cars is my least favorite of all the Pixar films. Some would say, “The least Pixar film is still better then most others” and I kind of agree with that sentiment. However, they have built themselves a rather high pedestal to stand on and when they don’t reach those heights, it’s a long way down. So what happens when these Cars go onto further adventures?

Facts of the Case
Cars 2 rejoins racecar Lightning McQueen and his best friend, tow truck Mater, as they jumpstart a new adventure to exotic new lands across the globe. The duo are joined by the hometown pit crew from Radiator Springs as they head overseas to support Lighting as he competes in the first ever World Grand Prix. But the road to the finish line is filled with plenty of potholes, detours and bombshells when Mater is mistakenly ensnared in an intriguing escapade of his own– international espionage.

The Evidence
What fails here is the same thing that failed in the original Cars, the story. It is weak and, arguably, too complex for children. We are treated to a grand Bond-like tale of double-crosses and subplots, which, because I like the spy genre, was the best part of the entire movie for me. However, I don’t feel that most 8-year-olds can track all that’s going on and may get lost and/or bored trying to keep up. Pixar usually doesn’t have this problem. Other studios tend to separate their material and jokes and say, “These topics and jokes are for the adults and these are for the kids and never the twain shall meet.” But Pixar doesn’t do that. They know to keep the attention of the entire audience all they need to do write good material and everyone will love it. Now of course Pixar has had parts of their films that may sail over the heads of the young-uns (the first 10 minutes of Up come to mind). However, they have always known how to toe the line and if they veer off for a moment to quickly bring it back to median ground so that all may enjoy.

The largest drawback for me in Cars 2 was that instead of following Lightning McQueen like we did in the first installment, his dim-witted sidekick Mater takes the lead. This upsets me in many ways. There is something to be said about having someone who is not all that bright be the person you are supposed to feel for. Forrest Gump is a recent example of this and one that was done properly. However, if they were to show us that because of Forrest’s dullness, his friends were being put at risk or even hurt we would soon lose concern for Forrest and instead be concerned for those around him. That is what I felt throughout this film for those around Mater. His idiocy is shown to affect his friends adversely but we’re supposed to feel bad for him because he didn’t mean it and he’s sorry. Sorry Mater, though your Rain Man abilities save the day, I don’t feel bad that you were yelled at. You got what was coming.

Closing Statement
While Cars 2 still does not come up to the level of most other Pixar films, it’s still better then the original in my book. That may be a personal preference though since Cars 2 had nothing to do with Nascar or country music and fairly little to do with racing. I was actually intrigued with the spy story and wished they had picked someone else to be the main protagonist to follow. That’s OK. Pixar’s been around for 25 years and they can’t be perfect forever.

The Verdict

6/10

Up

OPENING: 05/29/2009

STUDIO: Disney / Pixar

RUN TIME: 96 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

SOUNDTRACK:

The Charge
The greatest adventure of our lives is often the one we don’t even know we’re experiencing.

Opening Statement
I don’t know what’s in the air or the water up in Emeryville, CA, but whatever it is inspires some of the greatest filmmaking the world has ever known. Pixar has once again tapped into the universal truth of the human experience and delivered an adventure in Up so sweeping and emotionally charged even WALL•E could shed a tear.

Facts of the Case
Meet Carl and Ellie, two kids whose imaginations and lust for life is larger than all outdoors. These two kindred spirits want nothing more than to venture forth into the deepest reaches of the unknown and make a life for themselves amongst the beauty and majesty of Mother Earth’s most magnificent creation — Paradise Falls. Of course, life often manages to get in the way of our dreams. But, as the saying goes, love conquers all and nowhere is that belief more evident than in the journey shared by Carl and Ellie. Unfortunately, all journeys must end, and this one leaves Carl heartsick and without purpose… that is until the modern world begins to close in around him. What’s a adventurer with nothing left to lose going to do? Why take to the sky and fulfill a promise to his true love. Only problem is, Russell, one of the neighbor kids, accidentally tags along for the ride — and a good thing too, since these mismatched travelers are going to need each other to survive the many trials and tribulations that await them.

The Evidence
I fully admit, I had my doubts going into this one. For as much as I adored WALL • E and pretty much everything else sprung forth from the hallowed halls of Pixar, a 90 minute adventure about a senior citizen and his flying house did not sound all that appealing. Several minutes in — via a brilliant sequence encapsulating Carl and Ellie’s life together — I realized how foolish it was of me to ever doubt John Lasseter and Ed Catmull’s team of gifted filmmakers.

Up is a film that hooks your emotions and never lets go. Unlike Hollywood’s hard-on for mind-blowing visual effects, Pixar leverages its technological prowess but always puts story and characters first. As WALL • E ran away with the hearts and minds of last summer’s movie audiences, Up will do same. Director Pete Docter (Monsters Inc.) and writer Bob Peterson (Finding Nemo) marshal their troops, guiding us on a journey to a world we didn’t even know existed, and one we will want, nay need to revisit again and again. It’s a world beyond space and time, where idyllic 1940s sensibilities run headlong into modern challenges, ultimately bringing out the best in us all, even when the biggest obstacle turns out to be a childhood hero who’s far less noble than you idealized him to be.

Carl (voiced with tremendous nuance by Ed Asner) is a member of the Greatest Generation, now past his prime and usefulness to society. He’s standing in the way of capitalistic “progress” and needs to be put on a shelf with the rest of the aged and infirm. Trouble is, he’s not going quietly, and rightly so. Why should any of us be forced to do what the masses feel is best, when we know in our heart of hearts there’s so much more of life left to explore? Thankfully, fate has paired him with Russell (perfectly captured by young Jordan Nagai), a boy much like Carl used to be, full of adventure and appreciation for all the world has to offer. Russell too has been touched by life’s complexities, but he’s not about to let that stop him from doing what’s right.

Along the way our heroes join forces with Dug, a talking dog, and Kevin, an exotic version of Sesame Street’s Big Bird. The bonds they form are critical, as their journey is laden with pitfalls which can only be overcome by utilizing their combined knowledge and talents. On the surface, it sounds simple enough — and I don’t want to give away too much of the story, so as to preserve the wonder that awaits you — but even the most basic of tales in the hands of Pixar are rich, all encompassing experiences, supercharged by another brilliant underscore from composer Michael Giacchino. The thematic elements will linger long after you leave the theater, and you’ll need a copy of the soundtrack to scratch the itch that’ll haunt your emotional core.

Okay, there are a couple of niggling plot holes, like how Russell was able to make it up to the front porch after take-off, and just how old is Charles Muntz when we meet him, but these are easily set aside by the scope of the overall experience. Up is a pitch perfect balance of heartfelt emotion, laugh out loud humor, and edge-of-your seat excitement.

I did not have the opportunity to see the film in Disney Digital 3D on first viewing, but for as awe-inspiring as the visuals are in 2D, I can only imagine the depth of splendor to be experienced in Pixar’s first extra-dimensional foray. Like WALL-E, there are moments you will swear you are seeing a live action film. From the environmental detail of the South American jungle, to the tactile design of our heroes — down to the fabrics of their costumes — the imagery is astoundingly lifelike, even centered around characters who harken back to the glory days of Rankin-Bass. The rendering achievements Pixar is making with each successive picture is remarkable, which makes me wonder just how much further they can push the envelope.

And speaking of envelope pushing, we are once again blessed with a beautiful Pixar short which precedes the feature. Partly Cloudy is a touching and inventive tale of how babies of all species are created and brought into the world. Writer/Director Peter Sohn (Ratatouille) gets the opportunity to spread his wings, painting a landscape lush with character, color, and effects. It may not be as memorable as Knick Knack or as hilarious as Jack-Jack Attack, but it proves once again how important these shorts are to the future of the company, expanding an already rich stable of writing and directorial talent.

Closing Statement
The Pixar clan are hands down the most impressive storytellers since Bill Shakespeare and the Grimm Brothers. Young or old, male or female, rich or poor, kind or cruel, anyone who enters the theater to see Up will find themselves stripped down to their innermost 6-year-old, freed from every care and concern they came with, and emotionally unshackled, so as to lose themselves in one of the finest human adventure stories ever put to film. And, if you’re lucky, it just might change your perspective on what’s most important in life.

The Verdict
11/10 (That’s right, I said 11. In the words of Nigel Tufnel, “Eleven. Exactly. It’s one louder.”)

Q: What did the role of directing animator on WALL-E involve?

AM: The Directing Animator’s job is to help the other animators keep their animation on model, so that the acting and movement are consistent for each of the characters over the entire film. They work to be both a surrogate voice of the Director when he/she is available, and also offer acting and performance suggestions. Directing Animators also help to define the motion and character of the main characters in the film. The Directing Animator reports directly to the Supervising Animators. On WALL-E, as well as The Incredibles, I worked under the Supervision Animators Alan Barillaro and Steven Hunter. They interface more with the production staff about the direction and management of the WALL-E animation department. They also serve as both a surrogate voice of the Director and also offer acting and performance suggestions as well. Time permitting, Supervising Animators will also help to define the motion and character of the main characters in the film.


Q: The WALL-E acronym stood for “Waste Allocation Load Lifter Earth-class.” What is BURN-E short for?

AM: BURN-E stands for “Basic Utility Repair Nano Engineer.” I have since heard from some people that it should actually be BURN-A because the “E” in WALL-E stands for “Earth-Class” and the “A” would be the appropriate “Axiom-Class.” Now I could argue that BURN-E was a robot on Earth that was installed on the Axiom, but a) I would be lying, and b) What’s the point? If that’s the biggest problem you have with the film, then I have done my job. Now put yourself in my shoes. You have to name this robot. BURN-E is funny and breaks the continuity of the film. BURN-A is more accurate to the feature and is not funny at all. Which would you choose? I thought so. I do love that geeks pick up on this and I am happy to be creating this controversy. I’d probably do the same thing, were I not involved. Jim Reardon, head of story on WALL-E, thought of the name. Derek Thompson and fellow story artist Ted Mathot came up with the acronym.

Q: Brad Bird created the similarly fun companion short Jack-Jack Attack for The Incredibles. What are your thoughts on side-stories like these?

AM: I am a big fan of side stories. Coincidentally, I had a side story pitch for The Incredibles that Brad was excited about, but budget constraints kept us from doing it. I think it’s important that the side story not belittle or betray the main story. If the main story is about the existence of the Easter Bunny, the side story can’t say there is no Easter Bunny or it messes with the feature.

Q: What made you choose BURN-E as the main subject?

AM: I was drawn to BURN-E because his story was not fully explored in the feature. I like M-O, but he is in the feature a lot already, so I did not feel like his story needed to be told as urgently. Also I liked the idea of having a short that took place outside the central story arc of WALL-E.


Q: How did BURN-E’s story originate?

AM: As a filmgoer, I wanted to know what happened to BURN-E. I had a few ideas of places we could cut back to BURN-E in the feature, but it slowed the pace of the film down. Once Andrew encouraged me to take these ideas and develop them into a short, I needed to find a unifying story arc. I came up with this idea of him having a job and that job would be repairing this light. Then I thought, it would be funny to have WALL-E inadvertently cause this meteor to hit the light on the ship. This led to the central idea of the short. In the feature, WALL-E has a positive effect on everyone he meets. So I thought, what if there is someone for whom WALL-E ‘s arrival on the Axiom isn’t a good thing. WALL-E is never purposefully mean to BURN-E, it’s just bad luck. Once I had that central idea I looked for key moments in the film to cut back to BURN-E to see what he was doing at that particular time.

Q: How hard was it to get the just right type of emotion out of a robot?

AM: It is always our goal as animators to make our work clearly communicate the thought process of the characters to the audience. It was particularly challenging for us on BURN-E as well as WALL-E because of the limited nature of the designs and the lack of dialogue. Both characters limited designs are appealing, but more work must be done in the story process to communicate his intentions. With BURN-E and with WALL-E, if the audience can’t tell what the character is thinking or what is going on, then they lose interest very quickly.

Q: Did you work on BURN-E during or after the production of WALL-E?

AM: Both. I started boarding BURN-E on the evenings and lunches when we were in the heat of animation production on WALL-E. Once the animation was wrapping up on the feature, production started on BURN-E. It dovetailed nicely, but I did have to put off a May vacation till August.

Q: How long did it take you to produce BURN-E?

AM: I first pitched the storyboard to Andrew Stanton in November 2007 and we finished production in late June 2008.


Q: BURN-E is your first film as a director. Do you see this film as a steppingstone towards directing features?

AM: BURN-E was a tremendous opportunity for me. The shorts program at Pixar is designed to be a training ground for potential future directors and new department heads. Sometimes that translates into directing features or heading departments on features and sometimes not. I have stories that I’d like to tell, so we’ll see what happens.

Q: How much freedom do you have at Pixar as a director on a little film like this?

AM: I pitched the film to Andrew and John Lasseter. Once they bought off on the concept, I was free to pretty much do as I wished. There were budget considerations, but there weren’t any compromises that hurt the film. I checked in with Andrew periodically and if there was anything that wasn’t reading or could be improved he would make notes. I would say that 95% of his notes made the film better. Mostly, he had notes on pacing. BURN-E, by nature, is fairly episodic. He had a lot of notes that kept the pace from slowing to a crawl. Freedom as a director is also the freedom to make a bad movie. I had the support of an extremely talented crew so anything that was bad they did there best to fix.

Q: John has previously said that Pixar’s shorts provide animators with the opportunity to experiment with new challenges outside the confines and limitations of a feature. Were there any particular technical or story challenges you set out to accomplish with BURN-E?

AM: The biggest challenge was how to make a 7+ minute film on a budget. I was allowed to make a film that long if it came in on budget. To be honest, I think the budget constraint helped. I wanted the film to look like a ’70s-’80s Sci-Fi films. On those films, they built awesome sets on limited budget. We used a lot of the same principles of repeated forms for BURN-E. As an homage, the floor grating in BURN-E is based on floor grating in featured in the movies Outland, Alien, and Aliens.

Q: What was the most challenging aspect of BURN-E?

AM: There were a lot of difficult shots to pull off in this film. From a technical perspective, the shot with WALL-E touching Saturn’s rings that transitions into the pebble meteor was the hardest to pull off. The Effects Supervisor, Bill Watral did a fabulous job stitching the shot from the film and a bunch of new elements that were on a literally planetary scale. On the performance side, the shot where SUPPLY-R drops the light on the ground was the trickiest to get right. There was something in the boards that was really funny that was extremely difficult to capture.

Q: Could you give a piece of advice to all those who start in this of the animation and dream of working in Pixar or on a project like this someday?

AM: Surround yourself with people whose work you admire and whose opinions you trust. In school, I worked really hard and sought out others who did the same. In your work, make sure that you are making something that you believe in. In BURN-E, I tried to have at least one thing in each shot that was true, real, or relatable. Make the world of your film believable and relatable and the audience will follow.

WALL-E

OPENING DATE: 06/28/2008

STUDIO: Disney

TRAILER: Trailer

ACCOMPLICES: Official Site

The Charge
After 700 years of doing what he was built for – he’ll discover what he’s meant for.

Opening Statement
Pixar has demonstrated a digital midas touch since they stormed onto the big-screen scene 13 years ago with Toy Story. Almost singlehandedly, they transformed CGI animation from a gimmick into the preferred mode of children’s storytelling. From the review buzz I kept hearing, I went into WALL-E expecting it to be Pixar’s crowning achievement. It isn’t, but it’s still the best family film you’ll see this year. Brilliantly blending adorable robots with keen social commentary and genuinely good science fiction, this is an important piece of the 2008 summer line-up.

Facts of the Case
700 years after Earth has been abandoned by humanity under a pathetic heap of garbage, only one of the waste management robots left behind to clean up our mess is still active. Somewhere in that expanse of time, WALL-E (Ben Burtt) has developed sentience. Perhaps it’s the loneliness of his solitary existence, or his growing fascination with the garbage he’s been instructed to collect. Either way, he works during the day to cube up giant towers of garbage, then spends the evenings collecting interesting objects and rewatching his VHS copy of Hello Dolly. That longing for contact is fulfilled when a scout ship arrives, delivering the sleek sophisticated EVE probe bot, and WALL-E is immediately smitten. He will do anything to capture her affection, even if that means traveling through space and saving humanity.

The Evidence
There are a lot of reasons to like WALL-E. It’s a beautiful film, and one that highlights Pixar’s rare ability to make a film with almost universal appeal. The production team remembers that “family film” doesn’t mean the same thing as “kid’s movie,” and creates something parents will enjoy rather than simply tolerate. Pixar is also uncompromising with the overall vision for the film, making a number of risky choices that pay off. That said, it’s also a film with big commercial appeal. They are a studio who realizes success comes from bold risks, not safe bets.

As a film, WALL-E‘s success lives or dies on the appeal of the main character. WALL-E is onscreen almost continually, and he barely speaks. And yet, he has been infused with so much personality that the audience is transfixed by him for the whole running time. In the future, robots have more personality than humans do; personality that comes out of the functions they were built with. This semi-sentience is handled brilliantly, as simple fact rather than as miracle or global disaster.

Speaking of global disasters, WALL-E also shows a chilling version of the future. The initial view of Earth as a gigantic garbage dump is frightening, being slowly revealed as we watch WALL-E work. This isn’t a complex message, but it’s well-aimed to the audience of children: the result of our wasteful culture could destroy the world. When we finally do meet the humans, the image is even more disturbing. Massively obese people float around on chairs, their eyes taken up by screens held close to their faces. Their hearing is absorbed by electronics that connect them to the world around them, both their friends and advertising. Perhaps most scary is the fact that it’s all run by a giant corporation called BnL, which dominates the sickly sweet, Wal-Mart future. The humans are reduced to raw consumerism, a captive market from birth to death. I’m not sure how much of this young kids will get, but it’s a far more ambitious message than I’ve seen in most animated features.

In actuality, though, none of these dire messages are required to enjoy the movie. We watched WALL-E at a Saturday matinee full of young kids, and although some of the youngest tykes were asking quite a few questions throughout the film, they all left talking excitedly about how much fun it was. With the dazzling visuals, it’s easy to see why kids can get by missing out on some of these finer points. With slightly older children, though, I can see WALL-E stirring good discussions afterwards, exploring some of the topics introduced by the film. The animation is a step up from Ratatouille, bordering on photorealistic when focused on the backdrops and robots. Humans still have a ways to go, but the level of detail presented here is truly astounding, and on a much larger scale than the studio has attempted in the past.

Rebuttal Witnesses
Despite all of this praise, I have to admit that I left the theatre feeling a bit disappointed. I’m not sure that all of the risks Pixar took this time around played out as well as they have in the past.

First, there is the choice to blend some live action footage in with the animation. This is something that Pixar has never done before, and they wanted to find a vivid way to distinguish the present from the future. This choice comes with two unwanted side effects. It’s oddly distracting, for one, although I like that they chose Fred Willard (A Mighty Wind) as the BnL CEO. The animated humans still don’t look that realistic in a realistic world, and seeing real footage just reminds us of that.

It’s also a bit hard to swallow the ending. While I think it’s crucial for a movie with this social message to have an ending of hope, the conclusion of WALL-E comes far too easy. The humans aren’t as grotesque as they should be either; the animation style simply makes them cute and soft. Obviously, some limits need to be placed to protect younger viewers, but it softens the overall impact.

All of these complaints are minor ones; issues that prevent WALL-E from claiming the Pixar crown from The Incredibles, not ones that prevent it from holding its robotic head high among its peers. This is a fine family film, one I would wholeheartedly recommend to anyone.

Closing Remarks
In a summer packed full of heroic adventures, the most compelling superhero may end up being its most unassuming: a cute little trash compacting robot named WALL-E. This is a film that all North American families should experience together, both for the joy of watching the film, and the meaningful discussions that will come out of its timely message.

The Verdict
After a long 700 years, WALL-E is hereby released of his duties, and free to pursue his dreams.

9/10