Tag Archives: pixar

The Iron Giant (1999)

220px-The_Iron_Giant_posterDirector Brad Bird has become quite a name in the world of film. He is most commonly associated with Pixar where he directed much celebrated films like Ratatouille and both entries in The Incredibles. Prior to that, he was mostly known for his work as an animator and director on The Simpsons. His directorial debut with the long-running franchise was the Season One highlight “Krusty Gets Busted” and he also contributed to the much loved “22 Short Films About Springfield.” It was his work as an animator with Klasky Csupo that got him his gig with both The Simpsons and The Tracey Ullman Show, where The Simpsons originated. And he probably ended up there largely because of  his work with Disney where he was a promising young animator in the 80s seemingly destined for great things with the company.

That did not happen, and perhaps it’s for the better considering all of the quality television and films we received as a result. And while those works are much celebrated, there are still many who feel Brad Bird’s finest contribution to the world of cinema is the 1999 box-office flop The Iron Giant.

brad_bird

The Iron Giant is the film directorial debut for Brad Bird.

The Iron Giant originated in a short story by poet Ted Hughes, who unfortunately passed away before the film was completed. It was a tale that captivated many who encountered it and even attracted the attention of famed musician Pete Townshend who crafted an entire concept album about the character. As a result, the story was ticketed for a musical release much in the style of many animated 90s projects, but when Brad Bird was hired to oversee it things changed. It was Bird who reimagined the story as one about a gun with a soul that decides it doesn’t actually want to be an instrument of death. This was partly the result of Bird’s sister Susan tragically being murdered during the film’s production. Warner Bros. also brought in Tim McCanlies to co-author the screenplay and the musical components were eventually dropped, though Townshend still received an executive producer credit.

The Iron Giant is a traditionally animated film which also features some CG elements, most notably the giant itself. The film is about a young boy named Hogarth Hughes (Eli Marienthal) who lives alone with his mother in a small coastal town in the state of Maine during the 1950s. Cold War paranoia is sweeping the country and is the framing device for the film. When a mysterious, 100-foot tall, robot crash lands nearby, it’s Hogarth who first finds him and befriends him. Through Hogarth, this massive robot (Vin Diesel) learns empathy and also receives a primer on life and death. The somewhat lonely Hogarth views the giant like an ultimate toy, but also comes to view the behemoth as a friend as well.

hogarth_and_the_giant

It’s the tale of a boy and his big ass robot.

Now, 100-foot tall robots naturally attract attention. When the giant first arrives on Earth, it inadvertently causes a ship to crash and the captain of that ship alerts the FBI. The government dispatches agent Kent Mansley (Christopher McDonald) to investigate and he is able to follow a series of clues, as well as some coincidence, to the home of the Hughes. It’s there Kent realizes Hogarth knows something, and he rents a room from Hogarth’s mother (Jennifer Aniston) to keep an eye on the lad while also hoping to earn his trust and in turn uncover the truth about this giant being that’s eating the community’s metal. In turn, Hogarth has to try and keep the secret of the giant hidden and he turns to a local beatnik artist named Dean McCoppin (Harry Connick Jr.) for help since he happens to run the local scrap metal yard.

mansley_hogarth

Mansley is so obsessed with his job that it allows him to be more of a comedic element early on in the film, but he eventually turns quite sinister.

The film contains plenty of elements of comedy and drama as the tale unfolds. Hogarth and the giant have to learn how to communicate with each other since the giant doesn’t understand English initially. There’s also a lot of physical comedy bits between Hogarth and Kent as Hogarth tries to keep his friend hidden and finds creative ways to get Kent off his back. Probably the best piece of comedy occurs when the giant’s hand, having been separated from the robot via a collision with a train, stumbles into Hogarth’s home during dinner in search of the rest of his body. Hogarth is then forced to go to great lengths to keep the mechanical monstrosity from his mother, and eventually Kent, before rejoining it with the rest of the giant.

The latter part of the film loses the comedy in favor of more dramatic story-telling. The central theme of the film is you are what you choose to be, and it’s an important thing for the giant to learn as the robot is equipped with some serious firepower. This is discovered when Hogarth accidentally trips an automated defense mechanism in the robot, and it’s further exacerbated when the army eventually learns about the robot’s existence (because it has to). It’s a rather simple message, but one that easily resonates with an audience which is partly why the film is so beloved. The pairing of a kid with a being not of this world will naturally draw comparisons to E.T. and it’s an apt comparison. The only thing really separating the character of E.T. from the giant is that E.T. largely remains a passivist during his story while the giant most certainly does not.

giant_squat

It’s a real joy to watch the film play with scale. Here, the giant has to literally squat down to fit in the same frame as Hogarth.

What the film chooses to leave out is the giant’s backstory. We don’t know why he’s here, or where he came from. Both are questions viewers are likely to ponder, but in the grand scheme they mean little just as it didn’t matter why E.T. was on Earth. We also don’t know much about Hogarth and how his life was before the events of the film, save for the fact that he appears to be a good student and a latchkey kid with few friends. And like the giant, it doesn’t matter and Bird was wise to ignore these details because it keeps the film at a quite tidy 87 minutes. Perhaps my biggest criticism of The Incredibles and its sequel is that they’re both just too damn long, so it’s nice to watch a Brad Bird feature that’s under 90 minutes.

The film is set in 1950s Maine partly to invoke images of Norman Rockwell. The choice is an excellent one as the town of Rockwell presented here is quite idyllic and cozy. The woodland scenery is especially gorgeous and lush and the human characters have a style to them that is not derivative of past Warner films or Disney. The giant is animated in CG largely because it was an easy way to keep his steel frame natural and consistent. He has a simple design to him and the texture work is kept fairly simple as well which helps to blend the giant with the hand-drawn visuals that surround it. He doesn’t stand out in an unnatural way, at least he doesn’t as much as a 100-foot tall robot can, and the choice to render the being this way appears to be a sound one as a result.

super_giant

The film’s central message is you are what you choose to be. For the giant, that’s Superman.

Michael Kamen is responsible for the film’s score and it’s scope is quite grand and appropriate. When the giant takes to the sky for the first time it’s exuberant and triumphant, and when it needs to be a bit melancholy it strikes the right tone. The film completely discarded its musical origins, save for an in-universe PSA about the duck and cover advice you’ve probably heard about that existed back in the 50s. The voice cast is tremendous and Eli Marienthal as Hogarth is especially deserving of praise given his young age at the time of recording. Aniston and Connick Jr. are perfectly capable in their roles, while McDonald toes the line of obsessive detective and parody rather adeptly in his portrayal of Kent Mansley. Diesel isn’t asked to do much as the giant, similar to his eventual role as Groot for Guardians of the Galaxy, but he does a good job when the scenes later in the film ask more of him. If your eyes don’t well up a bit when you hear him say “Superman” during the film’s climax then you have no soul.

iron_giant_signature

The film finally received a Blu Ray release in 2016 which also included two minutes of new footage. It was dubbed The Signature Edition.

The Iron Giant is a heartwarming tale about an outcast finding its purpose in life all on its own, even if that purpose strays from what others had earmarked it for. It’s also a tale of friendship and empathy, of right and wrong, and one about being mindful and trusting where appropriate. It’s easy to react to a creature such as the giant with fear, but maybe it’s best to give others a chance first and allow them to give one a reason to fear them beyond simply appearance. It’s also a gorgeously animated film and one of the last of its kind as it wasn’t long after the release of The Iron Giant that the majority of animated features switched over entirely to 3D, CG, animated stories. Most acknowledge now that the reason this film failed at the box office was due to Warner Bros. not marketing it well. Even though it seems many agree with that assessment, it didn’t stop studios like Warner from using commercial failures like The Iron Giant as justification for moving away from traditionally animated films. It’s unfortunate as I fear we as a society will soon lose the ability to create such wonders simply because Hollywood isn’t providing a reason for those to learn these skills. If that’s the case, at least we’ll always have wonders like The Iron Giant to look back on.


Onward (2020)

onward_tease2020 is probably going to be remembered for a lot of things, as most years are, but it’s hard to imagine it being more remembered for anything other than Covid-19, aka coronavirus. The global pandemic has shuttered businesses, cost people their jobs (and lives), while turning us all into hermits. Social distancing is a phrase we’ve all learned and are unlikely to forget. And as we move beyond this era which will hopefully end in a return to normalcy, there will be things forever associated with this period in time and one of those items forever linked to Covid-19 is the Pixar animated feature Onward.

Onward was wide-released on March 6, 2020. Roughly two weeks later, the film industry came to a screeching halt. Even when the film opened, some were already staying away from crowded places before many states in the US started forcing closures of non-essential businesses. As a result, Onward became Pixar’s lowest grossing movie through no fault of its own. As of this writing, it’s estimated to have earned a little over 100 million dollars. With no end in sight to the current climate, Disney saw no reason to keep it in theaters. Disney decided to make the best of the current situation and quickly pivoted Onward to digital using it as a lure to get more subscribers to its relatively new streaming service Disney+. Patrons could pay to rent the film digitally on March 20, or wait for it to arrive on Disney+ on April 4, less than a month after its theatrical release. Because it’s so new and people are forced to stay at home, it’s possible more eyeballs will be trained on this film than some other recent Pixar fare because it’s quite a novelty to have a brand new Pixar feature so readily available.

null

Brothers and Ian and Barely are going on a quest to resurrect their father and maybe learn a thing or two about each other.

Onward is a buddy comedy starring two brothers, Ian (Tom Holland) and Barley (Chris Pratt), who embark on a “quest” to restore their late father to life for one day. The hook of the feature is that it’s set in a modern-day fantasy world. The premise is essentially what would a classic fantasy world have evolved into once things like electricity were discovered? The answer seems to be that magic was largely abandoned in favor of modern technology which advanced largely in step with our world. The main difference is that elves and orcs live side-by-side and some never found better housing than hollowed out giant mushrooms. The film was conceived by director Dan Scanlon who shares a similar backstory to the central characters here in that he and his brother lost their dad at a young age. Jason Headley and Keith Bunin were brought on to refine the screenplay and the story centers on the brother protagonists and explores their relationship with each other.

Ian is the more central figure of the story. He’s about to turn 16 and is a shy individual with few friends. Barley, his older brother, is more boisterous and in-love with the world’s fantastical history. He’s also a bit of an activist, as he sometimes clashes with their mother’s (Julia Louis-Dreyfus) police officer boyfriend (a centaur voiced by Mel Rodriguez) when he stands in the way of demolition crews looking to tare down old world relics. When their mother was pregnant with Ian, and Barely was quite young, their father passed away after suffering an illness. With Ian coming to age though, their mother presents them with a gift their father left for them and it turns out to be a magic staff with instructions how to bring their father back for one day. Ian sees this as a way to finally meet the man he only knows through pictures and an audio recording. When the spell goes wrong though, the boys are forced to seek out a new source of magic which takes them on a road trip. Barley, being a history buff, is excited to embark on what he considers a quest while Ian just wants to get it done and over with as quickly as possible so they have the maximum amount of time available to them to spend with their dad.

ONWARD

An early, quiet, moment where Ian listens to a recording of his dad he’s probably played a thousand times.

The film is largely a comedy with some fantastic set pieces and visual moments. The humor is derived from both physical comedy and conventional gags. The film mostly puts the visual gags of introducing fantasy creatures into suburbia upfront freeing it to be more creative as the film rolls along. It’s genuinely funny, though like the best Pixar features it relies more on heart and characters. Barley, being the excitable one, is often impulsive which clashes with Ian’s cautious approach. Barley would rather follow his gut while Ian wants to stick to a map the two find early on. The two need each other though, for it turns out Ian has an aptitude for magic and is able to make use of their father’s staff and the spells in Barley’s possession normally relegated to a Dungeons & Dragons type of game. And Ian needs Barley’s help because he can do practical things like drive. There are natural moments of conflict that can arise from this situation, and it’s easy to see these moments coming as Ian largely keeps quiet and defers to Barley, but you know he’s simmering on the inside at times. The film is a bit of a disguised film about what it means to be brothers. It seems to want viewers to think of it as a father-son pic at the onset, before pivoting to this brotherhood theme.

As someone who grew up reading lots of fantasy books, I welcome this setting and premise of Onward. Ian’s magical staff starts off rather neat, but it does threaten to become a crutch in order to advance the plot. The boys often run into an obstacle with the answer to such being a new spell for Ian to try out that Barley suggests. The film does at least utilize this arrangement to force the characters to learn how to work together. Initially, Barely’s suggestions on spells will be met with doubt from Ian with the miscasts even affecting Barley in a negative fashion. Ian will have to learn to trust his brother’s knowledge of the arcane, as well as his own abilities, in order to actually wield it effectively. It still ends up functioning as a deus ex machina, for the most part, but at least there’s the added goal of bringing the two characters closer.

ONWARD

Barley’s enthusiasm for history, which for this world is basically Dungeons & Dragons, is a source of embarrassment for brother Ian.

Because the film does deal with death in some way, it naturally lends itself to comparisons to Coco (and I suspect the upcoming film Soul will as well). It’s a bit unfortunate as Coco is quite possibly the best film Pixar has ever produced, it’s certainly my favorite. And it’s a wonderful film that Onward really can’t match. The plot beats here are pretty easy to see coming and it’s basically accepted at the outset that this is a film that will try to make you cry come the end. It’s at least more sincere and focused than a similar Pixar flick The Good Dinosaur. Where that film felt manipulative at times, this one does a better job of being sincere and earning its watery moments. Some viewers might feel conflicted about the ending, but it’s at least the one moment where the film does wander off the formula a touch. It’s accepted that things won’t go perfectly for Ian and Barley in their quest to be reunited with their father, but that also won’t stop viewers from yearning for that outcome.

corey_mom

Corey and Laurel could have been an interesting pair for the film’s B-plot, but it doesn’t really find anything unique for them to do.

Ian and Barley’s adventure is the main focus of the film, and it’s smart to do so. There are some solid side characters, but they have a hard time taking our focus away from Ian and Barley. The main side plot involves their mother , Laurel, who pairs up with a manticore named Corey (Octavia Spencer), who happens to know where the brothers are heading and, more importantly, knows they’re about to unleash a curse upon the world. The two are in a race to stop them, but we mostly know how that will play out based on similar stories. The brothers also have a couple of brushes with the law, but that’s mostly resolved fairly quickly before the film can get all Smokey and the Bandit on us. Mostly when the film was away from the brothers I just wanted to get back to them. I understand it needs to show us what’s happening elsewhere so the eventual meet-up between all of the characters is earned, but it wasn’t as fun as it could have been. Which is a shame, because the characters of Laurel and Corey have chemistry together and I think there was room for them in the film, but they just weren’t able to find it.

Mychael and Jeff Danna handled the film’s score and it’s not afraid to lean into that fantasy setting vibe. There’s also an original song over the ending credits performed by Brandi Carlile. The score is mostly fine, though I was disappointed with it in some areas. It doesn’t take many chances to meld the fantasy with modern sounds. When it goes for a gag in which Barley selects some questing music it also falls flat. Maybe they originally intended to license something, but instead it’s just bland synth-rock when I was looking for something bombastic akin to Rhapsody of Fire.

ian_magic

There’s magic to be found in this world, but the film doesn’t rely on it for visual spectacles too much.

Onward is a film rescued by its heart. It has a solid premise for a story and finds a way to arrive at a clever conclusion, even if the plot beats to get there feel very familiar. I think it could have done more with its setting. The idea is there, and some of the gags are well-played, but the whole thing feels surprisingly underplayed both visually and in the score. The actual technical abilities of the film also are not wow-inducing. Pixar is somewhat harmed by its own legacy in that respect since we’re so used to the studio raising the bar, but instead Onward is just comfortably fine. It does save its best piece of technical art for the end, which is a logical move, but it’s also not the type of visual you’ll walk away from saying “You have got to see this!” The relationship of brothers Ian and Barely though is what makes the film, and it’s not afraid to lean on the two. Pratt and Holland are both charismatic and believable in their roles and the characters are handled with grace. It’s hard for the audience to side with one over the other. They’re both right in some places, and weak in others. It’s easy to relate to both and thus hard to even pick a favorite.

It should also go without saying that the focus of the film on loss is easy to relate to. We either are that someone or know someone who has lost their father. Many can even relate to Ian as someone who never knew a parent due to tragedy. It’s a very compelling plot device to ask an audience what they would do in order to have one more day with someone they love. As a result, it’s almost impossible to separate this film from real world examples. If the film dwelled on that too much it would have felt manipulative, but instead it presents the premise and then lets it mostly simmer on the back burner. Because that sense of loss is such a personal thing, I suspect this movie will appeal more to people willing to allow themselves to “go there” and be vulnerable for 100 minutes or so. I would say Onward will be among the most polarizing for Pixar, but I think that’s too strong a word. There will be some who cite this as their new favorite from the studio, but few will number it among the worst. I think the divide will largely fall on the line of those who consider it great, and those who found it entertaining.

I lean more towards the latter, as I think the film offers a totally worthwhile and enjoyable experience, but it won’t be threatening to dethrone the likes of Coco and Finding Nemo for me. And in many ways I don’t think my opinion matters. Onward feels like a movie made by Dan Scanlon (and other talented people) for Dan Scanlon to process and deal with the tragedy in his past. He wasn’t able to wield a magical staff, but hopefully he and his brother were able to arrive at a similar place to Ian and Barley. And ultimately, I hope Onward ended up being the movie he wanted to make.


Ranking the Pixar Features

 

pixar-logoToy Story 4 has me waxing nostalgic about Pixar Animation Studios, even though Pixar is not an inherently nostalgic topic for me. I was already entering my teens when Toy Story debuted back in 1995. By the time Pixar’s fifth feature arrived I was in college and not really paying that much attention to the studio’s output any longer. The creation of Blu Ray is actually what got me interested in Pixar once more as the studio’s films looked wonderful in high definition. I began to collect them and before long I was reminded just how wonderful the studio is.

Back in 2013, I ranked what I considered to be the Top 10 Films of Pixar. Monsters University had just hit theaters and was one of four films I had not ranked. It was also the third film in four tries to be yet another sequel, something Pixar had avoided during its early days, but was turning into a staple for the studio. That period may have been the studio’s worst, as following Monsters University was…nothing. Pixar had released a film annually beginning with Cars in 2006, but problems arising with the development of The Good Dinosaur caused the studio to miss out on 2014 entirely. Since then the studio has been a juggernaut, releasing two films in 2015 and 2017 each with individual films in every other year in that time frame up until now. And as of this writing, there are two films slated for 2020 so the studio is showing no signs of slowing down in regards to its output.

Pixar has a pretty incredible track record with almost every movie the studio has put earning near universal praise. Cars 2 was the studio’s first true dud, and while it has added at least one other since, largely the films of Pixar have continued to be well-received. And we may be in the midst of another epict run as the last few years have been pretty great. Hopefully at least one of the films of 2020 continues that trend.

Now feels like a great time to rank these things once again though. Toy Story 4 is Pixar’s 21st feature film and its 8th sequel/prequel. Twenty-One films in twenty-four years, the majority of which have been original, is pretty damn incredible especially because computer animated films were a new artform. Pixar obviously had lots of practice making animated shorts and doing computer sequences in other films, but doing a feature utilizing this technology was still uncharted territory.

It should go without saying that ranking these films is an exercise in futility. While the first few were easy enough, it quickly became difficult. By the time I hit the top 10 of this list I was really scratching my head at arranging these films because they’re all just so good. And some of them I have seen more times than I can count due to my own children falling in love with them. For the ones I included in my top 10 six years ago, I’ll include where I placed them. Some moved due to new films entering the picture, while there were a few I dropped down a few spots due in large part to either fatigue or in just having a new appreciation for another film. I ranked these ones first, then revisited my past rankings and I was surprised at a few. Then I looked at the films surrounding those few surprises and I was less surprised because these things are just that hard to rank. Ratatouille, for example, is a film I absolutely adore and yet it couldn’t crack the top 5! For films I didn’t rank, I’ll include an “NR” distinction and for films not yet released “NA.” And lastly, before we begin I want to post a “SPOILERS” warning. A lot of these films are older so it may not seem important to warn folks about spoilers, but this is an examination of the films so some plot points will be discussed. In particular, the recently released Toy Story 4 so if you haven’t seen it maybe skip that write-up. That said, let’s get to the easy part, the worst of Pixar, and get on with this thing.

cars221. Cars 2 (2011)Previous Ranking:  NR

Cars 2 has the dubious honor of being Pixar’s worst film. It followed 2006’s Cars and largely feels like a sequel mandated by sales. Toys and merchandise based on the films are easy to conceive (they’re just Hot Wheels but with faces) and it was a real hit with kids. Then studio head John Lasseter also loved the project and it was basically his new baby following Toy Story, and when the guy in charge loves a franchise then you’re getting more from that franchise. The problem with this movie is that it makes the cardinal sin of taking a well-received side character from the first film and making him the main character in the sequel when the character was never suited for that role. In this case, it’s Mater who’s put into the starring role and his dim-witted nature just can’t carry a film. He was fine in the first film and occasionally funny, but here the schtick runs dry after 20 minutes. The rest of the film unfolds like a spy film, but it can’t decide if it wants to make an earnest run at being a spy movie or if it’s a spoof. Your kids might like it, but you probably won’t.

spot and arlo20. The Good Dinosaur (2015)Previous ranking:  NA

The Good Dinosaur was a supremely troubled picture, even though it had a fairly simple premise:  what if the asteroid that caused all of the dinosaurs on Earth to go extinct missed? What happened is dinosaurs flourished, learned how to become farmers, and eventually would have to learn how to live alongside humans. The film takes place though in the early years of humanity, so seeing humans and dinosaurs interact isn’t particularly interesting. The main character, Arlo, is likable enough, but the movie unfolds like a series of clichés and sequences ripped from past Disney flicks. It’s a very manipulative picture, and its somewhat original premise feels like its only original thought. On the plus side though, it looks pretty good and modern kids may be more accepting of it than The Land Before Time on account of its presentation, despite being an inferior picture.

monsters u19. Monsters University (2013)Previous ranking:  NR

Monsters University stands as Pixar’s lone prequel. Apparently wanting to do something with titular characters Mike and Sully again, but not seeing much promise in the new world setup by Monsters, Inc., we end up with a story of how the two met in college. It’s mostly fine, but also pretty forgettable. It’s not particularly fun to see the two start as enemies, especially when we know how they’re going to end up. The story of Mike wanting to be a scarer adds a bit of dimension to the character, but it’s also something that’s not even remotely hinted at in the previous film so it feels forced. The film focuses far too much on that aspect, because we know how it’s going to turn out the stakes don’t feel particularly high. The film also fails to create any new, memorable, characters and it drags on for too long. Still, it’s okay and I mostly had fun with that first viewing, I’ve just never really wanted to revisit it.

a bugs life18. A Bug’s Life (1998)Previous ranking:  NR

This is the point of the list where I feel like we’ve left the poor or merely adequate features behind and entered into what makes Pixar special. A Bug’s Life is largely hampered by the fact that it was the studio’s second ever feature when things were still being ironed out. The visuals are not as striking as they once were, and the story is a bit derivative of other works. It even felt derivative of Toy Story as it was another look at a much smaller world, only instead of toys we have bugs. Flick is a good lead though and Hopper makes for a convincing villain. Ants vs Grasshoppers isn’t a story I ever needed to be told, but it proved captivating enough. It’s just a film that has been topped many times over.

cars 117. Cars (2006)Previous ranking:  NR

Cars is a film I’ve actually come to appreciate a bit more over time. I still don’t think it’s great, but I find it entertaining enough. Which is good because my kid went through a phase where he wanted to watch this one a lot. Lightning McQueen is a fish out of water, a conceited race car who winds up in hick-ville. He’s unlikeable and he’s supposed to be, but he comes around and the journey is fairly organic rather than forced, even if you know that’s where the story needs to head. What has never sold me on the film, and franchise, is the need for it to exist. Personified cars just aren’t that interesting. They just act like humans, only their world makes no sense because of humanity’s absence even though signs of humanity are literally everywhere. Making the cars the characters did at least let Pixar off the hook in terms of having to animate humans, which was something of a weak point the studio was still figuring out. Otherwise, I’m just not charmed by the premise. Ultimately, the film is fine entertainment that’s just lacking that something extra that makes Pixar films truly special.

merida bow16. Brave (2012)Previous ranking:  10

Brave has the distinction of being the first Pixar film directed by a woman. One of the studio’s few black marks has been its inclusion of women. Few women have been writers on Pixar features and few have been allowed to sit in the director’s chair. Director Brenda Chapman did not have a great experience as she was to be the sole director, but clashes with Lasseter over the project got her demoted to co-director with Mark Andrews, who basically finished the picture. She has expressed no desire to return to Pixar and was very critical of the leadership there, and she was probably one of the many celebrating Lasseter’s exit when more voices came forward to denounce his behavior towards women. As a result, I wonder how Brave would have turned out had Chapman been allowed to make the film she wanted to make. It’s a mother/daughter picture in which the relationship and conflict between the two feels very authentic, even when the mother turns into a bear. The film has a strong start, but then it sort of meanders a bit and I always find myself losing interest the further in I go. It’s a good, solid, film though and it wouldn’t disappoint me if Merida were given another chance to lead a feature. Since Lasseter was replaced, Chapman has actually returned to Disney as a writer on The Lion King remake set to open soon, so maybe there’s still a chance she could return to the director’s chair for the company in the future. Never say never.

cars 315. Cars 3 (2017)Previous ranking: NA

It took three tries, but Cars 3 finally made the Cars franchise feel like it belonged at Pixar. After struggling to find an emotional hook in the first film, and basically not trying in the second, Cars 3 returned Lightning McQueen to the starring role and gave him a story that made him sympathetic. That story was for Lightning to confront his age and try to hang on as a top racer in his sport. In that respect, it feels similar to Toy Story 3 as those characters battle time in their own way. Cars 3 manages to surprise in how it handles the story while also providing a proper send-off for Paul Newman’s Doc Hudson character, who was basically written out of Cars 2. Cars 3 was the conclusion to a trilogy few wanted to see completed, but it proved worthwhile. Hopefully, Pixar knows well-enough to leave it be and resists the temptation of a Cars 4. Considering Cars was Lasseter’s baby, I think we may be in the clear.

RGB14. Incredibles 2 (2018)Previous ranking: NA

Incredibles 2 is the sequel we all knew was going to happen. Being a super hero film, it was the easiest sequel to craft. All one needs is a new villain for the heroes to battle and a plausible setup. Incredibles 2 surprised by playing it safer than expected. It essentially took the setup of the first film and flipped the roles of Mr. Incredible and Elastigirl. Mr. Incredible is the stay-at-home parent this time while Elastigirl gets to enjoy some adventuring. All of your favorites from the first film come back, and everything is still fine and charming. It’s just really long, like the first film, and since I didn’t love that one I found little to love here. It’s well-made and I think most fans enjoyed it. As sequels go, it’s pretty good, but I also expected more.

hank and dory13. Finding Dory (2016)Previous ranking:  NA

Finding Dory could have easily wound up being as bad as Cars 2. It takes the former sidekick, Dory, and puts the focus on her. It also rehashes the plot of the first film, but just moves some pieces around. And yet, the film works and in some respects I think it should be the benchmark for future Pixar sequels. If the studio isn’t confident its next sequel is as good or better than Finding Dory, then it shouldn’t make it. Dory does get a little grating, but her memory is allowed to gradually improve which helps make her more tolerable as the film moves along. Newcomer Hank is also a worthwhile addition to the cast, and there are some happy, teary-eyed, moments in this one. It’s also a tad manipulative, especially the flashbacks which include the impossibly cute baby Dory, so the emotional moments aren’t as earned as they are in other films. This one is still better than it had any right to be, and it’s more than okay that it exists even if it isn’t as good as Finding Nemo.

the incredibles12. The Incredibles (2004)Previous ranking:  9

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, this film largely just didn’t work for me. I thought I was going to love it, so maybe I had a problem with expectations going in, but numerous re-watches over the years have further convinced me it just isn’t for me. I find The Incredibles to just be too long, and too slow. It’s not hard to see where the plot wants to take the characters, so the slow pace just feels so unnecessary. And like Cars 2, it seems to have an identity crisis where it can’t decide if it’s an earnest take on a super hero film or if it’s a parody. Nonetheless, the characters are charming and well-developed and there’s still a lot to like. My feelings towards it though are my explanation for why it’s ranked here, and not in the top 10 where I feel a lot of fans seem to place this one.

bo peeps outlook11. Toy Story 4 (2019)Previous ranking:  NA

The newest film from Pixar proved to be a hard one to rank. I knew I liked the other three Toy Story films just a bit more, but figuring out how to rank it relative to the non-Toy Story films was a challenge. There’s a lot to like in this one from the gorgeous visuals to the humor, largely thanks to newcomer Forky. Selling the audience on its resolution was the hardest part. Did audiences care enough about Bo Peep to want her to return, let alone to have her serve as the catalyst for Woody essentially abandoning the purpose he once clung to so dearly? I feel like the response to Woody’s decision at the end of the film to leave his friends, and Bonnie, behind to live a life beside Bo Peep will determine how most people receive this film. And yet, I was largely fine with it, but I’m still ranking the film outside the top 10. That says less about this film and more about how fantastic the 10 films to come truly are.

wall-e and eva10. WALL-E (2008)Previous ranking:  5

WALL-E is one of our biggest fallers from the previous ranking. Some of that is due to some newcomers joining the fray, but mostly it’s due to my opinion on the film changing slightly. I still love WALL-E, I just don’t find it as engrossing as I once did. That’s largely due to the film’s second half in space, which fails to match the spectacle of the early part of the film when it occurs on Earth. It’s still funny though and I love the film’s message and how charming these unspeaking robot leads are. WALL-E is one of my favorite leads of any Pixar film and his success is a wonderful tribute to how good Pixar’s animators are. He says so much, and yet he says almost nothing at all throughout the whole movie. I may not be ranking it number one, but WALL-E is absolutely one of the studio’s greatest achievements.

sully and boo9. Monsters, Inc. (2001)Previous ranking:  3

Monsters, Inc. is actually our biggest faller, going all the way from 3 down to 9. Why is that? Unlike WALL-E, this one is largely fatigue. I’ve seen this one so many times due to it being on television a lot, being a personal favorite of mine, and being one my kids adore. Though no matter how many times I see it that closing, “Kitty!” from Boo still gets me every time. It’s the stuff leading up to that which I’ve grown a little sick of. It also doesn’t help that the visuals aren’t as nice to look at as they were in 2001, though Sully’s fur still stands as a remarkable achievement even today. Even though I’m ranking it 9th, I still love this movie as I do all of the movies in the top 10. And I will definitely be checking out the television series based on this property coming to Disney’s streaming service. Hopefully, it goes better than Monsters University.

toy story 2 welcome home8. Toy Story 2 (1999)Previous ranking:  8

Holding steady at number 8 is Pixar’s first sequel. Saying it held onto number 8 is actually deceiving, as there are two new films to come along since those rankings that leapt past this one without affecting its rank. And that reflects my growing appreciation for Toy Story 2. Where as before I was certain it was a lesser film when compared with Toy Story and Toy Story 3, now I’m less convinced of that. It really expands upon the cast of the first film despite only adding a couple new characters and it does so by simply bringing along more in the journey of the toys outside Andy’s room. Mr. Potato Head, played so perfectly by the late Don Rickles, is really allowed to shine as he joins Buzz and the others in tracking down the lost Woody. The film is tightly paced and its new villain is arguably better than Sid from the first. Plus it looks noticeably better. It also holds up as it has proven to be the favorite Pixar movie of my kids so I’ve endured this one more time than I can count, and every time I see it I still get pulled in. It’s quite possibly the best sequel that doesn’t eclipse the original ever created.
ratatouille7. Ratatouille (2007)Previous ranking:  7

Another film that has held steady, but actually improved given the new films released since 2013, is Ratatouille. I adore this movie. Remy is so wonderfully portrayed by Patton Oswalt and his story is unique, engrossing, and ever so charming. I’ve seen this one a lot, and it never fails to entertain me nor does it fail to leave me hungry. The food looks so good, and for whatever reason the grapes affect me the most. I’m both hungry and thirsty just thinking about it right now. The way this one ends, with Remy finally finding acceptance amongst both his rat peers and the humans he shares a kitchen with, could lend itself well to a potential sequel, but I’m glad Pixar has so far resisted the temptation. I don’t want this film tainted in any way, even if that fear is largely an overblown one as no film could taint the original.

up6. Up (2009)Previous ranking:  1

It may not have fallen the most spots, but it feels like Up is this list biggest mover because it fell from the top spot all the way to number 6, outside the top 5. If it had fallen to number 3 because two new films supplanted it that would be one thing, but to explain the drop to 6 is practically unexplainable, but let me try. I pretty much love Up the same now as I did in 2013. I actually have not watched this one much since then as it’s one my kids haven’t taken to (though I should try again). It’s mostly moved because the films ahead of it are ones I have seen quite a bit in the interim and I just have a newfound appreciation for. Was ranking it number 1 six years ago a mistake then? Maybe. The opening beats in this one are some of Pixar’s finest work. Perhaps I placed too much emphasis on those and not enough on the ensuing adventure, which is fun and humorous, but not nearly as emotional. Reflecting on it though, I just think it really is a case of me falling even more in love with Pixar’s other works and not necessarily falling out of love with Up. This film still gets to me and I still love its characters. Ultimately, being considered the sixth best Pixar movie is also nothing to be ashamed of. I also did protect myself a bit six years ago as I said these rankings within the top 5 are pretty fluid. Not a lot is separating these movies.

inside out5. Inside Out (2015)Previous ranking:  NA

Our first new entrant since 2013 to really make a splash, Inside Out was an instant contender for best film in Pixar’s catalog when it debuted in 2015. The internal struggle of emotions within a young girl as depicted by personified entities didn’t strike me as a truly novel idea, but it turned out to be incredibly well executed. The story is essentially about depression, and yet I don’t think that word is ever uttered by a character in the film. It’s so careful and well-thought out making it a truly technical marvel. That it’s able to be so procedural while still maintaining the fun and spontaneity of it all is its real achievement. Joy is well-balanced by Sadness, and the supporting roles of the other emotions prove to be hilarious more often than not. And even though most of the movie is spent inside her head, we still learn a lot about Riley and come to care for her by the film’s end almost as if she were our kid too. I think my adoration for the character, and the film, influenced me down the road when my own daughter came into this world. Her name? Riley.

toy story 14. Toy Story (1995)Previous ranking:  6

The debut feature from Pixar is a tough one to top. Obviously, the studio has topped it since I’m ranking it fourth, but careful consideration is given to any film I intend to rank ahead of it. First of all, yes, the story is a bit derivative of the less popular Jim Henson production The Christmas Toy, but Toy Story takes the concept of toys having their own world in which they live in so far ahead of that production that it barely warrants a mention. I do it only because a lot of the concepts are the same, though I question how original it is to begin with. Who didn’t wonder if their toys came to life when no one was around when they were kids? Anyway, Toy Story was an incredible technical achievement in 1995, but it’s also so much more. Like Disney was able to do way back in the 1930s with Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Pixar was able to convince an audience that a computer-generated character could make us cry. This one doesn’t go nearly as far as its sequels would in that regard as Toy Story’s tears, if it produces any, are via celebration as opposed to sadness. I still get chills when I watch this one today when Woody and Buzz take flight and head for Andy’s car. It’s a wonderful moment of elevation to cap the film’s climax cementing this film as one of Pixar, and Disney’s, all-time greatest achievements.

nemo and marlin3. Finding Nemo (2003)Previous ranking:  2

Moving down a notch from my 2013 rankings is Finding Nemo. Unlike WALL-E and Up, this one simply moved because a new film was released since then to push it back a spot. That’s no slight against Finding Nemo, a movie I’ve seen more times than I can count over the years because it remains my wife’s favorite film. If I had to offer up one piece of criticism towards it, it would be that the film is perhaps a bit too long (it didn’t really need that sequence with the net after Marlin and Nemo’s reunion), but otherwise there’s nothing I’d change about. The undersea world of Finding Nemo remains beautiful more than a decade removed from release, and the story of a father searching for his son against hopeless odds will never not resonate with audiences. When I find myself feeling a bit fatigued with this one, I just stop and remember how charming some of the smaller details are such as Bruce and his boys and the seagulls that just say “Mine!” over and over. A beautiful film with a beautiful story, I won’t blame you if you think Pixar has yet to top it.

TOY STORY 32. Toy Story 3 (2010)Previous ranking:  4

This is the biggest culprit in moving some of the other films down a few notches. Every time I revisit Toy Story 3 I’m blown away all over again. First of all, its visuals are miles ahead of the two preceding films and it’s one of Pixar’s greatest technical achievements. The world the toys inhabit is so much more alive than it was before and the little details are amazing. Yeah, the toys somehow get lost again, and yes, Buzz also is reverted to his old form yet again, but the journey is just so much more engrossing than before. Woody’s devotion to Andy remains strong and serves as the film’s emotional core, but also there is Woody’s devotion to his fellow toys. He’s a true leader here unwilling to let anything happen to the friends he’s shared a playroom with. We caught a glimpse of this in Toy Story 2 when he helped out poor Wheezy, but we really see it on display here when he not only risks life and limb to save the others, but also in how he chooses to finally say goodbye to Andy. If that moment in Bonnie’s yard doesn’t choke you up then you have no soul. What an incredible, brave, ending that also proved smart since it setup for future television specials and even a fourth film no one saw coming. Had this been the last we saw of Woody and the gang I think everyone would have been fine with it, because the ending is so perfectly bittersweet. Hug your toys, if you still have them, people.

coco proud corazon1. Coco (2017)Previous ranking:  NA

Of all the films on this list, I don’t think I’ve seen any other more times over these past six years than I have Coco. I figured this film would be plenty good, because it’s Pixar, but I don’t think I was prepared for just how great it was going to be. Coco is an easy choice as Pixar’s best film for me because it does everything well that Pixar is known for. It looks amazing, its characters are well-formed and endearing, it depicts a new, fantastic world in the Land of the Dead, and it packs an emotional wallop to boot. Oh boy, is that emotional hook a big one. I was prepared for Ernesto to not be related to Miguel in the end, and I even saw Hector’s reveal coming, and yet I still was not prepared for Miguel’s emotional performance of “Remember Me” to his grandmother, Coco. So much of the film’s heart should be credited to Anthony Gonzalez, the young man hired to provide the scratch track for Miguel who was so good in the role he was made the starring voice of the film. His performance is incredible, whether speaking lines or singing one of the film’s many songs. Coco is also the closest thing to a musical Pixar has produced, though the songs all work within the confines of the film as opposed to being something that breaks-up the flow of the plot. And the music is so wonderful! “Remember Me” is its most famous track, though it might be my least favorite song in the film. It’s supremely versatile though, as the song takes on a whole new meaning depending on the performance. In the hands of de la Cruz, it’s an up-tempo, playful, track, but when performed by Hector it’s a sweet and somber tune. I’m torn on if my favorite song is “Un Poco Loco” or “Proud Corazon.” The visuals at the end of the film when “Proud Corazon” is playing probably seals it for me as Miguel is warmly embraced by his family that once shunned music, and the spirit of his ancestor Hector takes the “ghost guitar” from him to play along which is the perfect touch for the scene. I’m welling up just recalling it. Coco is just a perfect film filled with wonder and excitement and plenty of humor while also containing an emotional backing no film in Pixar’s library can match. It surprised me to become a favorite of my children as well, who happily sing and dance along with the film and sit enthralled with its exciting, closing, moments. They don’t fully understand it, because they’re so young, and it will be interesting to see how they respond to it as they get older. I hope one day that Pixar can top this film, but there’s a part of me that doubts the studio ever can.


Toy Story 4

 

toy-story-4 poster

Toy Story 4 (2019)

Is there a better tetralogy of films than the recently completed (?) Toy Story franchise? It’s a question I didn’t immediately ponder upon viewing Toy Story 4, but in the days that followed it’s something I’ve started to consider. I’m not sure what the most famous tetralogy is, but my mind first went to the Indiana Jones franchise. While that one is quite good, I think most would agree the fourth film is okay at best. After that, and it gets murky for me. There’s a lot of trilogy franchises that were turned into four films like The Hunger Games and Twilight. I’ve seen The Hunger Games, I’ve never bothered with Twilight, but I don’t think many would argue for either as being great. There’s also Avengers, but that feels like another beast entirely given how interconnected it is with other Marvel films. And then there are a bunch of former trilogies turned into long-running franchises like Star Wars that took themselves beyond four films.

I’m surely missing out on some and there’s probably a good tetralogy or two I’m spacing on, but I’m having a hard time finding a worthy contender to what Pixar has done with its Toy Story franchise. It’s surprising how successful it has been considering Pixar never even envisioned doing a sequel. Disney all but mandated Toy Story 2 be a thing because of how successful the original was. It even started as a direct-to-video feature that earned a theatrical release and, for many, is the most beloved entry in the series. Toy Story 3 surprised and delighted movie-goers in 2010 and seemed to put a bow on the franchise as it dealt with the toys moving on from their beloved owner, Andy. A few TV specials have emerged since and it seemed like that’s where Toy Story was destined to reside. Then the world was surprised in 2014 when Toy Story 4 was officially confirmed as in development.

Toy Story 4 had probably the most treacherous development cycle (though most treacherous moment still belongs to Toy Story 2 when that film was accidentally deleted) of any of the films in the series thus far. A lot of writers came and went and the picture was delayed a year not once, but twice. John Lasseter was unceremoniously dumped by Disney and Pixar following some allegations of inappropriate conduct which was made worse when actress/writer Rashida Jones left the picture citing a disagreement on where the story was heading and renewing concerns that Pixar was not a great place for women creators. Given the turmoil behind the scenes, and the already high bar set by the previous films, it would not have been at all surprising if Toy Story 4 turned out to be a bust in the end. Pixar has a tremendous track record, but a similarly troubled picture like The Good Dinosaur wasn’t able to overcome development hell.

bo peeps outlook

Bo Peep is back and she has a whole new outlook on what it means to be a toy that Woody has to come to grips with.

Unlike The Good Dinosaur, this is Toy Story. This is the franchise that essentially made Pixar was it is today and it’s these characters that the company will be most identified by for as long as humans are around and talking about movies. There was likely a different kind of focus behind the scenes and a determination by those involved to make sure that this movie did not harm the reputation of the studio and the franchise as a whole. A lot of credit seems to be going to Andrew Stanton who has helmed several Pixar projects and director Josh Cooley, who was selected by Lasseter to helm his first feature-length project. Further credit should also go to these wonderful characters created by Pixar who quite simply refuse to stop being so damn charming and interesting despite appearing in now four films where the plot is nearly the same in all four with just slight variations on the setup.

Several years ago I ranked Pixar’s 10 best features and selected Toy Story 3 as my favorite in the Toy Story trilogy. It’s still my favorite, but following it I also had no idea how the franchise could go on. Well, that’s not entirely true. Pixar could have easily just stitched together another adventure only now instead of Andy in the background it’s Bonnie. After all, at their core all four films are just the toys getting lost and having to find their way back. That, however, isn’t really Pixar’s philosophy. Their features have purpose, and for Toy Story 4 the concept of self-identity and self worth are its purpose and main story. And the vehicle for that story is Woody (Tom Hanks), who was once the favorite toy of Andy but is now a cast-off in the eyes of Bonnie. He’s going to be paired up with newcomer Forky (Tony Hale), a spork turned into a toy via Bonnie (Madeleine McGraw) who has a hard time coming to grips with the fact that he’s no longer a discarded utensil but an actual toy.

Bonnie takes an immediate liking to Forky, and at least for the duration of the film, Forky is her new favorite toy. Forky though considers himself trash and all he wants is to be thrown away. It’s up to Woody to make sure that doesn’t happen. It’s a task Woody gives himself because he has no other purpose at the moment and he’s not even willing to share the responsibility of safeguarding Forky, which becomes quite a problem when the family hits the road for a good old fashioned RV vacation.

woody introduces forky

Woody introducing Forky to the rest of the gang.

The film opens with a flashback revealing what happened to Woody’s old flame Bo Peep (Annie Potts), the porcelain doll who adorned a lamp belonging to Andy’s sister Molly. She disappeared between Toy Story 2 and 3, and in Toy Story 4 she is reintroduced as a lost toy. During an attempted escape from the RV by Forky, Woody and he end up on their own in search of the RV. During that time they happen across an antiques store where Woody recognizes Bo Peep’s lamp in the window, but without Bo Peep. He’ll eventually find her, and the film turns into a story about Woody and Bo Peep that’s essentially a G-rated rom-com.

Along the way, new toys will be introduced like Keanu Reeves’ Duke Caboom, a dare devil motorcycle toy with confidence issues, and the comedic duo of Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele voice Ducky and Bunny, a pair of carnival prizes looking for an owner of their own. Old favorites like Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen) and Jessie (Joan Cusack) are here as well, but they play very minor roles compared with past films. Really, only Buzz has a substantial role as the others are mostly left waiting on the RV absent from the adventure being experienced by Woody. It’s something that does not read well in a review, or at least it wouldn’t had I read any reviews going into seeing this film, but I honestly did not miss those characters even if I mostly adored them in the prior films. That’s a testament to the engrossing nature of the film’s main plot, the questions it asks, and the stakes it creates.

clucky and bunny

Your old favorites are here, but there’s also new characters to introduce and, more importantly, merchandize.

Those stakes are partially created by outside forces. There’s a sense of finality going into this film, as there was with Toy Story 3, which makes it feel like almost anything could happen. And then there was also the impossible to avoid press on the film (even by someone like me who does his best to avoid such) in which Tim Allen and Tom Hanks openly talked about the emotional ending to the film. That had people speculating wildly on what could happen, and it was in the back of my mind while viewing the film. Even so, probably around the one-hour mark in the movie I could see where the picture was headed. That did not diminish my enjoyment of the film, though it probably contributed to my finding of the film’s resolution less emotional than its predecessor.

Toy Story 3 is a film that hit me right in the feels, so Toy Story 4 not matching that level of emotion is hardly a negative. It would have been hard to pull that off, but what Toy Story 4 did manage to do in terms of topping the prior films is up the comedy. This is, especially in the first half of the film, the funniest Toy Story movie yet. A lot of that comes from Forky who is basically suicidal, in a sense. I was quite skeptical of the character going into this one, but he absolutely won me over and he basically steals every scene he’s involved with. Ducky and Bunny also lend a certain level ludicrousness to this one that wasn’t found in past installments, or really in any Pixar film I can think of. I’m curious how much, if any, ad-libbing Key and Peel were allowed to do for their characters as it feels like their brand of humor certainly had an influence on their parts. Reeves is more charming than truly funny as Duke Caboom and Kristen Schaal’s Trixie is also good for a chuckle when she’s around.

toy story 4 scary

Your little ones may find some of the scenes in this picture a bit intense.

Toy Story 4 is not only the funniest film in the series, it might also be the scariest. While there is no moment where all of the toys look like they’re going to perish in a fire as there was in Toy Story 3, there’s some pretty scary imagery that may freak out the younger members of the audience. In particular is the army of old school ventriloquist dummies which occupy space in the antiques store. Those puppets, like clowns, are never not scary so when they’re trying to be terrifying it works. The film’s villain, Gabby Gabby (Christina Hendricks), is quietly unsettling as well and I always felt a feeling of discomfort when she was around, similar to Lotso from Toy Story 3.

The scary and the funny moments are just entertainment beats along the way to telling the story of Woody and Bo Peep. They have quite the adventure in this picture not unlike the past ones and everything looks quite spectacular along the way. The leap in terms of visuals from Toy Story 3 to 4 isn’t as impressive as what we saw in going from 2 to 3, but it’s still noticeable and this is a high point for Pixar. Whether it’s the toys or the few humans on display, this picture is marvelous to look at. The action pieces are thrilling and the novelty of viewing a world through the eyes of a toy has yet to grow stale. While I do think some liberties were taken in this picture in terms of the actions of the toys going unseen by the humans they share space with, it never diminished my enjoyment of the film.

I have heard there’s some disappointment amongst the fanbase in how this film resolves itself and some of the plot points it took to get there, but I can’t say I share them. Is this the story I would have told had I been given the keys to the franchise? Probably not, but I also would never be put in that position, and with good reason. I never desired to find out what happened to Bo Peep, just as I don’t really care what happened to Weezy or that shark who momentarily wore Woody’s hat in the first film, but Pixar created a story and a film centered on Bo Peep and it works. She is everything Woody fears as she’s a lost toy who is beholden to no owner, and Woody has to struggle to understand that world view. I get a sense some are disappointed to see that Bonnie has also essentially discarded the cowboy she appeared to love in Toy Story 3. To those I say how many of you continued to love every toy you received as a four-year-old? It would be more improbable for that four-year-old girl to continue to adore an old cowboy as opposed to finding something new (and in this it’s clearly established that she prefers Jessie to Woody). And while it’s unlikely any child would continue to love and adore a plastic spork turned into a toy, it’s totally probable in the short-term. I know my own kids have professed to love a Happy Meal toy or something similar for a few days or a week at most only for it to wind up under a bed or in a toy box for months on end (and then when I go to get rid of it they suddenly love it all over again).

woody bo rooftop

I never would have expected a rom-com from Toy Story, and yet that’s what we got and it works.

As it is, I find nothing improbable about the film’s overall plot, aside from it being about sentient toys. I accept the story for what it is, and found the film delightfully entertaining for its entire duration. There are parts that made me a touch uncomfortable with where these characters were going, but good films and stories should do that. They should challenge the viewer and take them out of their comfort zone at times, otherwise what’s the point?

Naturally, folks will debate what is the best movie in this franchise. It’s perhaps too soon to tell, but I do think Toy Story 4 is probably going to be the least liked film in the series, and yet it’s still going to be held up as another Pixar masterpiece. That says less about the movie than it does about the franchise as a whole, which has been remarkably consistent. It brings me back to my original question when I started this review:  what is the best tetralogy in film history? I’m not qualified to answer that definitively, but I’m having a hard time coming up with a series of four films better than what Pixar has given us with Toy Story. These are four delightful films populated by interesting and wondrous characters who have already managed to stand the test of time for nearly 25 years. Toy Story 4 is probably the end for these characters, though if you asked me I would have said the same after Toy Story 3. It’s always possible another movie comes along, and additional shorts will probably happen, but I wouldn’t hold my breath on Toy Story 5. If this is indeed the end then it’s a wonderful way to go out. Maybe it didn’t answer all of the questions fans had been asking (Who was Andy’s dad? Did Andy’s mom once own Jessie?),  but it kept the focus on the toys and it gave us a pretty full look at what it means to be a toy. It made us laugh and it made us cry and it probably also caused more than a few viewers to feel a little guilty about all of those toys we left behind ourselves, but mostly it captivated us and showed us a new way to enjoy animation. Toy Story is a franchise with an amazing and unforgettable legacy attached to it, and Toy Story 4 adds to it and is yet another film that will be enjoyed by kids and adults alike to infinity and beyond.


Lego 10766 – Woody and RC (Toy Story 4)

img_4030There’s a new Pixar movie incoming next month, which also means lots of new merch! Especially when the movie is none other than Toy Story 4 as what movie franchise could possibly lend itself better to toys than one about actual toys? Toy Story 4 is a merchandising juggernaut for Disney and a cash cow at the box office as well. That’s pretty much why it still exists as Pixar never intended to even do Toy Story 2. Normally, cash grabs can seem cynical, but in the case of Toy Story I think all can agree that the franchise’s continued existence is very much a good thing as it has yet to deliver a dud. Toy Story 4 could obviously change that, but for now that feels unlikely.

Lego is back to supplement the film with construction sets based on the property. This isn’t new, but what is new is that we now have some pre-existing mini figures in need of some company. Prior Toy Story sets put out by Lego went with customized mini figures that prioritized likeness over the traditional mini figure aesthetic. With Lego’s first wave of Disney themed mini figures a few years ago, the company created a Buzz Lightyear that is basically a traditional mini figure but with some accessories. The line also included an alien which was more like the old Toy Story mini figures in which Lego went with a custom headsculpt. Those two guys seemed lonely on my shelf, so I was happy to check out the latest sets to see what I could do for them.

img_4035

Woody together with his former adversary turned best friend.

And the one that jumped out at me is Lego 10766 – Woody and RC. This is essentially a remake of an old set, 7590, which featured Woody, Buzz, and RC plus the giant rocket from the climax of the original Toy Story. I don’t know why they’re doing a scene from the first film in promotion of the fourth, but I’m not complaining. This set is simpler and includes Woody as a more traditional mini figure, RC, and some in-scale army men. For the low price of 10 dollars, it felt like a no brainer when I saw it at the store as I could easily pair it with the Buzz I already have.

img_4034

Woody is the driver here.

Woody is a pretty straight-forward mini figure. His hat and hair are attached to his head. They’re likely separate pieces and could be separated by someone with some degree of determination, but I am not that person. All of his costume details are printed on and there’s no holster or anything additional. The little army men are just small, all green, pieces. They’re a cute touch, even if they’re not exceptional. There are also some cones to put together and an assortment of boxes with colored lids. It would have been nice if instead of boxes Lego had just included traditional alphabet building blocks, but that would require some custom printing and Lego obviously wanted to target a smaller price point for this one.

img_4036

The cockpit only has room for one.

RC is the main attraction. His build is quick and simple, but also quite clean and functional. His decals and eyes are printed pieces so no stickers to screw around with. You could probably build him just by looking at a picture, but there are of course instructions included. He also features a little remote control that Woody can hold and it’s also a simple construction, but one that captures the likeness quite well. Woody can fit in the driver’s seat area easily and I so far have elected to position Buzz on the tail piece. There’s nothing for him to click onto though. This RC is not as robust as the older one, but it works. About the only complaint I could levy is that the front bumper could have been done in a more inventive manner and the rear wheels should be larger than the front. He sits a bit too flat compared with the source material.

img_4031

Where Woody and company can expect to live out their days. It beats an attic.

A quick and simple post for a quick and simple Lego set. This one does its job and I’m happy to position Woody, RC, Buzz and the Alien together amongst my other Disney collectibles. And while I’d love to add Jessie or Rex, I don’t see myself shelling out for additional Toy Story 4 sets. I prefer this aesthetic for the figures compared with the older ones, and it’s nice to see a relatively cheap, licensed, set from Lego. I don’t think I need any additional Toy Story characters (technically, I don’t need any at all), but maybe I’ll change my mind after seeing Toy Story 4.


Lego Mini Figures – Disney Series 2

img_4019

Series 2 gives us more Aladdin which probably isn’t a surprise considering the new movie coming out.

I feel like I need to take credit for the existence of this wave of Disney Mini Figures. It wasn’t that long ago I wondered why the flood gates never opened following the 2016 release of Cinderella’s Castle from Walt Disney World and the wave of mini figures that preceded it. Just days after that post Lego announced a new set based on Steamboat Willie was incoming. Then just days after that a second wave of mini figures based on Disney properties was announced! My timing could not have been better.

Obviously, I am joking about the credit thing because these were in the works for months, if not years, before being announced. I just ended up having extremely good timing where Disney and Lego are concerned. When that Steamboat Willie set was released I snatched it up and shared my thoughts here on the set as a whole. Now I’ve tracked down the entirety of the mini figures that followed in May and I’m ready to tell you all about them.

img_4023

I’ve got these, and other Disney objects, displayed all over my house.

Series 2 for the Disney brand of Lego mini figures largely went as expected. Several characters complement the characters from series 1 while others are just logical inclusions based on their level of popularity. There are 18 figures in total, two of which are variants of previously released figures. Each comes in a blind bag, but those willing to stand around in-store feeling up bags should be able to reasonably ascertain who’s who without purchasing doubles of any character. Below, I’ll talk about things to look for when hunting as I found this series pretty easy. The only way you’ll end up with doubles is if you get impatient, which is easy to do as no one is 100% comfortable feeling-up bags of toys in a store while strangers look on. You just have to suck it up and feel like a dork for a little while. Each figure retails for 3.99 in most places, but specialty shops may tack on a buck or two and each figures comes with at least one accessory.

1928 Mickey and Minnie Mouse

So these two should look familiar. These are the same figures included in the Steamboat Willie set. It’s not at all surprising to see Lego save a couple of bucks by doubling-up here, and for those not interested in that set at least they can get a Minnie and Mickey this way. The only difference between the two is that these versions use a black, white, and gray color scheme while the Steamboat Willie figures utilized silver instead of gray to make them seem extra special. I’m a bit of a purist when it comes to my toys so I actually prefer this color scheme. Mickey and Minnie both feature a removable hat affixed by a peg with Minnie even coming with an extra in case one gets lost. Mickey sports his iconic steering wheel while Minnie gets a buoy. It’s a pretty lackluster accessory for Minnie as this is also Lego’s go-to piece when creating a toilet seat. Why not give her the ukulele or bird? These two are super easy to find though because of their unique head sculpts. And distinguishing between Mickey and Minnie is also simple given that giant steering wheel. I came across many in my search so they may even be packed slightly higher than other characters, or it could be that many people are leaving them behind. I kind of wish I had extras of the series 1 Mickey so I could get extras of these ones to make a classic, colored, Mickey by combing the black and white head with the colored body.

Huey

Coming in from the Disney Afternoon is Huey, the red-clad nephew of Donald Duck and great nephew to Scrooge McDuck. Huey is based on his classic look and the one most commonly associated with the original DuckTales from the 80s. He uses Lego’s kid legs which are immovable, has the “duck butt” debuted with Donald and Daisy, and removable cap. His accessories include the Junior Woodchuck’s Guide Book and a compass. When trying to find him in a blind bag, look for the book which comes in two pieces and is pretty distinct. Huey looks pretty great and the head sculpt is quite nice. Mostly, I am delighted to see some love for the Disney Afternoon. And naturally, you can’t have Huey without his brothers…

Dewey

Dewey (and Louie) is exactly the same as Huey only the red parts are blue. It’s another way for Lego to save some money and it makes sense as the triplets are identical in the source material (maybe this is why Lego decided on 80s DuckTales instead of the new one). The only other thing differentiating Dewey from Huey is his slingshot accessories. He comes with two, and it’s what you need to look for when feeling up a bag. It may be a small piece, but it’s actually pretty distinct even through a bag.

Louie

The last of the nephews and the one clad in green. I probably should have just put all three together, but oh well. He’s the exact same as his brothers, only he comes with two flashlights. They utilize the lightsaber hilt from Lego’s Star Wars sets and a stud for the light portion. Again, pretty easy to figure out as once you’ve identified that you’ve got one of the duck nephews you just need to find either a stud or the handle as Huey and Dewey do not have a similar piece.

Scrooge McDuck

My personal favorite of this wave is Scrooge himself. Based on his DuckTales look, he’s sporting his blue coat and top hat while also featuring a cane and his number one dime (plus an extra cane for good measure). His head sculpt looks great as it features his glasses molded right onto his bill. They’re colored instead of transparent, but look fine. His cane is missing a handle though, and the red stripe on his hat is molded on, but not painted. As a result, he could have been better, but still looks pretty rad to me. When hunting for Scrooge (who seems to be popular and a touch harder to find as a result) you can safely just key-in on the two walking sticks. Surprisingly, he’s the only figure with a perfectly straight, round, piece like that. If you want further assurance, his hat is also pretty easy to find and he’ll have the duck butt piece as well.

Chip and Dale

The mischievous duo of Chip and Dale make their Lego debut. While they’re obviously not in scale with the other characters, I still consider it a positive to receive such an iconic and classic pair. Chip and Dale utilize the better kid legs which are able to move like conventional mini figure legs as well as unique sculpted heads like the other mascot characters. The only way to distinguish between the two is their accessories. Chip comes with an acorn that’s disassembled. Through a bag it just feels like little, tiny, pieces. Dale, on the other hand, comes with a sack (a nut sack?) that’s pretty distinct and should be a reliable way to separate the two rodents. Lego also took some creative license with the pair and made Dale lighter in color. I’m not sure if this is a popular occurrence in the merchandise world, but I had not encountered it before. Again, purist here, so I’d prefer the two look the same, but it’s not a big deal. I do wish they had a tail piece instead of a printed one on their back. Overall though, they look plenty cute and the designs didn’t suffer in the transfer to 3D.

Elsa

The first series of Disney mini figures surprisingly avoided the princess characters, but this one did not. And how could Lego ignore the incredible popularity of Frozen, especially with a sequel coming later this year? Elsa comes clad in her classic ice blue dress. She has a cape, which I suppose is supposed to be the transparent parts of her dress, but just looks like a cape here. It’s a dark blue and covered in printed snowflakes. She also has an oversized snow flake, a braided hair piece that takes her hair over one shoulder, and a head piece with two facial expressions: a smile and a winking smile. Her base is a trapezoid like piece to account for her robes. Maleficent utilized a similar piece in series 1, but the difference here is that there’s some slight molding on the front to provide a hint of legs underneath – a nice touch. It’s that base that makes it easy to narrow down the other figures when looking for them as she shares that piece with Anna and Jafar. To further separate her from her sister just look for the snowflake. It may be a bit of a dumb accessory, but it does make it easy to find Elsa. Plus, she really didn’t have anything else in the film going for her. The cape looks silly, but the overall likeness is fine and sure to please your daughter (it did mine).

Anna

Anna comes sporting her traditional look when she sets out to find her sister. Her body sculpt is the same as Elsa’s except her hair features two braids instead of one. She even has a smirking face and winking face as well on her head piece. Her cape looks much better by virtue of it being pretty simple making her my preferred Frozen sister. Her accessory is also a bit more fun, though also not tremendously important to her character as it’s just a lantern. It’s a unique piece though making it easy to find Anna in a blind bag. Once you found the leg base piece, just look for the lantern and the cylinder that goes inside of it.

Jafar

Series 1 of the Disney mini figures included Aladdin and the Genie, so why not Jafar in series 2? We need more bad guys, so the sorcerer is welcomed. He has his standard look and comes with his large serpent-topped staff, the piece to look for when hunting. He also has a cape, shoulder pads, and his rather large hat. His head only features one expression, but it’s not like Jafar needs anything aside from his scowl. Characters with a lot of distinct characteristics in their clothing seem to work best, and it’s why Jafar is one of the best figures in this series. Like Anna and Elsa, he also uses the robed base and the abundance of accessories make him a cinch to figure out. The only thing missing is a little parrot stand-in for Iago.

Jasmine

Another princess, this one also pairs nicely with Aladdin. Jasmine is a conventional figure with all of her clothing being printed on. The sides of her body are blue which makes her look rather weird at certain angles, but this is how Lego does this sort of thing to make its figures actually look less blocky. She comes with a bird as seemingly all Disney princesses are capable of conversing with animals. It’s not a particularly exciting accessory, but I guess giving her a tiger would have been a touch excessive. When on the hunt for Jasmine you basically have to use process of elimination as her figure is rather plain. From there, look for the hair which is in a long braid and is rather soft and pretty easy to locate.

Hades

Arguably the easiest one to figure out when feeling-up the bags is Hades. That’s due to his unique leg-piece which is similar to Ursula’s from series 1. It’s molded to feature his robes which have a life of their own in the film he’s from. And if for some reason you can’t locate it, the little flames are also pretty easy to fine. Hades has a great look and the flames on his head are actually glued on. He’s another welcomed bad guy, and while I’ve never been a fan of Hercules, I’ve always liked Hades in spite of his detestable voice actor. He’s one of the better looking figures in this set as the bad guys really stand out.

Hercules

Since we got Hades, it’s no surprise to see Hercules in this wave as well. He’s a traditional mini figure who features two expressions, two swords, a shield, cape, and hair piece. The circular shield is pretty easy to fine, and the two swords stand out as well. I already mentioned I’m not much of a fan of the source material here, but for what it’s worth Hercules looks pretty good. He’d be hard to mess up.

Sally

Coming in from the always popular Nightmare Before Christmas is that lovable scarecrow Sally. Sally is another conventional mini figure with no additions aside from her hair. And it’s that hair that makes her a dead giveaway when searching through bags as it’s huge and spoon-shaped. Which is good because her little flower accessories, which have to be assembled, are somewhat nondescript when on the hunt. Otherwise, her features are achieved entirely via screen-printing as Lego opted not to give her any cloth pieces, which feels like a mistake as her model in the film has such lovely textures that this figure just can’t capture. She’s one of my least favorites as I find this depiction a little boring.

Jack Skellington

Naturally, if you’re going to include Sally then you need to include Jack. He’s able to “wow” more than Sally by virtue of his easily translatable look and additional pieces. He has his bat-like bowtie and cloth suit tails. His accessory is a Christmas gift, I believe the one that houses the shrunken head in the film, only this time it’s filled with little circular snowflakes. The cubed box is the item to look for when figure hunting and should stick out like a sore thumb. Jack’s face looks great and overall it’s hard to find fault with this one. Lego could have gone with a unique head piece, but I think the standard one works just fine for the character. After all, part of the charm is seeing the characters converted into the Lego style.

Edna Mode

Serving as a compliment to last summer’s Incredibles 2 Lego sets is this version of Edna Mode. A previous one was available, but it was rather lackluster. This one uses the Lego child body and an oversized hair piece that features Edna’s glasses to really bring her look alive. She also comes with a pair of coffee mugs and what I assume is a purse. By virtue of the fact that she shares a base with the nephews, you’ll want to try and find that hair piece. It’s bowl-shaped and quite deep so you shouldn’t worry about confusing it for one of the caps included with the duck boys. Mostly, use process of elimination as the duck boy heads are easy to distinguish and the duck butt is as well. You shouldn’t worry about confusing her with the chipmunks as their legs can move and it’s rather easy to actually move them through the bag without fear of tearing it open. I’m not much of a fan of the Incredibles or this character, but she looks good for what Lego is shooting for.

Frozone

Lastly, we have Frozone. It was surprising to see him excluded from the Lego sets from last year, but I guess that’s because they were saving him for this wave. Frozone comes with two ice pieces that his hands can grip as well as a saucer meant to serve as one of his ice sleds, I suppose. That saucer is what will make him easy to find as it’s large and flat. Lego opted to screen print his cowl on rather than make it a separate piece and it works considering how tight his costume is supposed to fit. The little sled piece makes him fun to pose, and overall he’s a logical inclusion that looks great.

img_4021And that concludes series 2. Will there be a series 3? I sure hope so as Lego still owes us a Goofy. How he managed to avoid inclusion in this wave is beyond me since he really should have been in the first with the other Disney originals. Aside from him, Pluto would be wanted even if he was depicted as a mascot rather than a four-legged dog (maybe make him a unique figure for another Disney park set?!) and Lego has yet to tackle any of the inhabitants of the Hundred Acre Woods. The Disney Afternoon is also teeming with potential figures, the most-wanted likely being Darkwing Duck. And if Lego insists on reusing its Mickey head well there’s a whole bunch of other outfits to explore. In short, a wave 3 would be easy to fill out and is probably likely to sell as well as any other series of mini figures, if not better, so hopefully it happens. I’m not ready for it to end.


Disney+ Revealed

Disney+It was only a matter of time until big companies got into streaming. Netflix was allowed to practically monopolize the market for years before facing any sort of real challenge. Now we have Hulu, Prime Video, as well as numerous niche offerings like WWE Network and Crunchyroll which cater to a specific type of fan. Premium channels like HBO can now be subscribed to without a cable subscription as more consumers look to change how they watch television. With Warner Media announcing in November of 2018 that it intended to offer a streaming service, it only made sense that Disney would follow suit. Not only did Disney possess its own vast library of works, it had recently entered into an agreement to acquire 20th Century Fox adding even more volume. And given how much money Disney had paid to acquire Fox’s portfolio, it only makes sense that the media giant would want to find a way to monetize that investment sooner rather than later.

We’ve known for months that Disney+ was coming. We’ve also known it was going to feature the entirety of Disney’s film library. This was notable when announced because it likely means the long-vaulted film Song of the South will be readily available for the first time in decades. Song of the South is a live-action animated hybrid first released in 1946. At best, it’s content was deemed racially insensitive and at worst flat-out racist as it sought to portray a setting of happy plantation workers in a post Civil War setting. Most historians seem to agree that Walt Disney’s heart was in the right place when the movie was made, but also acknowledge it’s very problematic. Today, most fans will just recognize the animated characters from the popular Disney World and Disneyland attraction Splash Mountain. Disney has long sought to distance itself from this film and never released it on VHS or DVD in the west. It has been released in some parts of the world where the issue of American slavery is less thorny. It’s likely appearance on Disney+ will be the first time many Americans are exposed to the film outside of a bootleg.

uncle remus

Disney+ will likely be how a lot of folks will first experience the controversial Song of the South.

A 70-year-old film that’s not very good wasn’t going to drive the success of Disney+ though. Song of the South will probably have high stream counts when the service launches and gradually fade away. The rest of the Disney film library will do a lot of the heavy-lifting, but how much was that going to be worth to consumers? Disney, more so than any other studio, has a pretty loyal following of fans that still buy its movies on physical media. While it’s certainly convenient to have films readily available on a streaming platform, what’s the value to Disney fans that already have most of these movies?

UPDATE:  Apparently “entire film library” does not apply to the controversial ones as it is now being reported that Song of the South will indeed be excluded from Disney+ when it launches this fall. In addition to that, Dumbo will see the infamous Jim Crow scene annexed from its film. Song of the South is not a good film so it’s not much of a loss to not have it on the streaming service. In the spirit of not hiding from one’s past, I would have liked to have seen it included with a disclaimer or even an introduction added on, but I’m also not surprised. Removing an entire scene, a rather pivotal one at that, from Dumbo is more concerning. If they’re going to start chopping up their films to remove questionable content (and there’s more than just Dumbo) then I’d prefer they just not include them on the platform.

Disney was going to have to make Disney+ special, and on April 11th the company at long last laid out what it envisioned for the service. The most important detail, as always, is cost. The service will launch in November 2019 at a cost of $6.99 per month in the US, or $70 per year. Other regions will follow as the company likely looks to stagger the release to get a read on how much their servers will have to work. Presumably, the cost will be the same or roughly the same in other parts of the world. It’s an aggressive price point, not in that it’s too high, but in that Disney clearly looks like it’s trying to undercut Netflix, which just raised its prices. Disney owns a 60% stake in Hulu so it likely doesn’t want to undercut that too much. And with the confirmation that it will be ad-free, Disney+ already looks like one of the better bargains in the streaming world.

disney+ dash

A concept of what fans can expect to see when they login to the service.

Disney+ will also include not just Disney films, but Star Wars and Marvel as well. This isn’t much of a surprise, but there probably were some wondering if one, or both, of those big brands would be sent to Hulu instead. It was also touted that the launch of the service will feature the newly released Captain Marvel, currently airing in theaters at the time of this writing. It’s interesting that Captain Marvel was highlighted, but not Toy Story 4 which is set for release this June. At the time Disney+ launches, Toy Story 4 will likely be heading to home media and digital for the holidays. That film might be the first litmus test for what fans can expect between home video and streaming release. It would be understandable if Disney wants a gap between the two so as not to harm home media sales, but it also needs to make its streaming service attractive in regards to new releases.

Disney knows it will need some original content to compete with the likes of Netflix, and it announced a few new shows destined for its streaming service. The Mandalorian is a Star Wars themed show about a bounty hunter that looks like Boba Fett because that character is inexplicably popular. There will also be an animated show based on Marvel’s What If? line of comics and a live-action show called WandaVision focusing on Scarlet Witch and Vision. Some what of a surprise was the announcement that the “live-action” Lady and the Tramp is going to be a direct-to-streaming film on the service as opposed to a theatrically released film. I suppose Lady and the Tramp isn’t as popular as the likes of Aladdin and Beauty and the Beast, but given how much money these live-action remakes have been making it’s still a bit of a surprise to see it bypass the theater.

Disney-Simpsons

The Simpsons “welcome” their new corporate overlords.

Perhaps the biggest surprise though was reserved for a non-Disney property:  The Simpsons. America’s favorite animated family is coming to Disney+ and all thirty seasons will be available on day one. I think most assumed that The Simpsons was destined for Hulu, but apparently Disney feels the brand is too valuable for that platform. It’s probably right, though this likely spells the end for The Simpsons World, the streaming portion of the FX Now app which currently is home to the entire series for anyone with a cable subscription. That app was limited, though it was still useful to have every episode on demand, with optional commentary no less. I assume the show will still air on FXX, assuming Disney keeps the channel around, but the on demand options to cable subscribers are probably about to decrease substantially.

What wasn’t touched on in as much detail as I would have liked is what is to come of the television properties Disney owns? Specifically, can we expect to see the entire Disney Afternoon collection of shows on this service? The announcement did make mention of Disney Channel programming so it’s expected all or most of the current programs will be there, but it wasn’t elaborated on. I also want to know if the classic theatrical shorts will show up, and if so, will they be remastered in HD? Some packages of shorts are currently available on Netflix, so it wouldn’t surprise me if those make it to Disney+ early on, but I’m really hoping all of the classic animation is included.

pooh and christopher robin

Disney+ could be a place where television shows like The New Adventures of Winnie the Pooh, one that has been ignored by Disney since it ceased airing, could finally find a new home.

Given the amount of content and the low introductory price, I think it’s safe to say that Disney+ will have a pretty successful launch. My household will likely be a day one subscriber as my kids probably average one Disney movie per day and this will save ware and tear on my Blu Ray collection. I suspect the price-point to change much faster than Netflix changed its pricing. The most popular Netflix subscription just increased to $13 per month, nearly twice what Disney+ will cost in November. There’s no way Disney, a company that really loves money, will stay at the low-end for long. It’ll be interesting to see how aggressively the company raises that number, with it likely staying put for a year or so. Disney will probably try to incentivize consumers to subscribe to the service in a package with Hulu and ESPN.

What we’re also likely to discover in the coming years as well is just how large an appetite the consumer has for streaming content. Cutting the chord used to be a radical concept, but now is starting to become pretty normal. It was once a way to drastically reduce the cost of television in the average household, but with more streaming options showing up spreading things around it’s no longer the value it once was. My guess is that consumers will become less loyal to any one brand and will be constantly switching between services on a monthly basis. That is, until the content providers start forcing or aggressively incentivizing consumers to subscribe to deals that last for months, or even years. It’s even possible they’ll be forced to turn to contracts, and then we’ll basically be right back to where we were with cable companies. The cycle will repeat.


Disney gets the Lego Treatment

maxresdefault-3Lego is one of the most popular toy manufacturers on the planet. They’ve become known for their building block style toys that come in various shapes, sizes, and colors and can be combined to form castles, pirate ships, space crafts, and other fantastic designs. They also have struck gold with their mini figures, simplistic action figures that embody the Lego design and make great pilots, captains, and heroes to pair with the various sets. It used to be you had to buy a construction set to get a figure or two, but for several years now Lego has capitalized on the appeal of its mini figures by releasing them individually in blind bag assortments. Even more recently, Lego has decided to apply a popular license for these blind bag releases. For the past two years, that license was The Simpsons. I was rather fond of this decision and really it got me back into Lego after not buying a set since I was a kid. The Simpsons I feel still had legs and a series three would have been welcomed by me, but Lego has apparently killed that line and decided to go with a new license:  Disney.

Theming a line of figures on the Disney license is almost as broad as creating a line of “People” figures. The Walt Disney Company has been putting out animated and live action films for nearly a century. The company has its own television station full of original programming, plus it owns Pixar, Marvel, Star Wars, and ABC to name a few. And since Lego already makes Star Wars and Marvel sets, it stands to reason that their Disney themed wave of mini figures could include those franchises if it wanted to. What it really means for Lego is that its first wave of Disney mini figures is an amalgamation of a few popular Disney properties. The first set of 18 Disney figures contains popular Disney creations like Mickey Mouse and Donald, characters from classic animated films like Aladdin and Peter Pan, and also a few Pixar figures to round things out. There are likely fans out there who would have preferred it if Lego stuck to the classic animated films, or maybe even just the Mickey and friends line, but Lego opted to try to please a wide consumer base.

IMG_0256

A motley crew of Disney plastic.

As someone who likes Disney and is married to a woman who LOVES Disney, it meant i had to collect this line with the same vigor as I did with The Simpsons. The wave hit retail on May 1st, though a few lucky individuals probably found them earlier. Like other mini figure waves, this series is released in blind bags so the consumer doesn’t know what they’re buying, unless they’re willing to sit and prod at each bag to feel the figure out. As Lego did with The Simpsons, they’ve chosen to make custom head sculpts for a lot of the Disney characters, basically all of the non-humanoid ones. That means finding Mickey and Minnie when groping a plastic bag is actually pretty easy, same for Sticth as well as the ducks, Donald and Daisy. I actually found the entire wave pretty easy to feel out and went a perfect 18 for 18 with my purchases. Now, if only I had better luck at finding the figures at big box retailers. Stores like Target and Toys R Us sell each figure for 3.99 a piece, but I got stuck hitting up specialty shops that charged 6.99. The things I do for love.

 

Unlike The Simpsons, these Disney figures are not released alongside any standard Lego sets, which is a bummer. Lego does have a line of Disney centric Lego Friends sets which focus on the various princess characters. The Friends line is Lego’s girl line, because apparently girls can’t handle traditional mini figures and bricks, and it’s clear Lego avoided duplicating characters it had already released as part of that line. The set of 18 is mostly free of the princess characters, with the exception of a mermaid Ariel. Alice from Alice in Wonderland is also included, but I don’t think she’s ever been considered a “princess.” From the Mickey and Friends collection, we have Mickey, Minnie, Donald and Daisy. Any Disney fan immediately sees that list and says “Where’s Goofy?!” He’s missing in action here. The four who are included look pretty good though. Donald and Daisy even have a little duck “butt” piece which is pretty funny but also pragmatic. Mickey is kind of dull though as he comes with no unique pieces or accessories. He doesn’t even have a tail! That’s a problem I’ll address later as it’s a recurring problem. Not the tail, but the lack of accessories to go along with these figures.

IMG_0257

Ursula’s got it going on.

From the Disney animated classics group of films, there’s the following:  Alice, Cheshire Cat, Maleficent, Peter Pan, Captain Hook, Stitch, Ursula, Ariel, Aladdin, and the Genie. All are done fairly well, though characters like Aladdin and Pan suffer from being a bit too conventional and kind of boring in appearance. Genie suffers a little in that he’s fairly unique, but the efforts made to convey that don’t work so well. Instead of getting a more unique sculpt, he’s actually a standard mini figure with add-on pieces to round out his look. He does have a “ghost” lower body which is kind of neat, but he still doesn’t really look all that much like the Genie from Aladdin. Plus Lego got really cheap with his gold cuffs and only painted half of his wrist. Maleficent is unique in that she doesn’t have legs, but a triangular block for a base to simulate her robes. It works pretty well as a visual, though it’s probably not fun for kids to play with. Ursula is definitely the cream of the crop as she gets a uniquely sculpted lower body that looks great. Ariel does as well, but her tail is rather blocky and unappealing to look at. I get that Lego is supposed to be blocky, but there’s just something off with Ariel’s look.

 

IMG_0258

The piece Lego fanatics have been waiting years for:  duck butt.

Pixar is also featured, albeit in a minor way. There aren’t many Pixar characters that would work as Lego mini figures, but Lego did pick some suitable ones. From Toy Story, there’s Buzz Lightyear and the Alien, and from The Incredibles we have Mr. Incredible and his foe Syndrome. Buzz is the star of the four. While he doesn’t quite look like the Buzz we know and love, the unique pieces included give him a lot of personality. The Alien gets a unique head sculpt and looks fine, while Mr. Incredible and Syndrome look about as good as they can, though they’re a little boring. I don’t dislike any of the four, and actually really like Buzz, but I am left wishing Lego had stuck with more conventional Disney properties and gave Pixar its own wave.

 

With any release like this, it’s easy to zero in on what’s missing. Properties like Pinnochio, Snow White, and The Lion King are synonymous with Disney but not represented here. There’s also a lack of quality accessories that’s kind of disappointing. Mickey comes with none, when he should come with Pluto. He could have come with some clothing type accessories like his sorcerer’s hat, something which is better than nothing. Ursula comes with King Triton’s trident but not his crown, and Ariel comes with an oyster shell with a pink jewel in it. Maybe I need to watch The Little Mermaid again because I don’t remember that amongst her many treasures. I’d rather she come with a fork, I mean, dinglehopper, though a Flounder would have been better. Stitch, Cheshire Cat, and the Alien all come with no accessories, and Aladdin and the Genie both come with the same lamp. Couldn’t Aladdin at least have come with a black Jafar’s lamp? These figures aren’t really all that cheap, the least Lego could do is make sure each character has at least one appropriate accessory to round them out.

IMG_0259

Pan looks kind of bloodthirsty, not that Hook looks like any less of a maniac.

Criticisms aside, I do think this is a pretty solid wave of mini figures and a nice start for the Disney line. I assume there will at least be a wave two and I’m hopeful Lego will explore some Disney sets, especially if they’re based on Disney World or Disneyland. As far as a potential wave 2 is concerned, I would assume some characters are no-brainers. Goofy, Woody, and Jessie seem like locks. Near locks would include Mrs. Incredible, Frozone, and Jafar. If Lego really wants to stick with the films its already touched upon, then characters like King Triton and the Queen of Hearts certainly have a shot as well. I’m hopeful that Pinnochio and Jiminy Cricket get a look, and a Beast and Gaston would be pretty awesome. It’ll probably be nearly a year before we know what’s to come, but until then it will be fun to speculate.

UPDATE:  Well it took Lego a few months to unveil it, they did indeed confirm a Lego version of Disney World’s iconic Cinderella Castle is coming this September. It will retail for $350 (ouch!) and total over 4,000 pieces and come bundled with 5 mini figures. Making her traditional Lego debut will be Tinker Belle and she’s joined by a tuxedo-clad Mickey, a red polka-dot version of Minnie, a pink version of Daisy, and Donald, who appears to be identical to his previously released figure. It looks pretty slick, and it’s hard to argue with the character choices. The castle interior looks like it will be full of easter eggs, and possibly hints for future mini figures, and the only initial piece of criticism I could offer is the depth of the castle looks shallow. It likely would have benefitted from a hinged design to make the base at least appear bigger. Aside from that, it’s a nice piece of eye candy and something I’m going to have to buy for my Disney-obsessed wife.LEGO_71040_fi

 


Dreaming of Kingdom Hearts 3

images-125

UPDATE 3/8/2014: Square-Enix has posted a survey for Kingdom Hearts, and if there is something you want to see in Kingdom Hearts 3 (Gargoyles!), this is the best way to make your voice heard!

Watching Gargoyles these past few weeks has got me thinking about the upcoming PS4/Xbox One game Kingdom Hearts 3.  So far, little information, aside from confirmation the title has been in development, has been released regarding the next entry in the Kingdom Hearts series.  For those unaware, the Kingdom Hearts games were initially conceived as a marriage between Disney and Square’s Final Fantasy.  Several games have been released in the series and, for the most part, they all follow a pattern of having the main character visit various different worlds based on classic and current Disney films.  Gargoyles has got me thinking about how cool it would be to see that world brought to the series as it would seemingly lend itself well to the video game form.  There was a game based on the series created for the Sega Genesis.  It was a late arrival on the Genesis and while it boasted some rather slick animation it was bogged down by poor gameplay mechanics and a repetitive design.  It is my understanding that the only rules for selecting worlds for Kingdom Hearts are that they be from Disney films, but not Disney owned films.  This would eliminate the various Marvel films produced by Disney as well as any future Star Wars ones.  It also appears to apply to Pixar films as well as so far no worlds from a Pixar film have shown up.  It also excludes any worlds from Disney television, but in the case of Gargoyles, this rule could be circumvented by the existence of Gargoyles The Movie:  The Heroes Awaken.  It’s kind of cheating as the direct-to-video movie is just the first five episodes edited into a 90 minute film but lets not get too technical.

Using my own memory, and with help from Wikipedia, I’ve come up with the below list of Disney films to appear as worlds in the Kingdom Hearts series:

  • Sleeping Beauty
  • The Little Mermaid
  • Aladdin
  • The Nightmare Before Christmas
  • Winnie the Pooh
  • Peter Pan
  • Hercules
  • Tarzan
  • Pinocchio
  • The Lion King
  • Steamboat Willie
  • Pirates of the Caribbean
  • Alice in Wonderland
  • Cinderella
  • Snow White
  • Beauty and the Beast
  • Mulan
  • Tron
  • Lilo & Stitch
  • The Hunchback of Notre Dame
  • The Three Musketeers
  • Fantasia

This list may not be exhaustive, and does contain some unusual selections.  “Steamboat Willie” stands out as it’s not a feature-length film, but as Mickey’s most recognizable short, it’s not surprising to see it included.  It also, like pretty much all of Disney’s classic shorts, was originally released to theaters.  The Three Musketeers also stands out as it was a direct-to-video release so it appears their self-inflicted rule does not mean the film needed to be theatrically released.  Square has done a good job of hitting most of Disney’s biggest properties.  There is also a good balance of old and new, but there’s still plenty of room for more.  Below are some thoughts of mine regarding where the franchise could go for its next outing:

Bambi – Bambi the character has already appeared as a summon in the KH series but he’s never had his own world.  As one of the few classic pictures to not have a world, it makes sense for Bambi to step into a larger role.  His world is not particularly unique considering it’s just a forest, but a world created around the forest fire scene from the film’s climax could have some interesting gameplay mechanics.  For one, it would make the world visually interesting and the fire could be the result of one of the film’s antagonists.  Bambi could be an assist character and, together with Sora, they would be tasked with extinguishing the blaze.  The world could either be full of peril due to the fire, or there could be a time limit in place.  Considering Bambi is one of Walt’s greatest achievements, it just makes too much sense to include it eventually.

And to think, some at Disney felt The Horned King would be too scary for kids...

And to think, some at Disney felt The Horned King would be too scary for kids…

The Black Cauldron –   The Black Cauldron is, unofficially of course, Disney’s black sheep.  It differs quite a bit in tone from the works that preceded it in that there’s a distinct absence of humor throughout.  A lot of critics disliked the film, and while it appears to have spawned a cult following, it’s still one of the lesser films put out by Disney.  It’s inclusion here is not a defense of the film, I haven’t it seen it in so long that I really can’t offer much of an opinion on it, but it’s world would actually appear to fit in quite well with the KH universe.  The Horned King would make a natural complement for Maleficent and the Fairfolk could be incorporated as well.  The film almost makes too much sense for inclusion, leading me to believe the only reason it has not been is because the film is so obscure.  It’s also possible that Disney doesn’t own any of the characters outright and legal issues may not make it worthwhile to include.

Toy Tinkers – I am an unabashed Donald Duck fan so I wanted to include one of his shorts on this list.  I initially thought “Trick or Treat” would work well because of the Witch Hazel and her special potion that brings inanimate objects to life, but such a world would have a lot in common with Fantasia and Halloweentown.  I settled on “Toy Tinkers” because it would allow the inclusion of a Christmas themed world and a unique gameplay opportunity.  I conceive it as a world in which Sora has been shrunk somehow and is caught in between the fire-fight between Donald and Chip and Dale.  There would be debris raining down and perhaps Sora would help Chip and Dale thwart Donald somehow.  It would be a bit of comedic relief and a fun bit of level design.

This would seem to be a natural conflict for a video game.

This would seem to be a natural conflict for a video game.

The Brave Little Tailor – My thought process for this level is similar to the above for “Toy Tinkers,” so I consider this an either/or arrangement.  In the short, “The Brave Little Tailor,” Mickey is tasked with defeating a giant.  For KH, the scenario seems obvious and Sora would either replace Mickey or assist him in taking down a giant.  It would feel similar to my “Toy Tinkers” scenario because Sora would be taking on a foe much larger than he, so the two would perhaps feel too alike if they both appeared in the same game.  Nonetheless, it would be fun to challenge the giant and a tailor themed Mickey could be an interesting assist character.  This could also easily be swapped out in favor of a Mickey and the Beanstalk themed level.

Duck TalesDuck Tales would appear to not be eligible due to the fact that it was a television property, but it sneaks in because it did have a feature-length release, Treasure of the Lost Lamp.  If the level had to be based on that film, then no matter, it could be a pseudo Indiana Jones type of deal with cave exploring with Uncle Scrooge, the nephews, and maybe even Launch Pad.  Classic Duck Tales villains could still be included as well.  Ultimately, I just want to see Scrooge’s giant vault of gold coins included complete with diving board.

Toy Story – Yes, I know and covered it already, it would appear that Pixar films are a no-go when it comes to KH.  However, Pixar’s films have become as much a part of the Disney brand as Mickey and Snow White and their presence is felt throughout Walt Disney World and Disney Land.  And if there is to be one exception made for Pixar, why it has to be Toy Story, no?  It makes too much sense for inclusion as Sora could be transformed into a toy of some kind and have to team-up with Woody and the gang to foil Sid.  The level basically designs itself and there are so many action sequences from the three films that the designers could look to for inspiration.  Come on Square/Disney, it’s time to invite Pixar to the party.  Do it!

I'd be delighted to see any of the films/shorts from this list incorporated into KH3, but mostly I just want to kick some ass with Goliath by my side.

I’d be delighted to see any of the films/shorts from this list incorporated into KH3, but mostly I just want to kick some ass with Goliath by my side.

Gargoyles – We’ll end this with what started it in the first place, Gargoyles!  Gargoyles, as primarily an action-adventure cartoon, makes a lot of sense for a video game.  Goliath would be a pretty bad-ass support character and Demona seems like a perfect villain for KH (though MacBeth and Xanatos would work as well).  There would be some fun music to source, and most of the voice cast has maintained a relationship with Disney to this day including Keith David (voice of Goliath) who recently voiced the villain for Disney’s The Princess and the Frog.  Gargoyles would also allow Square to set a level in New York, specifically the skies above New York.  The castle would make for both a great visual and fun setting for an all out battle with Demona or the Steel Clan.  Someone send the developers of Kingdom Hearts 3 a copy of the first season (or the movie, but they would need a VCR on hand to watch it) and then try to stop them from making use of it!

There’s actually plenty of other films Square could source for Kingdom Hearts 3 that I didn’t even bring up.  The Sword in the Stone or Robin Hood seem like natural fits, or perhaps because they’re too conventional they’ve been ignored.  101 Dalmatians also seems like an easy film to incorporate and Cruella De Vil would be a natural as a villain for the series.  And considering it drew inspiration from video games, I feel like I have to mention Wreck-It Ralph.  I actually fully expect a Wreck-It Ralph scenario of some kind to appear in KH3, either as the game world Fix-It Felix Jr. or maybe a Sugar Rush style mini game.  I consider all of my selections as long shots and I’d be surprised to see most of them.  It actually wouldn’t shock me if Disney lifted the embargo on Pixar films and allowed a Toy Story level, just because the property is so popular, and the giant sequence I described (most likely to occur in the form of Mickey and the Beanstalk) also strikes me as a legit possibility for a KH world.  The others are merely dreams or wishes, and as much as it would delight me to see Goliath and crew in Kingdom Hearts 3, I also acknowledge it’s mostly a pipe dream.  Perhaps if I wish upon a star…


The Best of Pixar

DownloadedFile-22In honor of the recently released to theaters Monsters University, I thought it would be fun to look back on the feature-length films put out by Pixar Animation Studios (in conjunction with Disney) and come up with a top 10.  This proved to be a pretty difficult task and I consider this list, especially the top 5, to be quite fluid.  Pixar has really eclipsed Disney as the premier creator of animated films.  It could be argued that before it, Japan’s Studio Ghibli had knocked Disney off the top of the mountain but Pixar now stands tall over all.  And while their output has dwindled in quality just a tad bit lately, it seems like the studio is likely to maintain that status for at least a few more years.  This list is not going to give each film the space it deserves, or else it would run into the tens of thousands of words.  I also want to add that I do not think Pixar has made a bad film yet, though I also have not seen Cars 2 which has been the worst reviewed film put out by the studio.  I didn’t see it because I didn’t really care for the original, though I didn’t hate it or anything.  I also did see Monsters University this weekend, and while I don’t think it makes their top 10, it was enjoyable entertainment.

10. Brave

Brave is hindered by that fact that it’s one of the more recent films put out by Pixar so it hasn’t had as long of a time to leave a lasting impression (and as you can imagine, nostalgia points count).  Brave is a refreshing take on the princess genre and Merida is a very likable and easy to root for character.  The visuals are splendid and the conflict unique, though the setting and style is perhaps a bit too similar to the previously released Dreamworks film How to Train Your Dragon.  This is a film I plan to revisit and I expect my appreciation for it will only grow from here.

9. The Incredibles

Perhaps a controversial selection as I know The Incredibles is a favorite for many.  For me, I absolutely love the concept of a super hero family and this was probably my most eagerly anticipated work from Pixar.  Perhaps it was the weight of expectations that resulted in my initial disappointment.  It just didn’t resonate with me the way I thought it would.  I very much enjoyed the Mr. Incredible character, but the rest of the family didn’t appeal to me as much.  The film is also a little overstuffed and could have used some trimming.  Every time I re-watch it I wonder if this is the viewing that will make me fall in love with it, but so far that hasn’t happened.  Despite that, I still look forward to the eventual sequel and will continue to enjoy the in-jokes thrown at comic book fans.

8. Toy Story 2

Toy Story was such a smashing success that it made sense for a sequel to follow.  Because these films take so long, Pixar first released A Bug’s Life before getting to Toy Story 2.  Serving as director for all three feature-length films was John Lasseter, who wisely realized he couldn’t expect to continue to direct everything put out by the studio.  Toy Story 2 is an excellent sequel that contains enough of what made the original so memorable without feeling like a re-tread.  Visually, it is far superior to the first.  Some people seem to prefer it to the original, but for me I enjoyed the plot from the first one more and found the end chase more thrilling than the sequence that closes out this one.  This one is still great though, and Jessie’s song is really well done, making Toy Story one of the best franchises in recent memory.

7.  Ratatouille

Remy is one of Pixar's best creations.

Remy is one of Pixar’s best creations.

This where the list starts getting hard for me.  I didn’t have much trouble ranking the first three, but now we’re getting into the films I truly love.  Ratatouille is a clever tale about a rat named Remy, who is one of the most well-crafted of any of Pixar’s leads.  He’s interesting, flawed, likable, and well-acted by the animators and voice actor Patton Oswalt.  This one isn’t as emotionally heavy as some of Pixar’s other films, but it is so much fun and it’s still a treat to experience all of Remy’s highs and lows.  I feel like I could watch this film every day and not get sick of it.

6.  Toy Story

The one that started it all.  Toy Story was a marvel when it was first released in 1995.  At that time, no one really thought computer generated images could captivate in the same way as hand-drawn animation and we were all proved wrong.  While I will always prefer more traditional animation, I both love and appreciate what today’s artists are capable of with CGi.  Toy Story doesn’t look as good now as it did back then (especially the dog and human characters), but that doesn’t detract from the wonderful and clever story about what goes on in the toy box when kids aren’t around.  It’s an easy to grasp concept and one that offers so many possibilities for visual gags and story potential.  The Woody (Tom Hanks) and Buzz (Tim Allen) rivalry is played up so well that it’s a shame it’s not as heated in the sequels.  Toy Story is a modern classic that is sure to delight and captivate audiences for generations to come.

5.  Wall-E

Wall-E is a rather bold film when one considers its audience.  The first act is absent of any dialogue as we explore a ruined earth with only a mute little robot to guide us.  It’s thru director Andrew Stanton and the supremely talented animators at Pixar that we’re able to connect and care about this little robot.  Wall-E, despite being a robot, is able to convey so many human emotions thru just the movement of his telescope-like eyes and limited vocalizations.  The film’s only weakness is how effective these early scenes are in comparison to the easier to follow scenes in space where humans dwell.  Some thumb their noses at the conservationist tone taken by the film, but I found it to be good satire and consider Wall-E a true treasure amongst american animation.

4.  Toy Story 3

I can’t say I was all that excited for another sequel for Toy Story, even though I very much enjoyed the first two.  I was so wrong when I finally sat down and watched Toy Story 3 and found myself completely blown away.  I didn’t realize how much I wanted to see the world of these toys explored with better technology over what was available for the first two.  The world popped and is an absolute feast for the eyes.  That wasn’t exactly a surprise, but the fact that the film had a plot that appealed to me even more than the first two is what truly shocked me.  I fell in love on the first viewing, and the additions of Michael Keaton and Ned Beatty to the all ready stellar cast was the cherry on top.

3.  Monsters Inc.

We have officially entered the splitting hairs section of my list.  1-7 was hard, 1-5 was harder still, and 1-3 feels almost pointless.  On any given day, any of these next three could be cited as my favorite from Pixar, but I’ve settled on this order for today.  Monsters Inc. was the first of the Pixar feature-length films to not be directed by Lasseter.  Pete Docter oversaw this one and would establish an ability to really make an emotional connection with the audience.  Monsters Inc. is kind of like a buddy comedy with leads Mike and Sully (portrayed by Billy Crystal and John Goodman), only in a fantastic setting.  The world of the monsters is fully realized and more than just a little clever.  This is the first CGi film I can recall where so much hair, or fur, was included and the results are spectacular.  It’s the addition of the Boo character though, that puts it over the top and gives it the weight I mentioned earlier.  This film’s ending is so perfect, it gets me every time.  I’m not sure if it’s not my favorite ending to any movie ever.  I love it!

2.  Finding Nemo

A lot of these films were all conceived around the same time.  I get the sense that the powers that be at Pixar decided on a bunch of worlds they wanted to see animated and went off of that.  Finding Nemo is Pixar’s undersea adventure and the results are breathtaking.  The world is so simple yet so complex, it is probably the film that benefitted most in the switch from DVD to Blu Ray of any other I’ve seen.  All of Pixar’s films are incredible looking, but Finding Nemo contains one of the more heart-warming father-son stories contained in any piece of entertainment.  And outside of that plot, the characters encountered along the way are amongst Pixar’s most memorable.  Whether it’s the possessive seagulls, laid-back Crush, or the unforgettable Dory, there’s something amazing in every scene.  I’m so glad that Pixar has chosen to revisit this world, even if it has no chance of matching up to the original.  Though Pixar has proved me wrong before.

1.  Up

The odd paring of the aged Carl with the youthful Russell paid off for Pixar.

The odd paring of the aged Carl with the youthful Russell paid off for Pixar.

If Wall-E was considered a bold move for a family movie, then what does that make Up with its octogenarian for a lead?  I suppose the marketing and merchandising department was disappointed when it found out that Carl Fredricksen (Ed Asner) action figures weren’t likely to generate the kind of revenue Disney is used to, but I like to think they were okay with that once they saw the film.  Up is a wonderful piece of animation, and if Pete Doctor’s previous directorial effort Monsters Inc. is considered weighty, Up is a virtual anvil.  The montage that takes place at the beginning of the film which sums up the life of Carl and Ellie is wonderfully moving, and like Wall-E, done so without any dialogue.  The sequence is masterfully done, and if viewers found it a bit too sad then I hope the rest of the film makes up for it.  The main plot pairs up Carl with the youthfully exuberant Russell.  This odd-couple pairing can be forgiven for being too obvious because it’s executed so well. The emotional response generated by this film seems so authentic, and it’s the rare animated film I can honestly recommend to viewers of all tastes.  And then there’s Dug.  Dug, who resembles no dog from the real world and yet makes me think of every dog I’ve ever met (any nice dog, anyways).  His mannerisms and thoughts are so spot-on it makes it seem like an easy thing to so faithfully convey a dog’s emotions, but it’s really not.  Up is absolutely wonderful, and not just among my favorites put out by Pixar or Disney, but one of my favorite movies of any I’ve seen.  It will take a lot from Pixar to top it, but I hope they like a good challenge.


%d bloggers like this: