Another great outing by Pixar. I thought it was very funny and well made.
***SOUL***
6,715 Views |
57 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by Lathspell
Absolutely gorgeous and really moving. Loved it.
Put WW1984 on the back burner and watch this instead.
Put WW1984 on the back burner and watch this instead.
Pretty good!
Head Ninja In Charge
Joined:
Oct 10, 2005
Posts:
19,425
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Just finished it. BRB. Have to cry a little as a reevaluate my entire life.
Head Ninja In Charge said:
Just finished it. BRB. Have to cry a little as a reevaluate my entire life.
As a finance guy, the hedge fund manager bit had me rolling.
Agreed. Great movie. Very moving.
My brother is a Knicks fan and I especially liked that joke.
My brother is a Knicks fan and I especially liked that joke.
My family all loved it. I got misty a few times. Great movie.
My man crush on Trent Reznor knows no bounds. Now scoring Pixar movies and hitting it out of the park. That piano tune at the end hit me.
My man crush on Trent Reznor knows no bounds. Now scoring Pixar movies and hitting it out of the park. That piano tune at the end hit me.
Be sure to watch the extras on Disney+. Joe Batiste scored the jazz and piano parts, Reznor scored the electronic ethereal parts.
We really enjoyed it. Watched outside next to the heater. Made for a great evening.
The Jerry's were amazing in the simplicity of how the moved. Really beautiful movie to watch.
The Jerry's were amazing in the simplicity of how the moved. Really beautiful movie to watch.
No John Ratzenberger.
C@LAg said:incorrectOl_Ag_02 said:
No John Ratzenberger.
https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2560693/pixars-soul-director-comments-on-john-ratzenbergers-mysterious-voice-cameo
Glad to be wrong.
I very much enjoyed the movie. It's sweet, thought provoking, beautifully created, has a great message, etc...
That being said, other than being animated, it's really not a kids movie. My kids say they liked it, but it's not particularly funny, and I know they didn't get most of it.
That being said, other than being animated, it's really not a kids movie. My kids say they liked it, but it's not particularly funny, and I know they didn't get most of it.
I had a similar thought but my nephews (5 and 7) loved it so go figure.
Pixar had a pretty good year between Onward and this. This was probably the best film they've put out in a long time. At least since Inside Out, but I think I liked this more.
Visually stunning and a great story. The mix of visual styles was the highlight for our family. But that would have been pointless without the story and music to back it up.
Josepi said:
I very much enjoyed the movie. It's sweet, thought provoking, beautifully created, has a great message, etc...
That being said, other than being animated, it's really not a kids movie. My kids say they liked it, but it's not particularly funny, and I know they didn't get most of it.
Agreed. I thought it was good for adults contemplating suicide.
boogieman said:
Agreed. Great movie. Very moving.
My brother is a Knicks fan and I especially liked that joke.
I could've sworn that was Patrick Ewing in the clip of the knocks player getting rejected at the rim.
Head Ninja In Charge
Joined:
Oct 10, 2005
Posts:
19,425
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It was Doris Burke on that call too. What a great movie.
Enjoyed that.
Decided to watch the movie based off this thread. Didn't pay attention to the previews or the actors in it so I went in not knowing anything. A real done movie and quite moving. It makes you think about life and just enjoy it. It was cool and surprise to see Trent Reznor and Atticus Finch work on this.
Whoa. So good, didn't expect that. Glad I watched it with my 2.5 y/o son, who seemed to enjoy it as well.
Visuals: very cool
Score: very cool
Story: meh
Score: very cool
Story: meh
I thought it was visually stunning and the music was amazing. Ambitious as hell. Agree with others in that I think this is way beyond the young crowd. But I was mesmerized watching it.
Loved it.
But seriously, after watching this, it did inspire to not waste a day. Instead of laying out the couch surfing Facebook, we've gotten up to work out on the garage these past days.
Really need to up our jazzing
But seriously, after watching this, it did inspire to not waste a day. Instead of laying out the couch surfing Facebook, we've gotten up to work out on the garage these past days.
Really need to up our jazzing
Great film. Truly captivating, insightful, emotionally and intellectually stimulating. Just, simply great. The moment he remembers his whole life I was a bit taken back by how moved I was both emotionally and as a viewer of art. Such a masterful sequence. My only regret is not watching this high - the "in the zone" scenes would have been trippy.
Between this, Inside Out, and Up, Peter Doctor has a masterful unofficial trilogy on his hands.
Between this, Inside Out, and Up, Peter Doctor has a masterful unofficial trilogy on his hands.
I enjoyed the movie. Kids started it one night and I was busy so I started over after they went to bed. It can hit you in the feels too.
On a side note, apparently this movie is racist according to internet warriors for having Tina Fey in virtual black face. GMAFB.
On a side note, apparently this movie is racist according to internet warriors for having Tina Fey in virtual black face. GMAFB.
reading internet warriors twitter opinions on anything should be cause enough to reevaluate your time usage more so than this movie.
I watched this and liked it for sure. From everything mentioned above.
My one question though is why did this have to be an animation film? Why couldn't this been done with live action? There was nothing of the world they created that couldn't have been done with actors and some fx's. Not the Jerry's of course. But why could the same actors played the same roles but not make it animation? The story wouldn't have missed the market if Jamie Foxx did the arch that Joe did. I almost think this would have been a great film with real actors.
My guess is money. Money it costs to make and movie it makes by being animated?
My one question though is why did this have to be an animation film? Why couldn't this been done with live action? There was nothing of the world they created that couldn't have been done with actors and some fx's. Not the Jerry's of course. But why could the same actors played the same roles but not make it animation? The story wouldn't have missed the market if Jamie Foxx did the arch that Joe did. I almost think this would have been a great film with real actors.
My guess is money. Money it costs to make and movie it makes by being animated?
It was a slow day at work. Had nothing better to do
The short answer is that Pixar films outgross pretty much everything except Star Wars and Marvel films. And no one is going to see a film about Jamie Foxx and a cat.
Funny though as I had exactly the opposite reaction, this is a film that only works because it's animated. At a base level, the talking cat would be total cheese. Then you look at things like the sand ship, the souls in various states, the Jerrys, and it's a much more appealing movie in an animated medium. In live action those things are all really hard to balance visually and wouldn't work nearly as well.
Funny though as I had exactly the opposite reaction, this is a film that only works because it's animated. At a base level, the talking cat would be total cheese. Then you look at things like the sand ship, the souls in various states, the Jerrys, and it's a much more appealing movie in an animated medium. In live action those things are all really hard to balance visually and wouldn't work nearly as well.
Well obviously they wouldn't make the "exact" same movie. More of the plot, replace the cat with a young kid or opposite gender etc. and the ship and sand , lost souls etc could be done with live action.
But like a said, I liked the movie and will watch again. Just curious why this and others like it are not being made with live actors
But like a said, I liked the movie and will watch again. Just curious why this and others like it are not being made with live actors
Great flick heading into 2021.
But that sort of the begs the question "Why would you?"
Sure, you could change things up and film it in live action, but we can do that with basically anything now. Everything from How To Train Your Dragon to Frozen to Moana could be done with real people and CG, but it would lose so much of the appeal and humor.
To answer your original question btw, it's generally not cheaper/easier to shoot live as opposed to animating something at this quality level. A Pixar feature is 3-5 years in development vs being able to comfortably turn around a live action feature in 1-2 years. And Pixar develops their stories in house, so this was never intended for anything but animation.
Sure, you could change things up and film it in live action, but we can do that with basically anything now. Everything from How To Train Your Dragon to Frozen to Moana could be done with real people and CG, but it would lose so much of the appeal and humor.
To answer your original question btw, it's generally not cheaper/easier to shoot live as opposed to animating something at this quality level. A Pixar feature is 3-5 years in development vs being able to comfortably turn around a live action feature in 1-2 years. And Pixar develops their stories in house, so this was never intended for anything but animation.
Featured Stories
See All
28:19
20h ago
6.4k
Storm chaser Josh Pate stops by for a spring one-on-one
by Billy Liucci
Spring Football Snippets: Practice No. 6
by Olin Buchanan
3:05
3h ago
1.3k
Baseball Thoughts: Aggies ride five-game heater into 2026's second half
by Ryan Brauninger
BasketballCoach2015
***** Official Houston Astros 2026 Season Thread *****
in MLB & Other Baseball
11