my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Wall • E (2008) (Page 4)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

Author Topic: Wall • E (2008) Carol May Film Handler Posts: 48 From: los angeles, ca, usa Registered: Nov 2006 posted 07-07-2008 03:33 PM                     I just saw a matinee of Wall-E in Century City. (Note to certain parents: Please teach your kids that movies in a theater are a shared experience and the rest of us really don't want a running commentary for an hour and a half.) I thought the animation was terrific, Wall-E was very human. And there were lots of very cute scenes or snippets of scenes. Overall though, I was bored. Something was missing. Even at 97 minutes, it probably could have been tightened up to 80, which would have given it more punch. The ending was good, because it said what it had to say and then ended. As far as being a political statement, it definitely was, and conservative bloggers will probably be all over the movie, but it wasn't too in your face.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-07-2008 09:16 PM                        Well...I watched the movie again with some family members over the weekend. I think this movie definitely improves on the second viewing. I enjoyed it more this time. However I still think it's among the weakest of the Pixar movies, if not THE weakest. (I don't remember much about "A Bug's Life" or "Monsters Inc.") There are still no scenes in "WALL-E" that I feel compelled to go back in and watch repeatedly, with the possible exceptions of the opening five minutes, and the bit where he's traveling through the space-scapes to get to the Axiom. Just like the first time, I found myself really intrigued and enjoying the first part of the movie, and then becoming totally disengaged when they arrive on the Axiom and all the other characters show up. Right when the movie should kick into high gear, it starts to drag. And I still think the humans look too much alike - why do all film-makers think that, in the future, everyone will be dressed the same? I know that's part of the point the story makes, that individuality will go out of style, but in this case it makes for a cheap-looking movie. Finally, I'm sick of every animated film having a "message." Can't a kids' movie be made without saddling the little twerps with the weight of the world's problems as they walk out of the theatre? I have really gotten to like the Peter Gabriel song at the end of the movie, but my original rating of 1.5 out of 5 still stands. I'm looking forward to getting something else onto the screen.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 07-07-2008 09:24 PM                        There's no way this is worse than A Bug's Life and Cars. Bug's Life wasn't very popular, but Cars was for some reason even though having a 2 hour bout with diarrhea is more entertaining than that movie.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-07-2008 10:13 PM                        Cars had a weak story it's true, but on the plus side it had great backgrounds, characters that didn't all look alike, a villain that wasn't a steering wheel, and George Carlin.  |  IP: Logged Jonathan Goeldner Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1360 From: Washington, District of Columbia Registered: Jun 2008 posted 07-08-2008 10:10 AM                     I wanted to see this in DLP, but instead saw this at my neighborhood theatre (AMC Mazza Gallerie/Screen 2: 35mm - THX Dolby Digital)and I quite enjoyed it, it was very different than what I expected. Whereas most Pixar films had many characters, this seemed to center around just three, with ancilary characters providing humour and slight interaction. While some can say there's more style of substance, I beg to differ ... it feels like 'Solaris' on much smaller scale. (for the record I really loathed 'Cars' - this is the second film that rectifies Pixar's greatness)  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 07-12-2008 05:22 AM                     ..too bad that other studios can't incorporate the 2.40/1 hard matt aperture frameline as this and the other two Pixar scope movies were printed in ... definitely hides edit splices and scope apertures that are slightly overcut...  |  IP: Logged Lyle Romer Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1400 From: Davie, FL, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 07-12-2008 09:49 AM                     Except the hard matte is bad for theaters designed for 2.35 where the screen masking needs to be re-done in order to get to 2.39.  |  IP: Logged Tim Reed Better Projection Pays Posts: 5246 From: Northampton, PA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 07-12-2008 01:45 PM                       quote: Carol May it wasn't too in your face. It was there, and that was too much for me. Sorry, but I take my light entertainment without indoctrination, please. It's Ronald McDonald selling a bill of goods.  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 07-12-2008 07:53 PM                     Was WALL*E marketed as light entertainment? Even if that was the case, I usually appreciate it when a movie has more depth than I anticipated. I can see a movie saying something stupid, and that making it bad, but was WALL*E's message really controversial? The problem with the stuff in WALL*E is that it doesn't really have anything new to say, and it doesn't really do a good job saying it. Also, I changed my mind. WALL*E is not the best Pixar movie. THE INCREDIBLES is better.  |  IP: Logged Bill Enos Film God Posts: 2081 From: Richmond, Virginia, USA Registered: Apr 2000 posted 10-16-2008 06:43 PM                     Finally got around to watching it. I thought the story wasn't up to Pixar's ususal, slow in a lot of places, really got tired of getting beaten over the head with the message, other than that, it's fair+. Watched it a second time, really got pissed with the heavyhanded message and left. Second time it SUCKED.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 10-16-2008 10:10 PM                     quote: Bill Enos really got pissed with the heavyhanded message and left. Second time it SUCKED. ...about the same propaganda message that we got from "The Bee Movie!" ..that was also plain horrible! Started out good enough, but when the politics came in, it definitely ruined the movie. -Monte  |  IP: Logged Galen Murphy-Fahlgren Master Film Handler Posts: 405 From: Canton, MI, USA Registered: Oct 2007 posted 10-17-2008 11:16 PM                     I saw it for the 4th time tonight. I had the night off, and passed on a few other movies that I wanted to see to see this one again. Full disclosure: it was playing at the Penn Theatre, an historic single a few miles away that I'm always angry I've never been to, so that played a big role. Their presentation was good, although the screen needed dusting badly and there was a faint buzz in the left surround channel. I really think the "message" is not as big as many of you are making it out to be. There is no global warming theme, or anything like that. The rampant consumerism is portrayed as bad, but rampant consumerism is bad, just open the Business section of any reputable paper. It is more of a setting, I think, than a political agenda being pushed by radical animators or something like that. It starts by asking, "What kind of human existence is so reliant on robots as to make a robot love story work?" The setting and people's behavior has to flow naturally as an answer to that question, and I think it did that at least as well as almost any other movie this year. Also, I've said it before, but the minimalistic dialogue really evokes a sense of old school film making to me. This project could have been done as a silent film with a live ensemble, and that is a plus in my book. Story telling through moving picture rather than having things spoon fed to you.  |  IP: Logged Bill Enos Film God Posts: 2081 From: Richmond, Virginia, USA Registered: Apr 2000 posted 10-19-2008 02:13 PM                     When I go to a movie I don't want, or expect to receive ANY political, social, enviro, etc. messages unless the subject is such. Michael Moores movies would be an example---you know it's going to be about his views when you buy the ticket, if you don't appreciate his point of view, don't go. If his movies had been billed as general interest it would be wrong.  |  IP: Logged Galen Murphy-Fahlgren Master Film Handler Posts: 405 From: Canton, MI, USA Registered: Oct 2007 posted 10-19-2008 03:39 PM                     Well, I don't think they were pushing an agenda here. The circumstances of human existence serve as a backdrop for telling a story. It's your basic post apocalyptic robot love story, in a format that is appropriate for Pixar. You guys are just oversensitive to someone pushing an agenda, so when what looks like an agenda appears, you latch onto it and complain. You can certainly criticize the movie, but to try to tear it apart for possibly condemning rampant consumerism, not such a good argument. Go see Saw V, I bet there won't be any social agenda there. But, it also won't be a technically proficient and highly character driven story either, will it? Oh well, at least it won't potentially try to make me feel bad for being an irresponsible consumer.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 10-19-2008 07:57 PM                     I guess anything environmental related is now officially politically incorrect. Let's do the right thing and turn the world into a toilet until our rivers are catching on fire again. After all, that's the right damned thing to do. The "man upstairs" will clean up the mess.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.