LIKED Hancock, LOVVVVVVVVVVVVVVED WALL-E!

[Gail Simone]

Hancock was better than many critics have said. There is some wonderful stuff in there--some goofy stuff, too, but overall, a great time at the movies, I thought.

BUT WALL-E POPPED THE HAPPY BALLOON.

What a great film. Man, this is why you have to put Pixar in ANOTHER CLASS ENTIRELY.

Just a ridiculously brilliant film. I kept marvelling at the storytelling.

Loved it.

[Kyuubi]

I cried during Wall E


THEY WERE MANLY TEARS! Which are different than normal tears.







Shut up!

[Ben Morgan]

*points and laughs at Kyuubi*

[Evan Waters]

Directive...

[escapegoat]

I was suppose to see WALL-E earlier this week with the whole family, but my 2 year old was still a bit too young to sit still in a movie theatre long enough and we had to exit about 20 minutes into the movie...sigh'
We thought a movie that wasn't heavy on the dialogue would keep her attention...she proved us wrong... :tongue:
I'm gonna take the 4 year old out for her to see it again later this week... she loved it, as she has with every other Pixar movie.

[escapegoat]

I cried during Wall E


THEY WERE MANLY TEARS! Which are different than normal tears.







Shut up!

I'm sure I'll wind up shedding a few manly tears myself when I get to seeing the whole thing...

[Kyuubi]

I didn't actually cry.



. . .until the credits.

[LtMarvel]

I cannot argue with Gail's assessment of these two films. Being a math guy, Hancock lost me for awhile with it's huge, surprise coincidence about the PR guy's family but they got me back with some lines about it always happens...

WALL-E was just brilliant. The message will make you look at yourself. (I'm very happy that we recycle!) And it still entertains and enthralls!

Oh, I was thrilled to see Jay Ward's name flash on the credits to the very funny Presto short.

When the film ends: WALL*E continues the story during the credits, and then they recreate scenes (a la The Incredibles). But if you wait all the way end, there is one, small injoke.

Hancock started the credits, had another scene, and then the credits roll. Nothing else there.

[TCJohnson]

Directive...

Define dancing!

[Cayman]

Pixar should win some special Oscar just for managing to make a cockroach lovable.

[kingdom2000]

Hancock was entertaining. Smith did his usually outstanding job. Charlize Theron frankly never looked better. Don't know why she wears her hair short when she looks so much more spectacular with long hair framing her face. Bateman did a good job with a nothing role. The story though...well it made no sense really. The main conflict basically was "I want to maintain my secret so I shall beat you up across a city!" and a revenge thing. All pointless and existed to for action beats. Which would be fine if the character development wasn't so one note. So shallow movie but entertaining.

Wall-E, much love for that film. Have to see it again. I hope the DVD is full of extras. Sadly Disney tends to suck on that department and that is one area that Pixar doesn't seem interested to shine in.

[TCJohnson]

Wall-E, much love for that film. Have to see it again. I hope the DVD is full of extras. Sadly Disney tends to suck on that department and that is one area that Pixar doesn't seem interested to shine in.

I only own two Pixar DVDs, Incredibles and Finding Nemo, and both of them were great on extras I thought.

[Ian Boothby]

Wanted's been getting really good review and Hancock slam after slam. I don't get that at all. Wanted was a huge stinker to me and Hancock a really refreshing surprise. Looking forward to Wall-E.

[Sarah Beach]

Haven't seen WALL-E yet, but will later this week.

But I did see Hancock. I liked it. Oh, there are some things I could critique, like it starts out setting you to expect and out and out comedy, but then the cast plays the emotions quite real, which makes it very off-beat. The back-story logic I found a bit odd and not what I would have chosen, but I went along with it for the story. But I can see why it could get bad reviews -- it doesn't fit comfortably into any particular genre. There's "something else" wherever you try to place it.

[Froggy]

the scene during the credits with mike epps had me going "WTF he doing in here? though

[Gilda Dent]

I thought Hancock was thoroughly mediocre. Wish I'd gone to see Wall-E instead, or Incredible Hulk.

[OzBat!]

Hancock was great fun, but where it fell down I felt was the total lack of any foreshadowing of the plot twist at the 4/5th mark. The Restaurant dinner discussion, and then... WHAMMO! If there'd been any kind of leadup for even one or two of those plot points, it would have worked a lot better.

Did love the fridge out in the driveway though.

[ninjapeps]

I hate you all. Wall-E hasn't shown over here yet. :frown:

[TomStillwell]

The thing I liked most about WALL-E was that they gave us messages on consumerism, environmentalism, conformity, and sloth but rapped it all up in a charming romance that puts to shame any of the smaltzy princess movies Disney puts out.

A great, great movie. And yes, I did cry.

[Infra-Man]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/97/Zippo-Slim-1968-Lit.jpg/180px-Zippo-Slim-1968-Lit.jpg

[KevinTBrown]

Ironically I also saw both movies this weekend. Saw Wall*E on Friday (took my wife and mom out to see it) and saw Hancock on Sunday (by myself).

First Hancock: It was... ok. Nothing more, nothing less. If it wasn't for Will Smith, I seriously doubt this movie would have been #1 this weekend. I'm not going to get into spoilers, but there were WAY too many plot holes, WAY too many scenes that never had any payoff whatsoever, and WAY too many scenes that were telegraphed. I left the movie thinking that if there were 10 more minutes to the movie, it probably would have worked perfectly.

Wall*E: This is the year I wish that the Academy Awards did not have a separate category for animated films. Wall*E could contend for best picture this year. Never have I experienced a movie that I thought would be charming and adorable, as well as poignant, but could still keep you captivated through its message. I am quite comfortable in saying that this is Disney's best movie to date.

Oh, and yes I did cry during Wall*E as well. (And Hancock too, but only because of the money spent..... :wink:)

One last thing: Both movies clocked in at about 90 minutes each. However, Wall*E felt longer, in a good way. Whereas Hancock felt as if, as I mentioned, you were missing some time.

[Agent Helix]

Wall-E is the best film of the year so far, easily surpassing every other movie out this summer. If there's any justice in Hollywood, this will be nominated for Best Picture, not simply Best Animated Feature.

[Infra-Man]

Wall*E: This is the year I wish that the Academy Awards did not have a separate category for animated films. Wall*E could contend for best picture this year.

I don't know the exact rules, but I think (this is uninformed) Pixar could choose to submit Wall-E to the Academy for Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Original Screenplay consideration rather than for Best Animated Picture consideration. Anyone know the stipulations for the Academy's submission and nomination process?

So far this year I haven't seen a better movie than Wall-E.

EDIT:
And heck, they might as well submit that Peter Gabriel song at the end for Best Original Song.

[Matt Algren]

Wall-E is the best film of the year so far, easily surpassing every other movie out this summer. If there's any justice in Hollywood, this will be nominated for Best Picture, not simply Best Animated Feature.
There's a movement to get Pixar/Disney to consider submitting WALL-E for Best Picture instead of Best Animated. (It's odd to me that they can't do both.)

Incidentally, it would be Disney's first Best Picture Oscar if it won, which it should, just for the scene toward the end when EVE tries to... well, you know. THE SCENE. It's wonderful on its own, but it's a beautifully done parallel* to THE EARLIER SCENE.

And I know everybody talks about it, but the silent first 20 minutes are magical. I wish more directors challenged themselves like that.

Which reminds me, should Andrew Stanton be nominated for best director?







*Not the right word, but my brain isn't working yet. Need caffeine. Must get caffeine.

[The Ray]

Ironically I also saw both movies this weekend. .

That's not ironic at all, actually.

[4PointOh]

I wish I still went to the movies! Unfortunately, cell phone culture has made it acceptable to be noisy/rude in theatres (and in libraries and just about everywhere else). So I wait for DVD releases now.

[4PointOh]

That's not ironic at all, actually.

He meant "coincidentally" I'm sure.

:wink:

[Infra-Man]

Which reminds me, should Andrew Stanton be nominated for best director?

Personally I think he should since he has his fingers in every element of the production to give it a cohesive vision, but it does get tricky when comparing the work of an animation director to a live-action director, particularly when it comes to the performance aspect of the characters.

It seems like the individual animators who animate their assigned scenes are like unit directors of that scene; while they inevitably answer to Stanton, the individual animators mold that particular performance, perhaps adding their own flourishes when they see fit. Since there isn't a lot of voice work in Wall-E (and even still, voice acting is generally a solitary animal compared to on-screen acting), that would seem to stack the deck against Stanton getting the nomination.

Might have to listen to the audio commentary on The Incredibles again to find out how Brad Bird exercised his directorial vision on that production.

[KevinTBrown]

He meant "coincidentally" I'm sure.

:wink:

Ironically, you're correct.

:tongue:




Not quite enough caffiene at the point of the day......

[Dreadstar]

Hancock suffered in the transition between the second and third acts. The reveal was great; the exposition, not so much. However, even though the ending was pretty "Hollywood", I think it managed to salvage itself from terminal mediocrity in the end. Not a great movie, just OK. But I have to admit, I had fun with it. My kid and I, nerds that we are, had all kinds of fun sitting in the audience and playing "superhero physics."

However, I have to echo the growing crowd in suggesting that Pixar/Disney should enter WALL-E into the Best Picture category this year. They won't *get* it, but they really should try to get it in the final 5. It really is that good.

[TCJohnson]

Wall*E: This is the year I wish that the Academy Awards did not have a separate category for animated films. Wall*E could contend for best picture this year. Never have I experienced a movie that I thought would be charming and adorable, as well as poignant, but could still keep you captivated through its message.


And did it with almost no violence. The most violent action in the movie was when Auto poked the captains in the eyes.

It really impressed me they had such a captivating family film that didn't rely on violence to hold people's attention.

[Bill Thompson]

Wall-E, much love for that film. Have to see it again. I hope the DVD is full of extras. Sadly Disney tends to suck on that department and that is one area that Pixar doesn't seem interested to shine in.

I don't know about featurettes or anything like that, but they have already confirmed that the DVD release will have two shorts on it. The Presto one they showed before Wall.E in the theaters as well as an all new never before seen one, Burn.E. That one will focus on the little robot stuck outside the Axiom after Eve and Wall.E sneak back in after celebrating that he saved the plant from the escape pod explosion.

[Stressfactor]

Took my 9 year old nephew to see Wall*E and he loved it -- and got the whole message too.

This really got me as well. I didn't cry but I found myself actually murmuring "Oh, poor Wall*E" aloud at several points. The movie was so touching, however, and yes, I agree, this had one of the best romances I've seen in ages and the characters were not even human!

In addition to the anti-consumerism, anti-sloth, and pro-environment messages there was a subtle message about human interaction. Even though Wall*E and EVE are not human Wall*E longs for companionship -- he longs to connect to someone and we see the humans on board the Axiom who have only virtual contact with one another -- even their children are taught by robots -- and they must break out of this as well and reconnect with one another. It was a nice little message about not letting "virtual" friendships replace real interaction.

A real gem of a movie and it makes you wonder where Pixar is going to go from here.

[Chris Hansbrough]

did the same thing recently except with me it was 3 movies. this past weekend...

Wal-E was spectaculatly amazing....just sunningly beautiful. Movie of the year at this point just eeking out some of the superflicks. It's wierd to say this but te best movies this year have been superhero movies and Wall-E with this way over the top at this point. simply stuning

Get Smart was a smart intelligent action cmedy that did both the action and the comedy well rather than just one or the other like action comedies usually do....

and Hancock was an aimless and insaely predictable mess that I could guess the entirety of the plot from the movie accurately ten minutes in (which is pretty much the running time of the movie) it was so telegraphed. It didn't know what it wanted to be.....a comedy, a genericc superhero movie, or a serious drama, and instead ended up a funny start, a boring as all heck middle with lame jokes that fell flat, and a sappy rama at the end that in some ways worked but in others really didn't.....it felt like there was at least a half hour of developmet that didn't make it into the film that made his transiton into real hero almost nonsensical.

[Buzz Dixon]

Saw WALL-E, loved it. It's not a simplistic movie at all, despite some critics claiming it is. I liked the way everybody, when given a chance, chose positive action.

[KevinTBrown]

By the way, what did people think of the cartoon short in front of Wall*E???

I was laughing so hard, I had tears running down my face.

[Chris Hansbrough]

By the way, what did people think of the cartoon short in front of Wall*E???

I was laughing so hard, I had tears running down my face.

I was too busy drinking your tears to pay attention :eek:

[Buzz Dixon]

By the way, what did people think of the cartoon short in front of Wall*E???

I was laughing so hard, I had tears running down my face.Best bunny since Bugs.

[Major Comma]

I always thought the Academy created The Best Animated Film category So they wouldnt have to give the Best Picture Oscar to an animated film.

[LtMarvel]

I'm not sure why they created the category. I do know that they have stated that they won't nominate anyone if there isn't 3 worthy nominees. (And they only nominate 3. Paprika and Tokyo Godfathers were nominee worthy.) Between WALL*E and Kung Fu Panda, you have two this year.

[ShaunN]

Dear Friends,

Gee, I'm going to get skewered for this, I think, but I saw Hancock last night (with my sister) and Wall-E on the weekend (with my sister and Dad) and - well, I preferred Hancock. My sister really preferrred Hancock. Maybe we went into WallE with huge expectations because of the great reviews and were disappointed as a result and the reverse was true with Hancock, but those were our honest reactions.

In thinking about this, I enjoyed WallE and Eve themselves, but I felt that the WallE human characters/message just did not make much sense to me. Maybe, oddly, I found it to be unrealistically optimistic, in a saccharine sort of way. After all, would you leave a comfortable environment on a starship, where all your needs are taken care of, and return to a planet that is, literally, a dump? I realize that some people would, but most humans would not. After all, how many of us would give up our comfortable houses today to live in tents or log cabins in the woods? What about the huge hardships that will face the returning humans? Did the captain of the ship have the right to make the choice about their future for all of the other people on the ship?

Re: Hancock - again, my expectations were lowered but, for the most part, I thought that the story hung together reasonably well (though the mid-town fight was ridiculous - why did it happen and why were there no repercussions? Big problem). Also, when and why did Hancock become a public superhero? What would have been the impact of a superhuman being around for 80 years? Numerous problems like that. But the essential idea of superhumans (as a separate race) and the notion that their proximity to each other can make them mortal was interesting. One nice nod to racial reality, I thought, was the clear implication that Hancock was beaten nearly to death in 1930s Miami for holding hands with a white woman.

I enjoyed both films, but its interesting how different personal tastes can be. I'll see both again, eventually, and see if my reactions are the same. For now, I'm looking forward to Hellboy and The Dark Knight.

Sincerely,

Shaun

[Bill Thompson]

In thinking about this, I enjoyed WallE and Eve themselves, but I felt that the WallE human characters/message just did not make much sense to me. Maybe, oddly, I found it to be unrealistically optimistic, in a saccharine sort of way. After all, would you leave a comfortable environment on a starship, where all your needs are taken care of, and return to a planet that is, literally, a dump? I realize that some people would, but most humans would not. After all, how many of us would give up our comfortable houses today to live in tents or log cabins in the woods? What about the huge hardships that will face the returning humans? Did the captain of the ship have the right to make the choice about their future for all of the other people on the ship?

In the simplest word, yes. That is what makes evolution possible and that is why the human race has evolved as much as it has. No matter what comforts we discover or possible hardships we endure we always strive for something better, for something tangible.

[Buzz Dixon]

.....Did the captain of the ship have the right to make the choice about their future for all of the other people on the ship?
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1132/1199659277_d767ffa987.jpg

[Ben Morgan]

Shaun, I think that Hancock only recently went public with his powers, maybe since the 80.

[TCJohnson]

In thinking about this, I enjoyed WallE and Eve themselves, but I felt that the WallE human characters/message just did not make much sense to me. Maybe, oddly, I found it to be unrealistically optimistic, in a saccharine sort of way. After all, would you leave a comfortable environment on a starship, where all your needs are taken care of, and return to a planet that is, literally, a dump? I realize that some people would, but most humans would not. After all, how many of us would give up our comfortable houses today to live in tents or log cabins in the woods? What about the huge hardships that will face the returning humans? Did the captain of the ship have the right to make the choice about their future for all of the other people on the ship?

Just to point out, the ship did not go away. It was still there, just docked on earth. They could have still used the ship's facilities.

[Pauly T]

And I don't remember everyone getting all up Neo's ass about pulling people out of The Matrix, no.

But some little trash-bot has got to catch all kinds of shit by inadvertently getting some fatties up off their asses!?!?

WALL*E don't give crap one about you, humanity at large, or the earth. He watches "Hello, Dolly!" not "An Inconvenient Truth". All the little dude wants to do is "grind gears" with some iPod-lookin' hottie, and everybody's gotta be givin' him mess.

Haters.

[lonewolf23k]

Just to point out, the ship did not go away. It was still there, just docked on earth. They could have still used the ship's facilities.

I'm assuming they did use the ship's facilities, and began expanding from it as they essentially rebuilt the planet. Judging from the credits, they must've had access to the facilities needed to restore the environment in full, probably complete with something like cloning tanks to bring back the wildlife as well.

[TCJohnson]

I'm assuming they did use the ship's facilities, and began expanding from it as they essentially rebuilt the planet. Judging from the credits, they must've had access to the facilities needed to restore the environment in full, probably complete with something like cloning tanks to bring back the wildlife as well.

Yup, that is what I got from the movie. Well, not a cloning tank but that's a good point.

[ShaunN]

Dear Friends,

HI! Yes, I assume they used the ship's facilities too. But that still means that they had to go out and begin to learn, from scratch, how to do everything, with bodies that had atrophied over generations from (apparently) minimal gravity. One way or the other, it was going to be a very difficult task to rebuild, particularly since the humans on that ship had, apparently, long ago lost their ability to take care of themselves. And I certainly don't buy the idea that humans are inclined towards hardship. A few people are, but most people don't accept hardship as a choice. Indeed, our entire society is built on the idea that our lives can be materially comfortable. The appeal of the Western world to the rest of the world is based around this notion of material well-being (which has innumerable positives, of course). Unless you can show that returning to Earth had become some great motivating myth behind the society that evolved on that starship, the idea that these people would take the risks associated with the return to Earth is, I think, reaching. At the very least, it was an extreme measure that required greater discussion among the population. And I don't buy the Capt. Kirk analogy - Kirk commanded a military ship, the captain on WAllE was taking care of civilians who were not in distress.

However, I realize that an argument can be made around the opposite position. This was just my initial reaction.

Sincerely,

Shaun

[Ian Boothby]

Or we'll see a sequel with Wall-E stacking large corpses into towers.

[a. non]

Or we'll see a sequel with Wall-E stacking large corpses into towers.

That's not funny; i've had dreams like that


I saw both Monday and Tuesday. I really liked Hancock; the only thing that felt off was the hook-handed villain.


I LOOOOVED Wall-E. I may take my nephew to see it tomorrow. We have a pool?

[drnorge]

I saw Hancock and was surprised. I was nervous that it was one of those movies that showed all of the good bits in the commercial and they did a good job of keeping some major story elements for the movie experience. My wife and I really had a good time. (Gotta love my wife, I secretly think she wanted to see a super hero movie on our anniversary just to make me happy. Although she really had a good time too. She rocks.)

I am so excited to hear Wall E was so good. I have no good excuse as to why I haven't seen it yet. Pixar always hits a home run. Might try and see it tomorrow night. Thanks for posting the comments on it.

Sean

[Nick Soapdish]

Dear Friends,

Gee, I'm going to get skewered for this, I think, but I saw Hancock last night (with my sister) and Wall-E on the weekend (with my sister and Dad) and - well, I preferred Hancock. My sister really preferrred Hancock. Maybe we went into WallE with huge expectations because of the great reviews and were disappointed as a result and the reverse was true with Hancock, but those were our honest reactions.

In thinking about this, I enjoyed WallE and Eve themselves, but I felt that the WallE human characters/message just did not make much sense to me. Maybe, oddly, I found it to be unrealistically optimistic, in a saccharine sort of way. After all, would you leave a comfortable environment on a starship, where all your needs are taken care of, and return to a planet that is, literally, a dump? I realize that some people would, but most humans would not. After all, how many of us would give up our comfortable houses today to live in tents or log cabins in the woods? What about the huge hardships that will face the returning humans? Did the captain of the ship have the right to make the choice about their future for all of the other people on the ship?

Sincerely,

Shaun

I haven't seen Hancock yet so I deleted that part of your post.

I think that a lot of why people decided to go out and do work is out of sheer boredom. But it's mostly to bring meaning to their lives.

I believe that we really do need work or some sort of purpose to our lives. It's not that the ship is simply more comfortable. It's that it does absolutely everything for them.

Some people may have stayed on the ship and a bunch probably went
back for "vacations". But we need some sort of challenge or goal and I don't think that the virtual games would've been enough for most.

[ShaunN]

Dear Nick,

Thanks. That's a really good point and, obviously, one of the messages of the film. Certainly, it's interesting that in Western society, the most materially comfortable society in human history, rates of depression are much higher than (apparently) in the past. (I say "apparently" since getting reliable information on this is probably impossible). One of the obvious failures of the materialist society is that it does nothing for one's spirit, and many people seem to be reacting to this through mental distress. On that ship, this should have been a real problem.

Take care,

Shaun

[Matt Algren]

Dear Nick,

Thanks. That's a really good point and, obviously, one of the messages of the film. Certainly, it's interesting that in Western society, the most materially comfortable society in human history, rates of depression are much higher than (apparently) in the past. (I say "apparently" since getting reliable information on this is probably impossible). One of the obvious failures of the materialist society is that it does nothing for one's spirit, and many people seem to be reacting to this through mental distress. On that ship, this should have been a real problem.

Take care,

Shaun
You're over thinking.

And depression isn't more prevalent, it's more commonly reported now that we can do something about it and the stigma is (slowly) fading.

[Buzz Dixon]

You're over thinking.

And depression isn't more prevalent, it's more commonly reported now that we can do something about it and the stigma is (slowly) fading.Contrary wise, in the past people had more pressing concerns than how they felt.

[Matt Algren]

Contrary wise, in the past people had more pressing concerns than how they felt.
We have a diary of my Grandmother's from two years of her early life, the year before and after she got married. On at least one day in five, she wrote a line about 'feeling blue'. It was just the norm.

I liken it to life before eyeglasses became available to the masses. People didn't report that they didn't see very well because there was no reason to. If there's nothing you can do, why bother talking about it?