Highlanders actually. I don't recall seeing ads for this outside of theaters, but then again with it being summer I haven't watched as much live TV.I'm excited for this movie.
It's kind of funny that all the trailers I've seen on ESPN/ABC during sports completely gloss over / leave out that the protagonist is a girl, and doesn't even show her at all. Just a bunch of generic Viking physical comedy.
You get worried, whereas I'm happy we don't have four trailers showing most of the content of the movie and lowering my incentive to actually see it. I hate it when trailers show too much.The ads all also seem to be sure to include the same 3 parts (lady screaming, stopping and screaming again. Old guy mooning someone. Everyone ducking arrows) which always worries me.
It's Pixar and that's enough for me.I haven't seen a lot of ads for this, so I can't actually tell what it's about other than she wants to "change her fate" which is pretty vague. The ads all also seem to be sure to include the same 3 parts (lady screaming, stopping and screaming again. Old guy mooning someone. Everyone ducking arrows) which always worries me.
This is pretty much why we didn't have a thread about it until now. It's a given to go see it.It's Pixar and that's enough for me.
Exception: Cars 2.It's Pixar and that's enough for me.
How's this single scene:I haven't seen a lot of ads for this, so I can't actually tell what it's about other than she wants to "change her fate" which is pretty vague. The ads all also seem to be sure to include the same 3 parts (lady screaming, stopping and screaming again. Old guy mooning someone. Everyone ducking arrows) which always worries me.
So you must be really excited to see Madagascar 3 which has almost exclusively limited it's trailers to that circus Afro song.You get worried, whereas I'm happy we don't have four trailers showing most of the content of the movie and lowering my incentive to actually see it. I hate it when trailers show too much.
I think this looks good. I'm looking forward to it.
It's... probably not a comedy?So you must be really excited to see Madagascar 3 which has almost exclusively limited it's trailers to that circus Afro song.
I'm sorry, that was mean of me. No one wants to see Madagascar 3. All I'm saying is that it looks like this movie has exactly 3 funny things that happen.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯It's... probably not a comedy?
Go watch some Shrek. Oh wait, that's not funny either.
It's about a Scottish princess who has issues with her family and the life her mother has planned out for her, so she goes and bothers something in the woods to change her fate. There are also bears.¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Whatevs. Shrek was pretty dope.
I still maintain that the trailers could do more to make me want to see this movie. If this one makes money I bet the next Pixar movie trailers won't even tell you what the movie is called. The posters will just say "Pixar did something. It's showing now. Hey maybe it's about the desk lamp! Who knows though?"
Ticket sales. There is a study that found that young men are less likely than young girls to be interested in a story if the protagonist is of the opposite sex. Part of why Disney's Rapunzel movie was titled _Tangled_ was to avoid pulling in only young girls. That's why they showed a lot of Flynn footage. I'm guessing they're trying to keep boys interested.I'm excited for this movie.
It's kind of funny that all the trailers I've seen on ESPN/ABC during sports completely gloss over / leave out that the protagonist is a girl, and doesn't even show her at all. Just a bunch of generic Viking physical comedy.
Yes, I too was able to see images and identify them for what they were, funnily enough. What I failed to see was a real reason to care about said movIng images.It's about a Scottish princess who has issues with her family and the life her mother has planned out for her, so she goes and bothers something in the woods to change her fate. There are also bears.
That is what I got from the trailers. I don't see how you failed to get at least that much.
At another forum I used to frequent, there was a guy who said all Pixar movies are the same; i.e. they made Toy Story, and then A Bug's Life was Toy Story with bugs, Monsters Inc. was Toy Story with monsters, The Incredibles was Toy Story with superheroes, Wall-E was Toy Story with rats... don't know what the hell he'd have said about Up. Anyway, he thought Shrek and Ice Age were the best things ever. Just goes to show, we don't all have the same opinions because some people eat lead paint and love Shrek and Ice Age.
The original title was "The Bear and the Bow" which might have appealed to boys more than "Brave".Ticket sales. There is a study that found that young men are less likely than young girls to be interested in a story if the protagonist is of the opposite sex. Part of why Disney's Rapunzel movie was titled _Tangled_ was to avoid pulling in only young girls. That's why they showed a lot of Flynn footage. I'm guessing they're trying to keep boys interested.
Yeah, but thisYes, I too was able to see images and identify them for what they were, funnily enough. What I failed to see was a real reason to care about said movIng images.
Is that ok?
made it seem like you had no idea what was going on from the trailers and that all you'd processed was the crappy tagline "If you had the chance to change your fate, would you do it?" What I don't understand is why you'd want more than story set-up.I can't actually tell what it's about other than she wants to "change her fate"
I went for the bondage undertones.Part of why Disney's Rapunzel movie was titled _Tangled_ was to avoid pulling in only young girls.
That makes me cackle. Even a bad Pixar movie beats Dreamworks.It.... has not been getting really excellent reviews over at rottentomatoes. I'm a little scared.
(Not BAD reviews, just a lot of things like "if this was Dreamworks this movie would be pretty good, but we expect better from Pixar")
Pixar Isn’t Even Trying. Brave, Reviewed.
by Will Leitch
1. The brand Pixar has become so powerful and so reliable in the last decade that we forget that's all it is: A brand. We assume every new Pixar film will be well thought out and impeccably constructed, like the Pixar crew is one hivemind that taps into the American subconscious and springs a neverending well of quick-witted, soul-stirring, demographically universal stories that everyone nods along with, together as one. But it's not, of course: Pixar is just a movie studio like any other, capable of rush jobs and cash grabs and bet-hedging. That they have taken risks in the past—most notably with Wall-E, a movie that seems more miraculous the farther away we get from it—does not makes them more likely to push the envelope in the future; it's the exact opposite. So last year, we get Cars 2, a movie I like but is as safe a bet as white bread. And this year, we get Brave, perhaps the least ambitious film they've ever made. I don't remember a time Pixar has expended so little energy to entertain us.
2. The issues are almost entirely with story, which is typically Pixar's strength. Merida is a princess betrothed to marry a rival kingdom's prince, a predetermined relationship she understandably fights against, especially because she yearns to be a great warrior like her father. Curiously, the movie turns her father (and all the male characters, really) into a buffoon, making her primary adversary her mother the Queen (voiced by Emma Thompson), who constantly rides her on what is proper and appropriate for a princess. So far, so good, if nothing particularly original: It's a standard story about a tomboy princess who lusts for a quest of her own, a striving for freedom and independence, with some Stonehenge-type structures thrown in to give the movie some mystical resonance. You're fully expecting a full-throated action adventure in the second half of the movie, as Merida fights like her father while learning that her mother has a few lessons to teach as well.
3. That is not what happens. I am hesitant to give away the movie's big plot twist halfway through, but suffice it to say, when it happens, it's a needle-off-the-record moment that sends the movie careening off in an entirely different, much dumber direction. It signals that the movie is about to go silly on us, and not in a "Look, I'm Woody, howdy howdy howdy" fun silly direction. The mystery and potential scope of the first half is just sent flying off the back of the truck, and the movie becomes an odd mix of slapstick and fairy-tale flimsiness, an utterly conventional tale of derring-do that keeps bumping into the lane of the faintly ridiculous. The movie's second half is a weirdly aimless slog, as if it forget all the threads it set up in the first half. If I didn't know it was animated, I'd have thought they had to bring all the cast together for some last-minute emergency reshoots.
4. I also don't remember the last time a Pixar film had such a tin ear for comedy, either. Scenes that are ostensibly played for laughs consistently fall flat, and dare I say it, there are some moments (particularly involving the mother after the plot twist) that the film borders perilously on the edge of camp. The movie isn't even all that consistent about the rules in its own imaginary universe, particularly when it comes to magic, which Brave introduces suddenly and half-heartedly, the lazy poison pill that both moves along the plot and illustrates how little it's willing to work. One of the keys to Pixar films' success is that they feel as if they've been made by obsessives; people obsessive to detail, sure, but also by people who seem to truly love their subject matter. (Ratatouille is totally made by foodies.) Here, the movie looks half-hearted, like everyone felt obliged to make it, rather than compelled. In a lot of ways, it feels like a PR campaign in search of a story. Pixar has long been criticized for being a boy's club, so now we have a movie with a mother-daughter relationship at the center of it. The problem is that you can't help but wonder if that's where the thought process stalled.
5. There's a good movie in here somewhere, evidenced in late scenes involving the mother and daughter that would have real emotional resonance had the film earned it. (Every mother and daughter have had moments when their inherent closeness have caused them to deeply hurt the other in ways only they could. This is a moving idea to put at the center of a kids movie. Just not this one.) And the movie looks undeniably terrific; plenty of thought and effort went into the visuals, from the sweeping panoramas of Scotland to the smallest ringlet of Merida's flowing red hair. But that attention to detail was lacking on the most basic level, the story; this is the first time, narratively, that Pixar hasn't bothered to sweat the small stuff. I'm not sure what the problem is—maybe they just thought having a female lead was enough?—but to see a Pixar movie this sloppy, conventional, and slipshod is downright flabbergasting. Maybe it really is a boy's club after all.
Grade: C.
I agree. I won't be flipping out and swearing to never watch another Pixar film. I just wanted this one to be good.Pixar is allowed an only mildly good movie every once in a while. (Yes, I'm also worried)
You jest, but in actuality there was a push back in 2005 for Disney to buy EA in order to try to save the brand (EA, not Disney), in order to create Disney Pixar EA.Bad news, Pixar just got bought by EA.
That's because Dreamworks has stopped trying to undermine and attack Disney and Pixar at every turn, and instead focused on making entertaining films.Dreamworks has been doing a lot better of late. Kung Fu Panda, MegaMind, and Despicable Me were all great movies (and the sequel to Kung Fu Panda was better than it had any right to be). They clearly know what they are doing.
Just a little correction, but Despicable Me was done by Illumination Entertainment, the same people that did Hop, and just recently, The Lorax. It was not done by Dreamworks.Dreamworks has been doing a lot better of late. Kung Fu Panda, MegaMind, and Despicable Me were all great movies (and the sequel to Kung Fu Panda was better than it had any right to be). They clearly know what they are doing.
...at least they have one good movie?Just a little correction, but Despicable Me was done by Illumination Entertainment, the same people that did Hop, and just recently, The Lorax. It was not done by Dreamworks.
So yeah... they've only done one good movie then. Well, Horton Hears a Who was okay.Just a little correction, but Despicable Me was done by Illumination Entertainment, the same people that did Hop, and just recently, The Lorax. It was not done by Dreamworks.
"Horton Hears A Who!" was done by Blue Sky Studios, the same guys that did Ice Age.So yeah... they've only done one good movie then. Well, Horton Hears a Who was okay.
The twist ended up being exactly what I was expecting going in, only to a different person then I was expecting.I have a guess at what the twist is in Brave, and if I'm right, I'm gonna be pissed.
That's all fine and good, but that's not what's going on in these scenarios. It's forcing an unwilling woman to wear a corset that is clearly too tight, all the while ignoring her protests. THAT is female oppression, and it's a handy trope for writers.Any ways, the whole corset thing in Braves trailer really annoys me. Writers tend to fall back on this trope that a corset symbolizes female oppression. A corset that's properly fitten and tied is not uncomfortable and offers great breast and back support. Hell, men used to wear corsets back in the civil war era!
Point 1: This is a teenaged girl who is rebelling. Her mother has to force her to wear proper support for decency, really. I wanted to wear skirts well above my knee to school when I 16...my father forced me to dress decently. I resented him for it but looking back on it I understand it.That's all fine and good, but that's not what's going on in these scenarios. It's forcing an unwilling woman to wear a corset that is clearly too tight, all the while ignoring her protests. THAT is female oppression, and it's a handy trope for writers.
When I saw the trailer for MegaMind, I thought "Oh, they're doing an animated ripoff of Dr. Horrible."Dreamworks has been doing a lot better of late. Kung Fu Panda, MegaMind, and Despicable Me were all great movies (and the sequel to Kung Fu Panda was better than it had any right to be). They clearly know what they are doing.
Exactly what crossed my mind when he said that.She's a dude, isn't she? That, or her lack of a soul as a ginger makes her strong enough to face her fears.
Yeah, but neither are particularly outstanding, so it's not exactly like it matters.Megamind > Despicable Me
Out of this list, I think Rango's the best one.Blue Sky (Fox)- Ice Age 1-4, Robots, Horton Hears a Who, Rio
Illumination- Despicable Me, The Lorax
Sony Animation- Open Season, Surf's Up, Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs, Hotel Transylvania
Nickelodeon & ILM- Rango
Pixar- Toy Story 1-3, A Bug's Life, Finding Nemo, Ratatouille, The Incredibles, Cars 1-2, Wall-E, Up, Brave, Monster's Inc
Disney 3D- Chicken Little, Meet the Robinsons, Bolt, Tangled, Wreck-It Ralph
Dreamworks- Antz, Shark Tale, Over the Hedge, Flushed Away, Monsters Vs. Aliens,Bee Movie, Madagascar 1-3, Shrek 1-4, Megamind, Puss in Boots, Kung Fu Panda 1-2
Most of those faces are from promos for the movies, it's a marketing thing. The geniuses in Marketing think that expression instantly makes the characters look a little more "edgy" and it will help to keep from alienating the all important teen demographic. We had a woman from the Dreamworks Art Department come in and give us a rundown of how things work there, and she hated the Marketing department for this.Hearing the various talks we did, it was very clear that Dreamworks has a far more business-oriented mind.Obligatory Pixar vs Dreamworks images
Rango is amazingly good. I was blown away by it.Out of this list, I think Rango's the best one.
Have you watched the amazing Pixar documentary that comes with Wall-E? I think I've watched that more times than the actual movie. It's sooooo good.This thread has made me decide to watch either Wall-E or Ratatouille tonight.
Possibly both.
As with nearly every Pixar teaser, it looks terrible.The official trailer for Monster's University is also out.
Phew.Rumoured for 2015.
Nevermind, they've come out and officially denied it since then. Thank God.
I can definitely understand that.I haven't seen Rango because my wife and kids went without me and were bored to tears by it.
And it looks baaaaaaaaad. But I thought the same of the first teasers for Toy Story 3 and that one was probably my favourite animated film ever. Definitely my favourite CG film. So I'm still hopeful.The official trailer for Monster's University is also out.
You know why it bothers me? Because it is over-done. How many period piece movies show a woman being tied into a corset whether it's for comedic value or as a symbol of oppression or because zOMG it's a woman in her knickers? Cut me a damn break.Any ways, the whole corset thing in Braves trailer really annoys me.
I think I'm the only one this bothers.
How many period piece movies show a woman being tied into a corset whether it's for comedic value or as a symbol of oppression or because zOMG it's a woman in her knickers?
Actually running away from her problems and asking someone else to fix it made all her problems worse. So I don't think that's really the message.My bigger problem with the movie is how it comes across as being about a young girl's ability to change her destiny by standing up for herself and eventually being accepted for who she is. Instead it looks to me like the lesson here is running away from your problems and asking someone else to make things go the way you want is fine if you're a girl. I think I'll pass on this one.
Yes, better than Cars 2, I'd put it in the upper half of the Pixar oeuvre (though I'm not a fan of the Toy Story films). It didn't seem as fresh a take on fairy tales as some of their other, more loved, original films.
Same. Well, a little older than Andy, but still close enough in age that it all got to me. The third one choked me up in so many scenes. When I watched it in theatres with my friends we were all tearing up. One of my friends didn't get a chance to see it until later though. I got it on DVD and had already watched it twice, but he hadn't seen it yet, so we put it on. My other roommate came in like 2minutes into the movie and was like "Oh, we're doing this? Alright." And sat down.I don't see how anyone could not like Toy Story.
On the other hand, I was of that group that was Andy's age when every movie came out, so I might hold it closer than others. I cried my eyes out during the third one.
In the movie I'm pretty sure that the princess was playing up her uncomfort and over tightening of the corset because she is a child being forced to wear something that she doesn't like and the mother tied it snug but not overly tightPoint 1: This is a teenaged girl who is rebelling. Her mother has to force her to wear proper support for decency, really. I wanted to wear skirts well above my knee to school when I 16...my father forced me to dress decently. I resented him for it but looking back on it I understand it.
Point 2: I assume the mother wears a corset as well, so she should know how to tie it comfortably. Instead she ties it up as tight as possible and declares it "perfect". It would have been perfect a if it was a few notches looser as well and any woman that has worn a corset can you that!
It's lazy writing. They just didn't have a better way to say "Look! Oppression!"
Added at: 19:50
Edit: I want to make it clear this my only problem thus far. I'm not a hardcore feminist and i haven't seen the entire movie. I just had to roll my eyes at this scene. It was pulled off better in Pirates of the Caribbean. At least in that movie the garment was unfamiliar to Elizabeth Swann and her servants.
That's not a wig, is it? Tell me that's not a wig. I don't care if it's $50 worth of hair dye and 3 hours with a curling iron every morning, if it's not a wig..... homina.