Ohmu blood

plasticwingsband · Post by **plasticwingsband** » Tue Nov 09, 2004 8:08 pm

It was surprisingly dark for a Disney movie, and I thought it was better for that. I don't know if anyone's seen The Iron Giant, but it's directed by the same guy, and The Incredibles has a similar "dark" theme.

I'd say it's on the same level as Finding Nemo, but it's got a completely different vibe.

Spazz · Post by **Spazz** » Tue Nov 09, 2004 8:32 pm

Zeta wrote:Omachao has no blood. I should know.

That's because they're really <B>GRENADE</B>S!!

Zeta · Post by **Zeta** » Tue Nov 09, 2004 9:56 pm

So "Cars" is on the way. Which will be the last Pixar/Disney joint film.

And then we have "Rat" which is Pixar's first solo movie - about rats.

TOTALLY COINCIDENTALLY - Dreamworks is ALSO doing a movie about Rats called "Flushed Away".

Not that Dreamworks doesn't constantly listen for whatever Hollywood buzz about Pixar's projects and then shamelessly try to rip their ideas off, replacing good writing and heart with big-name stars and pop-culture jokes.

Nope . . . *cough*Antz*cough*Shark Tale.

Post by **Segaholic2** » Tue Nov 09, 2004 10:13 pm

At least they got it right with Shrek.

Zeta · Post by **Zeta** » Tue Nov 09, 2004 10:28 pm

Yeah, I'm still trying to figure out hw exactly they managed to pull that off! Not just once, but TWICE!

Grant · Post by **Grant** » Tue Nov 09, 2004 10:29 pm

Just the exception that proves the rule, I guess.

Post by **Green Gibbon!** » Tue Nov 09, 2004 10:35 pm

I don't like Dreamworks' movies (no, not even Shrek), but their animation is second to none. They've topped even Pixar in that respect.

Zeta · Post by **Zeta** » Tue Nov 09, 2004 10:37 pm

I'll give you that when it comes to animals, monsters, dragons, or other objects, but I think Pixar does better looking and better moving humans.

Dreamworks' humans just look like slightly animated Barbie dolls.

Spazz · Post by **Spazz** » Tue Nov 09, 2004 10:56 pm

They made Siegfried & Roy look like midgets in "Father of the Pride." That show on the WB with the talking animals an' all with John Goodman.

Radrappy · Post by **Radrappy** » Tue Nov 09, 2004 11:05 pm

i went to pixar last chirstmas where one of the animators informed me that there is a "leak" in pixar that informs Dreamworks of upcoming pixar productions so that they may be countered. I do not think at all that they should be countered so shamelessly. Btw if anyone wanted to know, i plan to work at pixar much later on. . i hear they're opening a 2D animation studio and i would die to be a part of it.

Post by **Delphine** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 10:27 am

I would just like everyone to know that when referring to yourself in the first person, and thus saying "I", the letter "I" is a pronoun in this instance, and therefore should be capitalized. Just a PSA.

Zeta · Post by **Zeta** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 12:49 pm

Pubic Suck Ass?

Post by **Delphine** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:31 pm

Public Service Announcement, smartass.

Post by **Esrever** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 7:22 pm

Honestly, I hate the animation in Dreamworks' films. The models themselves look great, and I don't mind the Shrek series in terms of story either, but there is just something about the animation itself that is still... bad. Particularly the facial animation for the human characters. Even though the art direction is a bit more cartoony, I still find that Pixar's characters move and express in a way that is miles ahead of anything Dreamworks is doing.

I know it's not a traditionally CG animated Dreamworks film, but for a more extreme example of the same kinds of "problems" I think Dreamworks films have, watch that "Polar Express" movie.

Post by **Green Gibbon!** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:17 pm

Who told you you could get out of the corner?

Zeta · Post by **Zeta** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:39 pm

I know it's not a traditionally CG animated Dreamworks film, but for a more extreme example of the same kinds of "problems" I think Dreamworks films have, watch that "Polar Express" movie.

No thank you. I'd like to keep that cherished childhood memory in tact. You know - unlike "The Cat in the Hat". Which was brutally raped by Mike Myers and a team of uncreative, boorish, greedy, bastards.

Baba O'Reily · Post by **Baba O'Reily** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:43 pm

Zeta wrote:
I know it's not a traditionally CG animated Dreamworks film, but for a more extreme example of the same kinds of "problems" I think Dreamworks films have, watch that "Polar Express" movie.
No thank you. I'd like to keep that cherished childhood memory in tact. You know - unlike "The Cat in the Hat". Which was brutally raped by Mike Myers and a team of uncreative, boorish, greedy, bastards.

Jesus, you seem bitter. Do you want a hug?
I think you need a hug.

Post by **Esrever** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 10:00 pm

Aw, don't worry Zeta. I honestly think the failings of the Polar Express movie are technical, rather than conceptual. It sounds like they tried really hard to capture the spirit of the book... if only all the characters didn't look like zombies.

Haha, Gibs, I'm still in the corner, just yelling!

Zeta · Post by **Zeta** » Wed Nov 10, 2004 10:42 pm

Jesus, you seem bitter. Do you want a hug?
I think you need a hug.

Wow . . . you really do like me, don't you?

Aw, don't worry Zeta. I honestly think the failings of the Polar Express movie are technical, rather than conceptual. It sounds like they tried really hard to capture the spirit of the book... if only all the characters didn't look like zombies.

Thanks for the reassurance. After seeing part of the "Cat and the Hat" and part of "The Grinch" (I walked out on both movies, why did I go to CaTH? 8-year old cousin) many of my more pristine Dr. Seuss memories were destroyed.

Seuss landing at Universal Studios is pretty cool, though. I wasn't brave enough to try the Green Eggs and Ham . . .

Tsuyoshi-kun · Post by **Tsuyoshi-kun** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 12:51 pm

Ron Howard's How The Grinch Stole Christmas still hurts me to think about it to this very day. Poor Cindy Lou-Who...she was now ugly and annoying, unlike the original 1966 animated special by Chuck Jones. Jim Carrey couldn't save this special effects-laden piece of crap, which, to quote Leonard Maltin, is a "cheerless bastardization" of Dr. Seuss' work.

And The Cat in the Hhat....AAAAAGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!

OT: I didn't know Pixar had another movie together with Disney still.

Post by **Green Gibbon!** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:27 pm

I just saw The Incredibles today, and I take back what I said before about Dreamworks having better animation than Pixar. Incredibles has the most amazing CG work I've ever seen. I went with some friends from my animation class, and we all walked out totally stunned. I think it kind of depressed us, because we've all spent the past year working on our senior projects and after watching something like that, you realize how little you actually know.

Awesome, awesome movie, though. For my money, it's Pixar's best yet.

Post by **Segaholic2** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:56 pm

...

...You have friends?

Zeta · Post by **Zeta** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:10 pm

I wonder how much he pays them?

Ngangbius · Post by **Ngangbius** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 11:18 pm

Zeta wrote:I'll give you that when it comes to animals, monsters, dragons, or other objects, but I think Pixar does better looking and better moving humans.

I don't think humans are the only things Pixar does better than Dreamworks--especially when you compare this:

to...this:

:X

Zeta · Post by **Zeta** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 11:31 pm

I think that's more crappy character design than flaws in the animation itself. They can be two different things.

You'll notice that Will Fish may be disgustingly grotesque, but he has more detail than Marlin. You can see the individual scales on his body, for instance.