Wall E wasn't good. Cars was great. If you think otherwise you are silly. SILLY.

Monkey's Knuckle: lionfish: I didn't like it. I couldn't believe they never started actually having any useful dialog. All they ever did is say each others name, directive and plant. The supporting robot characters didn't even get a word in. Not one. The movie itself was ok, but they really missed an opportunity to develop the characters. It leaves you with nothing quotable, nothing really memorable, about the movie. Pixar finally fails. It was bound to happen.

Yes, they failed because you didn't like it. Who are you? Dwayne Hoover?

Read his posts carefully. He hasn't actually seen it. Good troll until he slipped up, though.

On my comment on the polys in the galaxies: I meant to say cities. Apologies. :p

TOTAL RIP OFF of the Joan River's robot in Spaceballs. What nerve those overrated Pixar guys have.

mcmnky: This reviewer is a d-bag.

"Wall•E" is Pixar's most creative and original product to date, and that's saying something given that the company previously gave us "Cars," "Finding Nemo" and "The Incredibles."

...3 movies of limited creativity and originality. Not to knock those movies, but are those the best examples of Pixar's work? Especially when trying to add context for what is obviously an ambitious project.

If your standard of creativity includes "Cars"--an animated version of "Doc Hollywood"--and "The Incredibles"--the idea that superheroes might have regular lives with families might have been groundbreaking in the 1970s but not in 2004--then I cannot put too much stock in your opinion of a movie most other folks are calling one of best so far this year and a contender for Best Film nominations.

So it's original to anthropomorphize technology? How so? And it's certainly original to express deep profound love after the most limited of interaction and certainly the abstract limits that a technological brain would place upon the mystical experience that love often is.

And of course no one, not anyone, has ever commented on consumerism, obesity, or environmentalism.

Wow, the stupid in you is strong. Wall E was overly simplistic, pandering junk that was meant mainly to espouse a political message. And what's worse, is they are so full of themselves that they took a great chance to have a dialogue free movie and make it deeply moving. Instead the chose poor background music, slow humor (after all, if they had had truly funny scenes, the love expressed would have been greater), along with a complete lack innovation. There was nothing new in this love story. There was nothing new with the political message. Grow up. Wall E wasn't great. He isn't cute, and there is no real apparent reason why he expresses elements of humanity other than it panders to audience emotion.

Nemo is still my favorite, but Wall-e was darling.

/the short at the beginning, funniest Pixar short yet
//I love going to a G-rated movie and finding the theater full of college kids

sloppy shoes: mcmnky: This reviewer is a d-bag.

"Wall•E" is Pixar's most creative and original product to date, and that's saying something given that the company previously gave us "Cars," "Finding Nemo" and "The Incredibles."

...3 movies of limited creativity and originality. Not to knock those movies, but are those the best examples of Pixar's work? Especially when trying to add context for what is obviously an ambitious project.

If your standard of creativity includes "Cars"--an animated version of "Doc Hollywood"--and "The Incredibles"--the idea that superheroes might have regular lives with families might have been groundbreaking in the 1970s but not in 2004--then I cannot put too much stock in your opinion of a movie most other folks are calling one of best so far this year and a contender for Best Film nominations.

So it's original to anthropomorphize technology? How so? And it's certainly original to express deep profound love after the most limited of interaction and certainly the abstract limits that a technological brain would place upon the mystical experience that love often is.

And of course no one, not anyone, has ever commented on consumerism, obesity, or environmentalism.

Wow, the stupid in you is strong. Wall E was overly simplistic, pandering junk that was meant mainly to espouse a political message. And what's worse, is they are so full of themselves that they took a great chance to have a dialogue free movie and make it deeply moving. Instead the chose poor background music, slow humor (after all, if they had had truly funny scenes, the love expressed would have been greater), along with a complete lack innovation. There was nothing new in this love story. There was nothing new with the political message. Grow up. Wall E wasn't great. He isn't cute, and there is no real apparent reason why he expresses elements of humanity other than it panders to audience emotion.

And, of course, you are the be-all, end-all arbiter of this?

Tastes differ. Many folks, myself included, have the exact opposite opinion of the film from your own. Many of us felt that Cars was basically a CG Doc Hollywood with Larry the Cable Guy added for extra annoyance. You didn't. Opinions are like that. You're not right, you're not wrong, but in this case the majority, inasmuch as this thread is concerned, seems to greatly disagree with you.

lionfish: And why was fred willard the only actual human depicted in the movie?

Actually, the people in the Axiom spaceship promo video were also depicted by actual humans. I think the reason there were real people in the film (as Nuuu pointed out) was to point out that the movie is about us as a society. What I think was more important, though, was it helped contrast real people with their grossly obese, easychair-bound progeny 700 years in the future. It shows just how much humanity can change after generations of slothful grazing from the comfort of a chair.

Even the progression of captain photos seen on the control deck of ship depict the gradual change from realistic representations of modern humans to the grazing fatties of the future.

/dug Wall-E a lot
//Second favorite Pixar movie behind The Incredibles

I'll give this one good odds. Only Pixar film I hated was Ratatouille. Aside from the quirky casting, it was something like Dreamworks would produce.

Which is sad. Antz showed a lot of potential to be Pixar-ish (and while I liked A Bug's Life, Antz was much better). And then Shrek happened.

But, back to topic: . Pixar ain't perfect, but they're largely pretty consistent, most times better than any other studio out there. I'll take Wall-E over whatever shiat that Dreamworks is putting out next.

/I'm glaring at you, Shrek 4.
//You know it's gonna happen.

Of course I'm not any better judge than anyone else because it basically revolves around an emotional opinion. But of course we shouldn't discuss the issue because all Fark threads should end in agreement and heaven forbid someone disagree and express their disagreement.

Lordy, Lordy, It's an internet message board. I'm just saying I didn't like the film and why I feel that way. If you don't want to talk about that, ignore my post.

And for the record, neither story (Cars or Wall E) is overly original. The difference is that Cars characters grew, expressed love, and adapted to their message. Wall E was clearly lonely and wanted love. Ironically, the people in the movie were lonely, though they had companions. Yet, Wall E blindly falls in love for whatever blind companion he finds, even though she doesn't really express interest, for little reason, until later in the movie.

Yet, as contrived as the cars characters were, they at least followed some logical order. Wall E was merely pandering to our humanity and expecting us to follow along. That isn't a good movie. That's you willing and wanting to be entertained, not EXPECTING to be entertained.

The problem is that Wall E falls short if you don't find it to be cute. Much like Cars likely falls short if you don't find the characters cute. (Though cars is slightly deeper; yet, one could argue that Wall E had the potential to be deeper as there are likely more connections that could be super-analyzed- but none really are).

If you liked the movie, more power to you. But Wall E doesn't hold a candle to Toy Story, Monsters INC, Toy Story 2, or to a lesser extent the Incredibles, Cars. Ratatouille, Wall E, and a Bugs Life were ok, but okay at best.

Makh: I guess since we are rating our favorite Pixar films.

Really liked
1. The Incredibles
2. Wall-E
3. Toy Story
4. Monsters, Inc.

Liked
5. Toy Story 2
6. Ratatouille
7. Cars
8. A Bug's Life

Enjoyed it but wouldn't watch it again or see a sequel
9. Finding Nemo

Finding Nemo was the movie that I walked out of with my son...he grabbed my hand and said,"Dad...I love you." For that, this movie will rank up there as one of my all time fav's.

Cars just didn't appeal to me at all. I didn't care about the Owen Wilson car or develop any connection to it, the car-character designs were bland and not particularly emotive (hell, I still assert that the Aardman cars for those Chevron commercials have more personality), and the only characters I liked were the Paul Newman car and the Italian stereotypes. The Car Talk cameo was pretty cool, but that was about it. Imo, it's the only Pixar movie that feels like it was not made by Pixar.

sloppy shoes: That's you willing and wanting to be entertained, not EXPECTING to be entertained.

This is the part where you are dead wrong. Of course I'm willing to be entertained, but that doesn't make the film more entertaining, no matter which way you swing it. I've disliked other pixar films, so Wall-E really wouldn't have been the first (or even the second) had I disliked it.

They really do have a knack for adapting plots to totally odd conditions, though, don't they:

A Bug's Life - The Seven Samurai (If you're going to steal, steal from the best!)

Monster's Inc - That episode of every sitcom where the main characters get saddled with a little kid (though it took this to much better directions).

Finding Nemo - Something, I'm sure. It's just slipped my mind. I've put most of this film out of my mind, having been pretty darn nonplussed by it. Pretty, though.

Cars - Doc Hollywood, as has been discussed.

Now, relative to some of these, Wall-E has a much more original plot. Does that make it a better film? Well, that's up to opinion. Unlike you, though, I found that they displayed the emotion in the 'bots quite well. I did not, actually, find this film wanting for much at all. I also found it to be a lot less tedious to watch than Cars. Others have told me that this is because I'm not a race fan. Works for me. I also loathe Larry the Cable Guy's voice and really wish somebody would sew his mouth shut, so that probably has something to do with it to. I seriously don't see how you could say that the characters in Wall-E, the title character excluded, haven't grown, though. For the most part, every other featured character (within reason) experienced a major and logical character change, even the cockroach.

Six_By_Nine: /I'm glaring at you, Shrek 4.
//You know it's gonna happen.

Actually, it is going to happen. Believe it or not, they've already confirmed the fourth and fifth Shrek movies, as well as a spin-off featuring Puss in Boots.

He-e-e-e-y...I think Spaceballs ripped off another robot design...




Notice the similarity:

How is Wall E's plot original? Lonely, tragic character 1 meets superior, uncaring character 2. Character 1 tries for the affections of character based upon lack of a significant relationships and the superficial understanding of second character. Eventually, through the timely and tragic coincidences of their misadventures, they both develop more characteristics needed to express the human emotion of love rather than their heretofore static appearance and action, and they end up, indeed, falling in love. Insert whatever side plot you would like with bumbled action and minor comic relief.

Amazingly I just saw another movie with that plot- Get Smart. Or many, many other movies that have come out. Wall E was not an original plot.

sloppy shoes: How is Wall E's plot original? Lonely, tragic character 1 meets superior, uncaring character 2. Character 1 tries for the affections of character based upon lack of a significant relationships and the superficial understanding of second character. Eventually, through the timely and tragic coincidences of their misadventures, they both develop more characteristics needed to express the human emotion of love rather than their heretofore static appearance and action, and they end up, indeed, falling in love. Insert whatever side plot you would like with bumbled action and minor comic relief.

Amazingly I just saw another movie with that plot- Get Smart. Or many, many other movies that have come out. Wall E was not an original plot.

That's why I prefaced it with the "relative to..."

Leishu: Finding Nemo - Something, I'm sure. It's just slipped my mind. I've put most of this film out of my mind, having been pretty darn nonplussed by it. Pretty, though.

To me, it was an underwater "Bambi".

I will say this about Wall E- I think Pixar was on the right track. I think they tried, but failed.

The insert of real humans and previous human movies was awesome. (Though I think they made the wrong choices to insert). But certainly it was meant to be nostalgic, humanize the love and characters, and evince the idea that we are connected to the story.

However, Wall E isn't cute for me. That is a huge downfall to the above plot I mentioned. It makes the plot seem foolish and lacking of reality- after all it is a dream to believe if we just try hard enough we can make that character who doesn't really like us, love us. And I think that Wall E would have been a better character if they had further explored why he expressed human characteristics- as opposed to most of the other robots who showed only the basest of human qualities. Is humanity contagious? Can you catch it from the magic of video? (AS both the captain and Wall E did?) It then spread threw the characters. So humanity is some sense of human mysticism and curiosity that is overly contagious. Well, why then did we lose it in the first place? If humanity is so contagious why do we appear to be losing it in the place of rampant consumerism? Obviously this is a kids movie, but when you delve into complex subjects, don't expect everyone to be carried away by your message.

On another note, the visuals were amazing. Would have been flawless if the instrumentals chosen were better.

Leishu:sloppy shoes: How is Wall E's plot original? Lonely, tragic character 1 meets superior, uncaring character 2. Character 1 tries for the affections of character based upon lack of a significant relationships and the superficial understanding of second character. Eventually, through the timely and tragic coincidences of their misadventures, they both develop more characteristics needed to express the human emotion of love rather than their heretofore static appearance and action, and they end up, indeed, falling in love. Insert whatever side plot you would like with bumbled action and minor comic relief.

Amazingly I just saw another movie with that plot- Get Smart. Or many, many other movies that have come out. Wall E was not an original plot.

That's why I prefaced it with the "relative to..."

And I said that none of them had an original plot. And you didn't make a counter-argument. How does prefacing your statement with "relative to" help your argument. Wall E's plot is a basic Hollywood plot. It's exactly the same as Get Smart, except added in free of charge was a political message and a change of scenery. That isn't originality.

It occurred to me while watching the movie that it is making a statement about capitalism. However, it's not what you think. It's showing an absurd result of the "bad" type of market economy, where there is not feedback loop of things costing to much that are wasteful. Those tubs of lard had absolutely no interest in anything but their own selfish interests (which is normal), but there was no opposite market pressure that regulates their decisions.

Sure, I want a Mercedes. I can't afford one, so I don't get one. The slobs on the Axiom never had to deal with that reality. In a true market, they would get eaten alive.

/reading books on economics and watching kids movies might not be a good combination.

ManRay:It occurred to me while watching the movie that it is making a statement about capitalism. However, it's not what you think. It's showing an absurd result of the "bad" type of market economy, where there is not feedback loop of things costing to much that are wasteful. Those tubs of lard had absolutely no interest in anything but their own selfish interests (which is normal), but there was no opposite market pressure that regulates their decisions.

Sure, I want a Mercedes. I can't afford one, so I don't get one. The slobs on the Axiom never had to deal with that reality. In a true market, they would get eaten alive.

/reading books on economics and watching kids movies might not be a good combination.

I would actually say the message was against marketing, not necissarly free markets. Take the joke in the Axiom where the announcer says to the effect of "Tired of red, try blue" and everyone immediatly switches to blue.

sloppy shoes:I would actually say the message was against marketing, not necissarly free markets. Take the joke in the Axiom where the announcer says to the effect of "Tired of red, try blue" and everyone immediatly switches to blue.

I can see that. The book I am reading is talking about making irrational choices in a free market, I would say switching from red to blue just because you can sounds irrational. This assumes there is no benefit to switching, and I didn't see one.

Leishu are you seriously implying they rendered each and every individual star and planet in that galaxy? Are you that dense?

lionfish: I didn't like it. I couldn't believe they never started actually having any useful dialog. All they ever did is say each others name, directive and plant.

You REALLY don't get it.

sloppy shoes:Leishu:sloppy shoes: How is Wall E's plot original? Lonely, tragic character 1 meets superior, uncaring character 2. Character 1 tries for the affections of character based upon lack of a significant relationships and the superficial understanding of second character. Eventually, through the timely and tragic coincidences of their misadventures, they both develop more characteristics needed to express the human emotion of love rather than their heretofore static appearance and action, and they end up, indeed, falling in love. Insert whatever side plot you would like with bumbled action and minor comic relief.

Amazingly I just saw another movie with that plot- Get Smart. Or many, many other movies that have come out. Wall E was not an original plot.

That's why I prefaced it with the "relative to..."

And I said that none of them had an original plot. And you didn't make a counter-argument. How does prefacing your statement with "relative to" help your argument. Wall E's plot is a basic Hollywood plot. It's exactly the same as Get Smart, except added in free of charge was a political message and a change of scenery. That isn't originality.

I had no intention of making a counter-argument. I was elaborating on the point you made, stating, basically, that I found Wall-E to be relatively original, though still not that original of a plot. I also found that it had substantial differences from Get Smart which you are not accounting for (alpha male competition) and only has similarities on the most very basic level, unlike Cars or A Bug's Life, which had completely analogous characterizations to their sources on almost every level.

Mother's Bloody Sperm:Leishu are you seriously implying they rendered each and every individual star and planet in that galaxy? Are you that dense?

I misstated. See subsequent posts.

Leishu all your other posts are defending the plot, what are you referring to?

I thought it stunk.

The only amusing point was that they did so much marketing for this movie - which made it a success - and the story of the movie is marketing as well.

tarkus1980 2001 is an overrated artistic masturbation-fest. It's a good movie trapped inside a big, bloated, superfluous one.

Leishu

Except for the fact that the alpha male competition had nothing to do with the story except comic relief. Yet, the positioning of the characters as sad and lonely did. That's why it is part of the plot outline. And while there was no other robot to compete with, originally Wall E was not "alpha male" enough for Eva anyways. He was inferior. It wasn't until he stepped up to the plate with comical actions and eventually saving the plant several times that she truly fell for him. Just like in Get Smart. Amazingly, just like in Get Smart, Wall E was credited with failure at first (he didn't actually lose the plant, just as the Rock was the real traitor), but then was redeemed and the initial spark of love overflowed because the female character underestimated the male character.

Just saw Wall*E with the kids this afternoon. My wife and I liked it, the kids (9 and 7) thought it was "good" but not as good as Kung-Fu Panda -- which was obviously much more geared for kids.

My favorite part, however, was at the end of the movie when the credits started rolling and all the fatties in the theater -- parents and kiddies -- sorta slunk out, heads down, with their empty gi-normous slushie cups and popcorn buckets in hand, and threw them out.

Maybe a little shame goes a long way?

Nah!

sloppy shoes:How is Wall E's plot original? Lonely, tragic character 1 meets superior, uncaring character 2. Character 1 tries for the affections of character based upon lack of a significant relationships and the superficial understanding of second character. Eventually, through the timely and tragic coincidences of their misadventures, they both develop more characteristics needed to express the human emotion of love rather than their heretofore static appearance and action, and they end up, indeed, falling in love. Insert whatever side plot you would like with bumbled action and minor comic relief.

Amazingly I just saw another movie with that plot- Get Smart. Or many, many other movies that have come out. Wall E was not an original plot.

You can make the argument that there has not been original plot put forth in any major work since just after the dawn of humanity. Shakespeare's works were largely derivatives from his contemporaries, Greek plays, Tristan & Iseult, and so on. He had no original plots. However, we still consider his works to be among the quintessential masterpieces in human history. The problem with any plot is you can boil it down to an archetype and claim the plot is unoriginal because it's been done a billion times before. If you don't like something because you don't think the story is original, quite honestly, I don't think you should like any story ever told.

Frankly, I think Wall-E is one of the best movies I've ever seen in my life. I'm still in awe at how absolutely beautiful and thoughtful that movie is.

I think that the few movie critics that don't like amazing films must contemplate suicide constantly.

Something along the lines of "OH MY GOD I DID IT AGAIN! I'VE PROVEN THAT I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THE fark I'M TALKING ABOUT! WHERE'S MY GUN?!"

tarkus first two times I watched it, I passed out. Third time I sat through the whole thing... and, like other Kubrick films that I've seen, I thought the direction and cinematography were excellent, but the storytelling clearly came second. I thought it failed in conveying a coherent narrative fluidly and was, in this sense, a failure.

Outshined_One:sloppy shoes:How is Wall E's plot original? Lonely, tragic character 1 meets superior, uncaring character 2. Character 1 tries for the affections of character based upon lack of a significant relationships and the superficial understanding of second character. Eventually, through the timely and tragic coincidences of their misadventures, they both develop more characteristics needed to express the human emotion of love rather than their heretofore static appearance and action, and they end up, indeed, falling in love. Insert whatever side plot you would like with bumbled action and minor comic relief.

Amazingly I just saw another movie with that plot- Get Smart. Or many, many other movies that have come out. Wall E was not an original plot.

You can make the argument that there has not been original plot put forth in any major work since just after the dawn of humanity. Shakespeare's works were largely derivatives from his contemporaries, Greek plays, Tristan & Iseult, and so on. He had no original plots. However, we still consider his works to be among the quintessential masterpieces in human history. The problem with any plot is you can boil it down to an archetype and claim the plot is unoriginal because it's been done a billion times before. If you don't like something because you don't think the story is original, quite honestly, I don't think you should like any story ever told.

Frankly, I think Wall-E is one of the best movies I've ever seen in my life. I'm still in awe at how absolutely beautiful and thoughtful that movie is.

I never said I didn't like it because the story wasn't original. I was arguing with Leishu who said it was better because it was original. Which makes no sense.

I don't like Wall E because the difference between Shakespeare and Wall E is the intricate poetry and human exposition in between the plot. Wall E doesn't have that- just a giant, obvious to anyone with an IQ above 12 political message. Yes the visual are amazing. Yes, movies are the medium for visuals and sound. (Music choices were sub-par though, considering they really lacked significant emotional standpoint.) But there is more to shakespeare than a plot. You don't study Hamlet to care about whether or not the uncle dies or whatever. You study Hamlet for his soliquoy on suicide. Look at Nemo and Cars and Toy Story- they had an intriquate poetic experience about them concerning certain human conditions. Wall E had nothing beyond the basic plot, besides visuals. That's my complaint. I don't care that it is unoriginal, but it is nothing more than unoriginal. The comedy wasn't funny. The message was basic- and there was no real insight as to why that message is realistic, as obviously it is a huge exaggeration. And frankly, there was very little human connection with Wall E other than some people think he is cute. He had a curiosity, but it was more a frank stupidity than the actual curiosity for expression and emotion that the captain had when he discovered what Earth used to be like.

tarkus1980:Outshined_One:You can make the argument that there has not been original plot put forth in any major work since just after the dawn of humanity.

Agreed. My former roomate is fond of saying that his favorite versions of Hamlet are "The Lion King" and "Return of the Jedi."

I've always been partial toThe Oresteia.

sloppy shoes well said. You went to college, didn't you?