Cars 2 - Pixar's first flop?

[zinfamous]

!!!

http://popculturezoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/upnew.jpg

Cool 4K image from 'Up'. Really shows that even 1080p is pretty limited compared to the potential. It'll probably be a few years yet before we even have ~4000x3000 displays in the median consumer market though. Right now even 2560x1600 is ludicriously expensive.

wow.
and 4K is still inferior to 35mm, correct?

 

[Arkaign]

wow.
and 4K is still inferior to 35mm, correct?

Indeed. Although there are a lot of things you have to do to get 35mm to get to it's full potential, and it seriously depends on having the best cameras, best film, best lighting, and the requisite experts to get the best results. I'd have to say the average person would get much better results with a Red 4k camera vs. an equally expensive 35mm setup. There's also the issue of data storage and integrity. Film, as I'm sure you've noticed in many dvd and bd transfers, tends to age poorly even when stored in good conditions. Anything chemically imprinted like that is impossible to be perfectly preserved though. So that's why you get a lot of transfers that have excess grain or visible damage to the source film, and conversely, a lot of poorly or rushed/cheap restorations for the bd transfer, with edge enhancement, artificial noise reduction, crushed blacks, etc.

There is a lot of progress continually being made here though, I'd say we're under a decade before the coffin of film is ready to begin with the funeral procession. Film will remain as an artistic choice, but the tech for digital cameras with near-100% color accuracy and insane framerate and resolution is already coming to us.

For a practical reference, something like 16,000x9,000 would be around the range of reasonably 'perfect' image reproduction for a 2d film. Going full digital like that also enables the possibility of 120fps or higher video, something not nearly as feasible when dealing with film.

 

[Ichinisan]

Also, the 35mm film is way higher than 720p.

I know that, but this is an animated, digital production. Shouldn't there be no film involved in the process?

I was saying that, even if you considered the "source" to be the initial print, the initial print was distributed to movie theaters on 35mm film and 720p would have been inadequate. Pixar definitely would have rendered at a much higher resolution as the first 35mm print was created.

Still, in the case of Pixar films, the "source" is actually data for 3d models, textures, skeletal animations, scenes, virtual "camera" movements, audio recordings, etc...

It can be rendered at whatever output resolution is desired. Also, seamless changes and enhancements can be added. Not just technical things like better lighting, reflections, physics, textures etc...but also story / scene elements. It grants far more freedom than the typical "cutting room" editor would ever have.

CZroe mentioned that 4:3 releases actually had all the scenes re-composed to fit in everything in the frame without chopping or pan-n-scan.

 

[Ichinisan]

... Going full digital like that also enables the possibility of 120fps or higher video, something not nearly as feasible when dealing with film.

Yup. Even if, for some reason, camera movements and skeletal animations had been generated and stored as 24 "frames" per second (instead of vectors and timing data), you can still interpolate in-between motions from the "keyframe" positions.

 

[Texashiker]

I know this is an old thread, but I did not want to start a new one on the same topic.

My wife and I took our grand kids to see cars 2 last night, and it was pretty bad.

The plot of way over the head of the targeted audience. My grands kids, who can usually watch the original cars, were not interested. The only time the movie seemed to catch the attention of the kids was when towmater was on the screen.

On top of the over done plot, I think the gun play was a little too much for a kids movie. Who in their right mind puts gun scenes in a kids movie?

My wife and I walked out about an hour into the movie.

 

[ch33zw1z]

My experience was totally different than yours Texas. My soon-to-be 5 year old loved it, couldn't take his eyes off the screen. I think they did a great job, and I was very skeptical going in. They throw in some stuff for adults as well, of course. My kid already wants Santa to bring him Cars 2 for christmas.

 

[abaez]

A flop once every 25 or so years aint bad.

 

[gorcorps]

A flop once every 25 or so years aint bad.

Yup. They still have a track record that's phenomenal compared to most movie producers. And of course it's merely a critical flop, it's still making gobs of money. And the "critical flop" part of it is always subjective. Lots of people still like it.

 

[dainthomas]

On top of the over done plot, I think the gun play was a little too much for a kids movie. Who in their right mind puts gun scenes in a kids movie?

So much fail. Most of us managed to watch Road Runner cartoons growing up without turning into sociopaths. And you're from Texas? Lol.

PS: Don't let your little darlings ever watch Lilo and Stitch either. Rofl.

 

[ch33zw1z]

So much fail. Most of us managed to watch Road Runner cartoons growing up without turning into sociopaths. And you're from Texas? Lol.

PS: Don't let your little darlings ever watch Lilo and Stitch either. Rofl.

Tell me about it. I put Tom and Jerry on, it lasted about 20 seconds before I started getting hit with whatever was within my sons reach. Turned that off real quick. Cartoons have changed so much.

 

[NFS4]

33%? Daaaayyymmm

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/cars_2/

 

[ProfJohn]

^ kind of surprising since most critics seem to have the 'its good, but not that good' attitude about it.

 

[busydude]

Critically.. this movie seems to be first flop coming from Pixar, but commercially this is going to be massive success. This falls into the Michael Bay and Roland Emmerich territory.

 

[TheNinja]

^ kind of surprising since most critics seem to have the 'its good, but not that good' attitude about it.

Ya, it seems like critics expect a lot from a Pixar movie. They almost build it up so much that when they actually see it, it disappoints them.

 

[Queasy]

I doubt it will flop at the box office but this is perhaps Pixar's first blatant cash-in with a franchise. Sure, they sold toys with Toy Story 1 - 3 but there was still a story to be told there.

Just look at the Sunday ad flyers and you'll see why Cars 2 was made. In the immortal words of Yogurt, "Moichandising, moichandising, where the real money from the movie is made!"

Cars 2 looks like it was made to sell toys instead of doing what Pixar does best, tell a great story.

 

[The_Dude8]

I doubt it will flop at the box office but this is perhaps Pixar's first blatant cash-in with a franchise. Sure, they sold toys with Toy Story 1 - 3 but there was still a story to be told there.

Just look at the Sunday ad flyers and you'll see why Cars 2 was made. In the immortal words of Yogurt, "Moichandising, moichandising, where the real money from the movie is made!"

Cars 2 looks like it was made to sell toys instead of doing what Pixar does best, tell a great story.

that what happen when disney took over pixar.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Critically.. this movie seems to be first flop coming from Pixar, but commercially this is going to be massive success. This falls into the Michael Bay and Roland Emmerich territory.

Except Cars 1 was one of Pixar's worst box office performers leaving 0 reason to believe Cars 2 will be any better.

Again, this movie is to help milk that merchandising cash cow, not generate block busting ticket sales. The franchise simply is not the prototypical Pixar in being able to appeal to a diverse audience.

 

[Texashiker]

I doubt it will flop at the box office but this is perhaps Pixar's first blatant cash-in with a franchise. Sure, they sold toys with Toy Story 1 - 3 but there was still a story to be told there.

Cars 2 looks like it was made to sell toys instead of doing what Pixar does best, tell a great story.

One of my big complaints about cars 2 is that the story plot is over the head of the targeted audience.

What 4, 5 or 6 year old knows the difference between the different types of race cars? That 1 type of car runs well on a certain type of track, and another type of car runs well on another type of track.

Then there is the geographical locations of the movie. Most kids are going to be challenged to know where the race tracks are at.

The toy story series on the other hand could have been in any town, anywhere in the world.

To me, cars 2 looks like it would have been better for some tv show instead of the theater.

 

[ProfJohn]

Yea, but different types of race cars are awesome when it comes to selling them.

From a merchandising POV the movie is brilliant.

There were 16 major characters in the first movie. This one has 33.
That provides them with a LOT more cars toys to sell to kids.

This movie really is nothing more than Pixar selling out to make money. Sad, but reality.

 

[roguerower]

I need to pony up the cash for the Pixar BluRay collection. I'm 24 and they're still some of my favorite movies. All 3 Toy Story movies have made me tear up because of the view of kids growing up through the toy's eyes. Even though I rationally know that there is NO way that's possible I still get a little choked up at all the reflective parts.

 

[Bacstar]

There's a great documentary on Netflix covering Pixar. Think it's called "The Pixar Story". Covers the founding to the release of "The Incredibles", i think. From watching it, you can see how the founders poured their heart & soul into every project.

It's sad to hear that most people view this new movie as a merchandizing and cash grab, but it was bound to happen with Disney at the reins.

 

[gorcorps]

Except Cars 1 was one of Pixar's worst box office performers leaving 0 reason to believe Cars 2 will be any better.

Again, this movie is to help milk that merchandising cash cow, not generate block busting ticket sales. The franchise simply is not the prototypical Pixar in being able to appeal to a diverse audience.

Box office performance isn't the only thing that makes a commercial success. In fact when we're talking kid's movies it's probably a very small part of it. This will sell a ton of toys, clothes, eventually DVDs/blu-rays... etc. Just like the first one did.

 

[chuckywang]

$68M at the box office the first weekend. Problem critics??

 

[zinfamous]

I know this is an old thread, but I did not want to start a new one on the same topic.

My wife and I took our grand kids to see cars 2 last night, and it was pretty bad.

The plot of way over the head of the targeted audience. My grands kids, who can usually watch the original cars, were not interested. The only time the movie seemed to catch the attention of the kids was when towmater was on the screen.

On top of the over done plot, I think the gun play was a little too much for a kids movie. Who in their right mind puts gun scenes in a kids movie?

My wife and I walked out about an hour into the movie.

I didn't see it, but my mother essentially said the same thing. She took my 5 year-old nephew to see it last week. She thought it was way too over his head, the actual story, but he loved it.

I reminded her that Pixar has always had multiple plots and story lines in their movies--one for the kids and one for the adults. That's why they've been so successful. The main plot doesn't have to be too difficult for the kids to pick up, and some are simpler than others. They iitll tend to enjoy it.

For my nephew: "I liked the secret agents one was good and there was this bad one and Mater had a bomb in him but he was lucky because it didn't splode and the good secret agent was lucky too because he didn't die."

He loved it.

I still haven't seen it. Never saw Cars 1, either.


As for the bolded, the MPAA, that's who. a bunch of childless, boring, fuckstick Christian conservatives that are tasked with approving "family morality" on the entire American-produced movie audience. that, and well, any movie released in the US.

their mantra:

sexuality: evil
guns and violence and death: A-OK.

what a bunch of fuckwads.

 

[abaez]

$68M at the box office the first weekend. Problem critics??

Lets see how long that lasts after some word of mouth.

And http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYg0VgPy6Uk&feature=player_embedded is what we expect from Pixar.