After seeing the trailer for Short Circuit I can agree that he is indeed a Johnny 5 rip off. It's not only his appearance, but also his personality (and how he goes from not having one to having one) and his voice. All Pixar did was shorten the robot and put him in space.
Flanger-Hanger wrote:After seeing the trailer for Short Circuit I can agree that he is indeed a Johnny 5 rip off. It's not only his appearance, but also his personality (and how he goes from not having one to having one) and his voice. All Pixar did was shorten the robot and put him in space.
But Andrew Stanton said that they came up with the idea of Wall-E somewhere during the 90s. Johnny 5 didn't exist back then, so maybe it's just a coincidence?
Short Circuit came out in 1986. As for idea, there's a difference between having an idea, and deciding what a character will look like 10 or more years later.
As many know, I'm not a massive supporter of the idea that Pixar is full of original creative thoughts. ( I won't go into my arguments again, because frankly it's a waste of time. ) but it must be said, I don't think Wall-E is a rip-off of Johnny Five in the "it's a direct copy, just squash him down" school of thought. I do think that perhaps the designers were influenced by Johnny Five and probably unaware of the fact.
There are only so many robots you can do. In fact both Johnny Five and Wall-E are similar to remote bomb deactivating robots which are in use today, so the design they came up with was probably based on real world research.
I'm more concerned about the presence of this EVE robot. Initially I was pleased that Wall-E seemed to be doing something different, but alas, the more I see of the film, the more I think its going to end up as another "mismatched buddy/partnership" movie.
I think the biggest comparison between Johnny, E.T., and Wally are the eyes. Yet, I do not think of this as a rip off, because these characters were given large, expressive eyes for a good reason. Many filmmakers consider the eyes to be the most expressive part of the body. Windows to the soul, if you will.
Also, I do not agree that Johnny and Wally have similar personalities. Johnny was a very outgoing robot and would not hesitate to try or learn new things. Wally looks to be much more meek and shy.
2099net wrote:I'm more concerned about the presence of this EVE robot. Initially I was pleased that Wall-E seemed to be doing something different, but alas, the more I see of the film, the more I think its going to end up as another "mismatched buddy/partnership" movie.
I don't think so. The other films were male bonding movies(<strike>Finding Nemo doesn't count as Dory is considered a male assuming she shares he sexual preferances with her voice actress </strike> ), this is a centerpiece romance, some Pixar has yet to do, so I think there's quite a lot of originality. The only resemblance of a buddy film is with Wall-E and the coach-roach, and judging by the trailers, that'll be used for gags more than anything.
I actually think this looks like Pixar's most original film yet. I think to call Wall-E a rip-off of Johnny 5 is a huge stretch. I mean, generally, aside from R2-D2 and C3PO(and XR from the underrated Buzz Lightyear show) most humanized robots look similar. I think this looks very original, something I haven't been too kind of Pixar for the past couple years. So needless to say, I'm very excited.
And being a life-long Apple user, I love Eve's design.
And yet T/P Fan, doesn't Cars have a romance in it? And the upcoming Newt sounds like most other Pixar two-some films - you can add "Romance" to the mix after Wall-E, so again it seems to be doing nothing new.
Wall-E doesn't seem to be anything new to me either. Ratatouille was perhaps their most original work. I've seen movies with men befriending rats...they are usually horror movies. Not usually fun, buddy films.
Lord, I may be opening the biggest can of worms ever conceived by humanity, but I need rant about this...
I've been reading the 'Pixar ain't original' posts and I offer a rebuttal.
Getting the negatives out of the way, yes, Pixar is guilty of using the same elements throughout their films. But many film studios are guilty of this, one of them being Disney.
Its true that while the stories are different each of the Disney films features recurring themes and characters. For example, the movies have a sympathetic lead character, accompanied by loyal friends (if the character is a princess she'll have cute animals that follow her everywhere, if the character is male he'll have comical companions), they desire something out of life, they are faced against a threat in the form of an over the top villain, they defeat it and everyone gets a happy ending. And sometimes, all of this is expressed through song, which follow character archetypes closely (expect to hear the introductory song, the "I want" song, the love song, the villain song, the sidekick song and the final song that closes the film).
So why complain about Pixar using the same formula when Disney used their own for years? Not to mention, many of the Disney films are based on existing stories, so Disney ain't so squeaky clean when it comes to "originality issues".
Its also been proven that formula works. Why do you think people are happy to hear that Disney is going back to traditional, fairy tale inspired movies?
But, here's where I come to the defense of both Disney and Pixar. While both are guilty of using a tried and true formula the biggest reason their films are so beloved and successful is because they take the tried and true into new directions.
In other words, the foundations remain the same but its all painted with a different shade of paint.
As for the buddy elements in the Pixar films, again, I won't argue that, but they are quite different in each film.
Here's a rundown of the buddies in the Pixar films:
Woody and Buzz: They started as rivals. Both are "fighting" for Andy's love, but Buzz doesn't realize it. They may be different, but they realize that they have something in common; they are both toys meant to bring happiness to a kid.
Mike and Sully: Unlike Buzz and Woody, they are already friends, longtime friends even! They are co-workers and both are willing to help each other out. However, Boo's appearance represent how in life priorities change and affect friendships. As you all remember, Mike was angry that Sulley was willing to risk his future, life and their friendship just to rescue a little girl. But in the end, their friendship grew stronger as they surpassed each hardship.
Marlin and Dory: This relationship represents how in life we meet people all of a sudden but leave a deep impact in our lives. Would Marlin have been able to find Nemo had he never met Dory? Probably, but the journey wouldn't have been as fulfilling.
Lighting and Mater: This is somewhat similar to the Marlin and Dory relationship, but is quite different. Mater represents the unexpected friend that for some reason sees the good in you and accepts you as a friend. Everyone in Radiator Springs hated McQueen for his attitude and destruction of the road, yet Mater accepted him as he is and became friends.
Remy and Linguini: This represents the odd partnerships we tend to make in life. Remy was a rat and Linguini was a human. Remy could cook but wasn't accepted in the kitchen while Linguini could work there, but was a terrible klutz. Together they made something special. Again, this represents how in life we make oddball partnerships that end up changing but the world and the people involved.
So as you can see, like their stories, the Pixar buddies may have been planned using the same set of blue prints, but all are handled differently and represent different aspects of human relationships.
So its unfair to call Pixar "un-original" for using similar themes, especially when many other filmmakers are guilty of this, yet no one says a word.
Sometimes, its not about the story you tell, its how you tell it, and I believe Disney and Pixar are proven masters of this.
NOTHING is 100% original anymore. So the whole argument is a moot point. You can sit and compare one book or movie to 100s of others. No matter how original it may seem at first.
Siren wrote:NOTHING is 100% original anymore. So the whole argument is a moot point. You can sit and compare one book or movie to 100s of others. No matter how original it may seem at first.
Siren wrote:NOTHING is 100% original anymore. So the whole argument is a moot point. You can sit and compare one book or movie to 100s of others. No matter how original it may seem at first.
Agree,there's nothing original,and just because WALL-E is similar to Johnny 5 doesn't mean it's a rip-off,it's not does lame,cheap movies who rip-off Disney,Pixar and Don Bluth films.
Siren wrote:NOTHING is 100% original anymore. So the whole argument is a moot point. You can sit and compare one book or movie to 100s of others. No matter how original it may seem at first.
Indeed, Because you are working in the same artform, you have to take advantage of things done before you or else you would be rediscovering the wheel all the time, which of course is unnecessary. But it is the amount of new elements that you put in your films that makes it original...
Siren wrote:Wall-E doesn't seem to be anything new to me either. Ratatouille was perhaps their most original work. I've seen movies with men befriending rats...they are usually horror movies. Not usually fun, buddy films.
Willard, there are rats in the basement!
I've been hearing the whole "Wall-E looks like Johnny 5" thing for months (and honestly I've been giggling about it because I know who Johnny 5 is ). Yes, they look and act and sound very similar, but like everyone else here has said, nothing's 100% original. I know I'm alone on this one, but just to prove a point, what I consider the best film to come out in more than a decade was based on another film from Hong Kong.
I'm going to go see this on opening day and I'm probably gonna love it, and note that I'll also avoid the other crap coming out June 27 (Wanted? Are you freakin' kidding me?).
Siren wrote:Wall-E doesn't seem to be anything new to me either. Ratatouille was perhaps their most original work. I've seen movies with men befriending rats...they are usually horror movies. Not usually fun, buddy films.
), this is a centerpiece romance, some Pixar has yet to do, so I think there's quite a lot of originality. The only resemblance of a buddy film is with Wall-E and the coach-roach, and judging by the trailers, that'll be used for gags more than anything.
