Pixar's Brave (formerly The Bear and the Bow)

All topics relating to Disney-branded content.
Locked
User avatar
Prince Edward
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1184
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:23 pm
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Contact:

Post by Prince Edward »

Another awful human design from Pixar. They make wonderful toys, rats, monsters etc, but Pixar can't animate a decent looking human even if John Lasseter's life depended on it :wink:
Favorite Disney-movies: Snow White, Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, Sleeping Beauty, The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, Pocahontas, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Hercules, Mulan, Tarzan, Tangled, Frozen, Pirates, Enchanted, Prince of Persia, Tron, Oz The Great and Powerful
User avatar
Sotiris
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 21228
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:06 am
Gender: Male
Location: Fantasyland

Post by Sotiris »

Prince Edward wrote:Another awful human design from Pixar. They make wonderful toys, rats, monsters etc, but Pixar can't animate a decent looking human even if John Lasseter's life depended on it :wink:
THANK YOU!! Finally, someone who agrees with me on this! :wink:
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Disney's Divinity
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 16291
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 9:26 am
Gender: Male

Post by Disney's Divinity »

I wonder why all it's more often the women in 3D movies that have huge heads? Obsession with women having huge eyes/being emotional, I guess?

That said, I remember liking the human designs in The Incredibles--except for Violet and Mirage (?). Elastigirl also had a huge head, but I liked the way they did the face. Plus, the whole thing was pretty stylistic.

Also, I loved Andy in TS3, and the little girl was also adorable there.
Image
Listening to most often lately:
Taylor Swift ~ "Elizabeth Taylor"
Katy Perry ~ "bandaid"
Meghan Trainor ~ "Still Don't Care"
User avatar
SWillie!
Collector's Edition
Posts: 2564
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 6:28 am

Post by SWillie! »

robster16 - I totally agree, it has a VERY classic Disney feel. This is the kind of movie that animation studios should be making.

Duster, he shouldn't ever have to take anything back. Does someone on a message board on the internet saying "I take back my comment" really make you feel better about something? Pretty pathetic if you ask me.

I wish EVERY company could make movies that feel like Disney movies. Classic Disney movies are your favorite things, right? Then why do you not want other studios to make movies that are up to those standards?
DisneyFan09
Diamond Edition
Posts: 4048
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 2:28 pm

Post by DisneyFan09 »

Prince Edward wrote:Another awful human design from Pixar. They make wonderful toys, rats, monsters etc, but Pixar can't animate a decent looking human even if John Lasseter's life depended on it :wink:
THANK YOU!! Finally, someone who agrees with me on this! :wink:
Hey, I'm with you too, man. It's okay that Pixar makes human designs that are unrealistic, but do they have to do that every time?
User avatar
Disney's Divinity
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 16291
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 9:26 am
Gender: Male

Post by Disney's Divinity »

All these personal attacks are only making the bunch of you look like the pathetic ones. Duster’s ideas may be absurd to you, but at least he never resorts to that. And it's easy to use that language because you know he won't respond back that way. Whether he is arrogant/pathetic/dramaqueen has nothing to do with it, considering you're just reading posts on the internet.

Also, he didn't "demand" anyone take their comments back, only asked.

Seriously. It's like watching Nene Leakes attack Latoya Jackson on the Entertainment Night commercials. :lol:
Image
Listening to most often lately:
Taylor Swift ~ "Elizabeth Taylor"
Katy Perry ~ "bandaid"
Meghan Trainor ~ "Still Don't Care"
User avatar
Sotiris
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 21228
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:06 am
Gender: Male
Location: Fantasyland

Post by Sotiris »

DisneyFan09 wrote:Hey, I'm with you too, man. It's okay that Pixar makes human designs that are unrealistic, but do they have to do that every time?
:thumb: The design of their human characters is usually unappealing, disproportionate, heavily caricatured & stylized--not always fitting for main characters who are supposed to look more 'naturalistic' and believable.
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
SWillie!
Collector's Edition
Posts: 2564
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 6:28 am

Post by SWillie! »

Disney's Divinity wrote:All these personal attacks are only making the bunch of you look like the pathetic ones. Duster’s ideas may be absurd to you, but at least he never resorts to that. And it's easy to use that language because you know he won't respond back that way. Whether he is arrogant/pathetic/dramaqueen has nothing to do with it, considering you're just reading posts on the internet.

Also, he didn't "demand" anyone take their comments back, only asked.

Seriously. It's like watching Nene Leakes attack Latoya Jackson on the Entertainment Night commercials. :lol:
Well, whether I'm pathetic or not is of no concern to me. To act personally hurt by a non-personal comment on the internet, and ask to have that comment taken back, even though it has literally nothing to do with you, is pathetic in my opinion.
User avatar
Kyle
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3568
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 6:47 pm

Post by Kyle »

Prince Edward wrote:Another awful human design from Pixar. They make wonderful toys, rats, monsters etc, but Pixar can't animate a decent looking human even if John Lasseter's life depended on it :wink:
I kinda agree except when it comes to the incredibles.
DisneyFan09 wrote:Hey, I'm with you too, man. It's okay that Pixar makes human designs that are unrealistic, but do they have to do that every time?
In a word, Yes!
Sotiris wrote: :thumb: The design of their human characters is usually unappealing, ]disproportionate, heavily caricatured & stylized--not always fitting for main characters who are supposed to look more 'naturalistic' and believable.
You say that like its a bad thing. I think that's how animated characters should be. Its the only way to steer clear of uncanney valley. Not to mention it takes advantage of the medium. If your going to go realistic you might as well shoot live action. You say caricatures aren't believable, I say their More believable than any "realistic" design could ever be. This is because with exaggeration you get more out of each character.
Do you really want Disney and or pixar movies to look anything like Beowulf? That's what happens when you don't caricature.
User avatar
magicalwands
Collector's Edition
Posts: 2099
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:24 am
Location: Gusteau's Restaurant

Post by magicalwands »

Kyle wrote:
Sotiris wrote: :thumb: The design of their human characters is usually unappealing, ]disproportionate, heavily caricatured & stylized--not always fitting for main characters who are supposed to look more 'naturalistic' and believable.
You say that like its a bad thing. I think that's how animated characters should be. Its the only way to steer clear of uncanney valley. Not to mention it takes advantage of the medium. If your going to go realistic you might as well shoot live action. You say caricatures aren't believable, I say their More believable than any "realistic" design could ever be. This is because with exaggeration you get more out of each character.
Do you really want Disney and or pixar movies to look anything like Beowulf? That's what happens when you don't caricature.
And we do not want any animated humans looking like those in Shrek. They have this quality to them that is spooky. Almost real but not really.
Image
User avatar
sunhuntin
Special Edition
Posts: 731
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2010 11:33 pm
Contact:

Post by sunhuntin »

Animalia wrote:I actually hope she will be included in the line. I can just imagine myself at six tricking myself out as Merida with bow and arrow and then putting on a fake Scottish accent. :D
itd be nice if they could include characters with making them look like a glittermonster exploded. merida wouldnt look right dressed up like the others. from what little i can tell, shes earthy and not overly girly. if that makes sense? shes look as far from the princess line design as a girl character can get.

^^^ based on the trailer since thats all ive seen of her, aside from enigmas gorgeous artwork.
big kid at heart
User avatar
Dr Frankenollie
In The Vaults
Posts: 2704
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:19 am

Post by Dr Frankenollie »

magicalwands wrote:You say that like its a bad thing. I think that's how animated characters should be. Its the only way to steer clear of uncanney valley. Not to mention it takes advantage of the medium. If your going to go realistic you might as well shoot live action. You say caricatures aren't believable, I say their More believable than any "realistic" design could ever be. This is because with exaggeration you get more out of each character.
Do you really want Disney and or pixar movies to look anything like Beowulf? That's what happens when you don't caricature.
:clap: I too prefer caricatures; they're much more inventively and interestingly designed, are usually more appealing, and as you said they steer well clear of the zombie style of Zemeckis in the Uncanny Valley.
Last edited by Dr Frankenollie on Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sotiris
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 21228
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:06 am
Gender: Male
Location: Fantasyland

Post by Sotiris »

magicalwands wrote:And we do not want any animated humans looking like those in Shrek. They have this quality to them that is spooky. Almost real but not really.
No one is asking for that; no one wants Sherk or mo-cap looking characters. But why can't they have more appealing human characters like those in Tangled? That's a CGI movie and the character designs are much more appealing.
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
SWillie!
Collector's Edition
Posts: 2564
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 6:28 am

Post by SWillie! »

Sotiris wrote:
magicalwands wrote:And we do not want any animated humans looking like those in Shrek. They have this quality to them that is spooky. Almost real but not really.
No one is asking for that; no one wants Sherk or mo-cap looking characters. But why can't they have more appealing human characters like those in Tangled? That's a CGI movie and the character designs are much more appealing.
Well this is a case of personal preference. It isn't a given that the characters in Tangled are more appealing. I, for one, think Merida's design is gorgeous. It's new, unique. We haven't seen it all before like we had with Tangled. Don't get me wrong, I loved Rapunzel and Flynn's designs... but just because Merida doesn't have that same old Disney look and proportions doesn't mean it's not appealing. Not appealing to you, more like.
User avatar
Sotiris
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 21228
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:06 am
Gender: Male
Location: Fantasyland

Post by Sotiris »

SWillie! wrote:Well this is a case of personal preference.
That's a given. :wink: I didn't say that I speak for anyone else but myself.

SWillie! wrote:I, for one, think Merida's design is gorgeous. It's new, unique.
While you might love her design, I don't think it's either new or unique. It's in the same style of other Pixar human characters.
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Kyle
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3568
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 6:47 pm

Post by Kyle »

Tangled's designs were appealing, but bland as heck. The exact opposite of the original unbraided design which seemed more specific.

Animation wise tangled was excellent, possibly the best CG human animation Ive seen to date. baring in mind animation is not the same as design. The movement itself has a level of exaggeration, (yes exaggeration the thing some of you seems so opposed to) that even Pixar characters haven't quite matched. The thing I don't get is that this exaggeration seems to go unnoticed or rather misinterpreted as realism by the same people against caricatured stuff. My mindset is why not have the design match the animation in its level of exaggeration?
User avatar
WarriorDreamer
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 12:25 pm
Location: England

Post by WarriorDreamer »

Uh... okay when have Pixar humans not looked good?

People saying 'they can't animate a human unless their life depended on it' um, yes they can. They're like, the richest animated company in the world. If they wanted to create ultra realistic humans they would do it. They have the software.

Pixar animation of humans is VERY cartoony and caricatured. But they want it that way. It really gives it more unique character.

Do you think Carl and Russel from Up would have looked half as appealing if they looked like ordinary realistic humans?

And for the record.. I think the humans in Toy Story look great.
User avatar
Kyle
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3568
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 6:47 pm

Post by Kyle »

Just to give my own thoughts real quick on Pixar's humans.

They generally look great for the time they released, but some haven't aged well. The ones in the first toy story felt very robotic, but you gotta cut them some slack being the first full length CG film and all. The humans improved ten fold by toy story 2, but still feel a bit robotic iby current standards. the two stand outs would be Jerry and Al, but Andy, molly and any extras don't hold up as well. Though I do have a soft spot for them being such a part of my childhood. By TS2 and TS3 they did they best they could with the more "realistic" style they kinda locked themselved into already but they could probably stand to have pushed the designs a bit further.

The incredibles to me was when they peaked at Humans. They have gone a bit downhill though with ratatouille, Wall-e and UP (No problem with carl but Russel looked like a Wall-e extra).

And now bringing this back on topic we're down to Brave, which Ive already said but I'm not crazy about the main girl's design. Its not at all because its wierd, Its just unappealing to me. Something about the proportions of her face just bug me. They also have that light scattering effect (first introduced in the incredibles and used in every Pixar and Disney human since) turned up way too high I think.

The other designs I do like.
DisneyDude2010
Special Edition
Posts: 815
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:48 am

Post by DisneyDude2010 »

Sotiris wrote:
Prince Edward wrote:Another awful human design from Pixar. They make wonderful toys, rats, monsters etc, but Pixar can't animate a decent looking human even if John Lasseter's life depended on it :wink:
THANK YOU!! Finally, someone who agrees with me on this! :wink:
Yes! Some people on the same page as me ...
That's what I loved about pixar they have their own imagination and make wonderful movies about bugs, toys and animals ... I have got to say the story does like very appealing indeed but her design is absolutely awful. Don't get me wrong I love her hair and how it stands out from the background surroundings and the volume of it. But come on! Mrs Incredible looks better than Merida... Surely her face could have some character. Rapunzel on the other hand was beautifully animated and the expression and humanity of the character was heart touching.
ts not at all because its wierd, Its just unappealing to me. Something about the proportions of her face just bug me. They also have that light scattering effect (first introduced in the incredibles and used in every Pixar and Disney human since) turned up way too high I think.

The other designs I do like.
Exactly what i thought! Her features seem to small compared to her head.

don't get me wrong i am excited about this film but i have to say her character looks bad :? I've heard rumors that that scene of her is Merida as a teen or just not actual movie animation (like in the tangled trailer)
I hope this is true ...

Also does anyone find it funny that when Pixar first opened John Lassetter said pixar didn't want to copy disney's fairytale roots and be completely original .... oh and if they make anymore signals have Monsters 2 is released i will go MAD!
Image
All our dreams can come true, if we have the courage to pursue them. - Walt Disney
DisneyAnimation88
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1088
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:00 am

Post by DisneyAnimation88 »

DisneyDude2010 wrote:lso does anyone find it funny that when Pixar first opened John Lassetter said pixar didn't want to copy disney's fairytale roots and be completely original
So if someone at Pixar comes up with a really good idea for a fairytale, they can't do it because Disney did it first? It seems everyone wants an original Pixar project, this is one, so give it a chance before comparing it to anything Disney has done.
We're not going to Guam, are we?
Locked