PatrickvD wrote:
Not sure what you mean here. Should I feel better that you don't know what the last three Disney films were?Disney's Divinity wrote:I was including The Princess and the Frog in that “last three films” comment, if it makes you feel better.
When did I say Dreamworks hasn't been making great films? The Panda films and Dragon are phenomenal. Their ratio sucks though, for every great film they have a terrible one lined up right around the corner. Disney hasn't made a Chicken Little in 7 years, while Dreamworks releases one every year.Disney's Divinity wrote:Looking at all the films in your signature, I can’t say I fully enjoyed any of them the same way I did even a few Dreamworks films the past few years (KFP, KFP2, HTTYD). Of course, the bar was pretty low considering what had just come before.
Well, you can’t be happy you can read, since you clearly can’t.PatrickvD wrote:Should I feel better that you don't know what the last three Disney films were?
I enjoyed all of them (except Tangled), but I didn't love any of them. They have their moments. Which applies to Paperman, too, I guess. I enjoyed it, but didn't love it. It feels more like "moving forward" than any of those films though.ajmrowland wrote:Either way, I was a sucker for Bolt and I loved Tangled, PatF, WIR and-to lesser extent-Meet the Robinsons.
I got more that Meg was just oblivious at the time of George's sexual hard-on (I don't blame him either. I know that feeling, bro.).Disney Duster wrote:Okay, the plot does make sense that way, but I still have a problem with what could be fixed in one shot. George looked up at Meg with a look of love, only to find her getting on the subway without looking at him at all. It makes it feel like Meg wasn't interested until paper airplanes made her see him again, which makes little sense.
So you think she would have stayed if she knew he liked her because she secretly liked him too?Super Aurora wrote:I got more that Meg was just oblivious at the time of George's sexual hard-on (I don't blame him either. I know that feeling, bro.).Disney Duster wrote:Okay, the plot does make sense that way, but I still have a problem with what could be fixed in one shot. George looked up at Meg with a look of love, only to find her getting on the subway without looking at him at all. It makes it feel like Meg wasn't interested until paper airplanes made her see him again, which makes little sense.
Who knows? Thats the point. These one-off meetings happen all the time in real life. You make eye contact with someone, or you have a short little interaction and then you go about your way, realizing sometimes too late that you should have said hi, because who knows what might have happened. In George and Meg's situation, they both went about their day because that's what actually happens in real life more often than not.Disney Duster wrote:So you think she would have stayed if she knew he liked her because she secretly liked him too?Super Aurora wrote: I got more that Meg was just oblivious at the time of George's sexual hard-on (I don't blame him either. I know that feeling, bro.).
Source: http://www.awn.com/news/music-and-sound ... man-singleChristophe Beck composed the uplifting and light-hearted original music for the animated short film.
“I tried to combine some traditional musical colors (like strings and harp) with more modern electronic elements in a way that felt sonically unique, while still evoking romance, longing, and a hint of magic,” said Beck. This was a great way to complement the mixture of old and new techniques in the animation.”
Beck described, “with no dialogue, and a black-and-white period setting, it was a great opportunity for music to shine and take center stage in the story-telling."
“I don’t tend to look under the hood too much,” Beck says about his process. “It’s really very instinctual, from-the-hip and, from an actual process point of view, improvisational.”
