Disney, DVD, and Beyond Forums
https://dvdizzy.com/forum/
This way you don't have to scroll down, and find it!The lineup is as follows....
* Brad Garrett as Chef Chazz
* Johnny Depp as Ratatouille
* Russell Allman as Snive
* Christopher Lee as Pat
* Keanu Reeves as Garr
* Anna Paquin as Linna
* Christopher Walken as Winston
* Arnold Schwarzenegger as the Exterminator
* John Ratzenberger
Hmmm, I'm all for Johnny Depp, but is anybody else getting a wierd Dreamworks vibe from this cast list? I mean, nearly everybody on here is a big-name celebrity. I sure hope PIXAR is casting these people because of voice & acting ability instead of popularity.TheSequelofDisney wrote:The lineup is as follows....
* Brad Garrett as Chef Chazz
* Johnny Depp as Ratatouille
* Russell Allman as Snive
* Christopher Lee as Pat
* Keanu Reeves as Garr
* Anna Paquin as Linna
* Christopher Walken as Winston
* Arnold Schwarzenegger as the Exterminator
* John Ratzenberger
Come on guys, NEVER believe anything Wikipedia publishes. Anyone can edit information on that site from any given computer.TheSequelofDisney wrote: * Arnold Schwarzenegger as the Exterminator
I didn't get this from Wikipediamagicalwands wrote:Come on guys, NEVER believe anything Wikipedia publishes. Anyone can edit information on that site from any given computer.TheSequelofDisney wrote: * Arnold Schwarzenegger as the Exterminator
First of all, I NEVER think of Dreamworks, when I think of Pixar. Pixar is genuine creative talent. I don't think as much of Dreamworks.Pasta67 wrote:TheSequelofDisney wrote:Hmmm, I'm all for Johnny Depp, but is anybody else getting a wierd Dreamworks vibe from this cast list? I mean, nearly everybody on here is a big-name celebrity. I sure hope PIXAR is casting these people because of voice & acting ability instead of popularity.
I really hope PIXAR doesn't start casting celebrities just for the sake of casting celebrities. They need to remember that you cast an actor to fit the character, you don't model a character to fit the actor, which is a mistake that Dreamworks have been making a lot.
All Netty was saying was he was tired of constant advertisement from the entertainment buissness in general, not just Pixar. Frankly, I'll have to agree with him. Pixar's 1 mintue "joke trailers" started out amusing but frankly, I have yet to meet a person who was impressed with that first Cars teaser, and I'm sure Ratatouille will be similar.Prince Eric wrote:As far as marketing blitz, I think downing Pixar for that is just plain silly. Marketing is a part of the industry, whether you like it or not, and their year-in-advance campaigns have yet to fail them. I, for one, adore their trailers. They do what teasers are supposed to do: reel in potential audience members and expand the studios fanbase. I of all people prefer it when the work speaks for itself, but I have no problem in the saturation of a produce if it's a very good one. Pixar has proven to have a flawless track record thus far.
Well the problem is, no one can really call Aardman of Ghibli overrated because a lot of people haven't even heard of them. Their films maybe successful by critics, but box office wise, they're either or limited released or not very successful. Pixar, however, had success a lot of different ways. And since they've got more to do now than they've even had before, I'm expecting their "golden touch" to drop over the few years.In regard to the Flushed Away movie, I'm equally excited about Aardman's latest creation. Aardman, Pixar, and Studio Ghibli make up the Holy Trinity of artistic animation these days, and they have yet to prove that they are over-hyped. I'm sure they will continue to dominate the critical kudos scene, as well as consistently gain broader audiences.
But The Wild has already gotten enough bashing. It was even a bomb at the box office. Besides, that was a first attempt from an "independent" company, so there's no need to bring it into discussion.I don't have a problem with star names as voice talent either. The problem is, casting directors at places like Dreamworks consistently miscast in favor of obtaining a bigger box-office draw. That does not mean that stars can't act. Whoever the casting director was for Over the Hedge needs to be commended, because not only was he/she able to form a cast of big stars, they were also true to the characters, casting the best choices for each role. Case in point: Bruce Willis was horrible as Spike in the Rugrats movie, but was extremely effective/moving in his role as the duplicitous racoon. In other words: there's no reason for anyone to bash this new Pixar creation. Bash something else, like The Wild.
I understand what he was saying, and I'm saying this: tough. Deal with it. As long as Pixar is successful using the marketing techniques that are known for, they have no need to scale down their campaign wattage (which is always tasteful and entertaining). No one I know is complaining, and the only people I am aware of that do have problems with the trailers are those on internet forums that have an innate grudge against anything that steals Disney's fire.Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote:All Netty was saying was he was tired of constant advertisement from the entertainment buissness in general, not just Pixar. Frankly, I'll have to agree with him. Pixar's 1 mintue "joke trailers" started out amusing but frankly, I have yet to meet a person who was impressed with that first Cars teaser, and I'm sure Ratatouille will be similiar.Prince Eric wrote:As far as marketing blitz, I think downing Pixar for that is just plain silly. Marketing is a part of the industry, whether you like it or not, and their year-in-advance campaigns have yet to fail them. I, for one, adore their trailers. They do what teasers are supposed to do: reel in potential audience members and expand the studios fanbase. I of all people prefer it when the work speaks for itself, but I have no problem in the saturation of a produce if it's a very good one. Pixar has proven to have a flawless track record thus far.
The website with the cast list cited Wikipedia as to where they got the information from.TheSequelofDisney wrote:I didn't get this from Wikipediamagicalwands wrote: Come on guys, NEVER believe anything Wikipedia publishes. Anyone can edit information on that site from any given computer.
Yes, I realize that, but from the cast list, it looks like EVERY character voice confirmed for the movie so far is a big-name celebrity. It's not just two or three characters this time; it's the WHOLE cast. I'm not saying that PIXAR has lost their creativity; I don't think that at all. It's just that when I first read the cast list, the first thing that popped into my mind was "Wow, all those celebrities make this look like a Dreamworks film". Believe me, I'm as big a PIXAR supporter as the next guy; it just surprised me that the cast list had so many celebrities, that's all. I wasn't dissing PIXAR.MadonnasManOne wrote:Second, have you NOT seen the other Pixar films? They have all had big name stars! For example: Tom Hanks and Tim Allen in Toy Story & Toy Story 2. Kevin Spacey, Phyllis Diller, and Denis Leary in A Bug's Life. John Goodman, Billy Crystal, and Jennifer Tilly in Monster's Inc. Albert Brooks, Ellen DeGeneres, and William Dafoe in Finding Nemo. Craig T. Nelson, Holly Hunter, and Samuel L. Jackson in The Incredibles. Owen Wilson, Paul Newman, and Michael Keeton in Cars. Those are just a few of the big name stars that Pixar has used in their films. Pixar doesn't use big name stars in order to get people in to see their films. They use them to serve the characters, and they always do.
Yes, but they really didn't advertise them now did they? Just look at the Cars posters, the trailer which can be found on the official site, or even the podcasts from iTunes, they advertise that this movie contains the voices of Owen Wilson and Paul Newman(two famous celebrities) more than any other Pixar film(with maybe the exception of Toy Story 2, which is understandable since people want to know if the people from the original return for a sequel). So I wouldn't be surprised if Ratatouille constantly advertises the voice actors. Even if it doesn't, people(mainly Johnny Depp fans) will know that Johnny Depp does the voice in this movie. And fangirls will see it JUST because it has Johnny Depp as a voice and not because of the story or characters, so the voice cast can be a big advantage if this film succeeds.MadonnasManOne wrote: Second, have you NOT seen the other Pixar films? They have all had big name stars!
Well I don't know where you've been, but that first Cars teaser had A LOT of criticism. I mean, that's why we've been getting talk that "Pixar has created it's first failure". Frankly, I don't generally have a problem with "joke teasers" but if teasers for Cars and Ratatouille leave people with criticism and make people unimpressed, why can't Pixar not show us anything UNTIL they've actually have something to show, like most movies do?Prince Eric wrote:No one I know is complaining, and the only people I am aware of that do have problems with the trailers are those on internet forums that have an innate grudge against anything that steals Disney's fire.
Ah, but neither Ghibli or Aardman have been bought buy one of the biggest companies on Earth. Many people are still loving this Disney/Pixar deal, but now it just gives me more criticism to judge on their next movies.Prince Eric wrote: Overhypped and over-rated are two different things. No one says Studio Ghibli or Aardman are over-rated, but they do generate lots of hype in the industry and with critics and with their small fanbases. In terms of distribution, they are huge successes for their parent companies. A 50 million dollar pull for Aardman may not seem like a lot, but considering production costs and total international revenue, that number qualifies as a hit. I used those three studios specifically, because in terms of animation of the new millenium, they are leading by a considerable margin and nothing they have done this decade has given even the slightest reason to doubt their capabilities, including Pixar. (The same, however, cannot be said about Disney or Dreamworks).
But have you personally seen The Wild? Sure it might've been a bomb at the box office and a critical failure, but it sure could've been given a change, after all, it was made by a company that didn't even make 1 film before. I haven't seen it, so I can't say, but did it really deserve to be a failure just because critics didn't like it? That's really the problem, people are willing to give "Pixar" a chance, yet they can't give other companies or films a chance.Prince Eric wrote:The Wild cannot be excused simply because it was a debut feature. It was bad. It deserves bashing. Not honest, creative people whose film hasn't even hit the screens yet. Cars will bring in a huge haul this weekend, and that's really all I'm concerned about; whether it's deserving of the money it makes or not has yet to be seen.
You forgot Larry the Cable Guy!!!MadonnasManOne wrote:First of all, I NEVER think of Dreamworks, when I think of Pixar. Pixar is genuine creative talent. I don't think as much of Dreamworks.
Second, have you NOT seen the other Pixar films? They have all had big name stars! For example: Tom Hanks and Tim Allen in Toy Story & Toy Story 2. Kevin Spacey, Phyllis Diller, and Denis Leary in A Bug's Life. John Goodman, Billy Crystal, and Jennifer Tilly in Monster's Inc. Albert Brooks, Ellen DeGeneres, and William Dafoe in Finding Nemo. Craig T. Nelson, Holly Hunter, and Samuel L. Jackson in The Incredibles. Owen Wilson, Paul Newman, and Michael Keeton in Cars. Those are just a few of the big name stars that Pixar has used in their films. Pixar doesn't use big name stars in order to get people in to see their films. They use them to serve the characters, and they always do.
<i>Cars</i> is actually the third time that a pair of voice cast members have gotten pre-title billing. <i>Toy Story 2</i> (Hanks and Allen) and <i>Monsters, Inc.</i> (Goodman and Crystal) did the same. Though it is weird that Newman gets top billing since his character seems more of a supporting role. Then again, I guess you don't give second billing to a guy who has awards that are older than Owen Wilson.Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote:Yes, but they really didn't advertise them now did they? Just look at the Cars posters, the trailer which can be found on the official site, or even the podcasts from iTunes, they advertise that this movie contains the voices of Owen Wilson and Paul Newman(two famous celebrities) more than any other Pixar film(with maybe the exception of Toy Story 2, which is understandable since people want to know if the people from the original return for a sequel).
Take note of the people who are complaining about the Cars teaser, and there's your answer.Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote:Well I don't know where you've been, but that first Cars teaser had A LOT of criticism. I mean, that's why we've been getting talk that "Pixar has created it's first failure". Frankly, I don't generally have a problem with "joke teasers" but if teasers for Cars and Ratatouille leave people with criticism and make people unimpressed, why can't Pixar not show us anything UNTIL they've actually have something to show, like most movies do?Prince Eric wrote:No one I know is complaining, and the only people I am aware of that do have problems with the trailers are those on internet forums that have an innate grudge against anything that steals Disney's fire.
Ah, but neither Ghibli or Aardman have been bought buy one of the biggest companies on Earth. Many people are still loving this Disney/Pixar deal, but now it just gives me more criticism to judge on their next movies.Prince Eric wrote: Overhypped and over-rated are two different things. No one says Studio Ghibli or Aardman are over-rated, but they do generate lots of hype in the industry and with critics and with their small fanbases. In terms of distribution, they are huge successes for their parent companies. A 50 million dollar pull for Aardman may not seem like a lot, but considering production costs and total international revenue, that number qualifies as a hit. I used those three studios specifically, because in terms of animation of the new millenium, they are leading by a considerable margin and nothing they have done this decade has given even the slightest reason to doubt their capabilities, including Pixar. (The same, however, cannot be said about Disney or Dreamworks).
Also, keep in mine, we've gotten over a year of Cars advertisement, and we've barely gotten a clear story of the film. Certainly that could bring doubts.
But have you personally seen The Wild? Sure it might've been a bomb at the box office and a critical failure, but it sure could've been given a change, after all, it was made by a company that didn't even make 1 film before. I haven't seen it, so I can't say, but did it really deserve to be a failure just because critics didn't like it? That's really the problem, people are willing to give "Pixar" a chance, yet they can't give other companies or films a chance.Prince Eric wrote:The Wild cannot be excused simply because it was a debut feature. It was bad. It deserves bashing. Not honest, creative people whose film hasn't even hit the screens yet. Cars will bring in a huge haul this weekend, and that's really all I'm concerned about; whether it's deserving of the money it makes or not has yet to be seen.
"Cars" will bring audiences no doubt, but that's only because of the name "Pixar" and because of it's computer animation. Not because for it's story or characters.
You proved my point, the only people who are being critical WITHOUT seeing the movie are those that are ticked about the Pixar/Disney deal. There's really no other SENSICAL reason, outside of the honest fact that maybe people aren't interested in seeing a movie about cars. Nothing about the actual QUALITY of Pixar's record suggests problems. That's arguably a fact, and as close to a fact that an opinion can be. I've seen The Wild. It's bad. I completely even forgot to put it in my screening log because it was so forgettable. Anyone who wanted to spend 10 bucks on a movie would choose a studio or name or entity that has a strong past, and Pixar has that. That's just common sense.I'm not going to say that you are wrong about the major pre-release hype, concerning movies. It does seem the promotion starts very early, anymore. Pixar is not the only company guilty of this. In fact, this is nothing new for Pixar, either. I think the issue is that pre-release hype of a film should not be a factor in whether the film is any good, or not. A film should be judged by the film, only. Not by pre-release hype, promotion, or critic's opinions. That's all just gaining awareness of the product. There's nothing wrong with it. It's their job to make as many people aware of the product that they are promoting. In case you haven't noticed, the box-office has been in a decline, and the studio has to work harder than ever to get people in to the theater. It doesn't matter how good a film is, if people do not know about it.2099net wrote: If Pixar are so well-loved and admired by the public, surely all this pre-pre-pre release hype isn't needed.
So all studios should just do away with their marketing divisions and let the craft do the talking? In an ideal world, that would make sense, but that's not the case now, is it? Advertising builds buzz, buzz builds excitement, and as far as I see, practically every household in America that has a toddler in their pack is in some way interested in Cars. Hype is different from buzz, and you are confusing the two. Hype is usually false excitement built up by studios industry talking heads for projects that often fail. Usually, hype is only recognizeable AFTER the fact. What Pixar is doing is generating buzz, and as I've said it's working. OK, so Cars just doesn't interest you. I understand that a teaser trailer may not generate any interest to an individual. That was the case with me with Over the Hedge, but it turned out pretty good. Just because you're not satisfied with a teaser doesn't mean that's indicative of the movie's quality. As I see it, that's what you're arguement amounts to, and I don't understand it at all. That's not an overreation. That's an honest REACTION to a confusing point in the first place.2099net wrote:
If Pixar are so well-loved and admired by the public, surely all this pre-pre-pre release hype isn't needed.