Let's face it, WallE is a Johnny 5 knock off.

All topics relating to Disney-branded content.
Timon/Pumbaa fan
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3675
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 4:45 pm

Post by Timon/Pumbaa fan »

2099net, I haven't changed my opinion, I still agree with you on Pixar's complete lack of originality. I think Wall-E shows some creativity though, if just for the fact none of the characters talk and for the first time the center of the film is a romance(every other Pixar movie just briefly referenced or hinted a romance, but they've not actually made an entire story surrounding on a romance. Cars was more of a buddy film and a explore a "world" they don't venture than a romance. That's why Doc Hollywood's part was bigger than Sally's). So in my opinion, this is maybe their most original film since Toy Story, which may not be saying much, but I'm much more excited for this than I am for Ratatouille.

But I still keep my opinions on the masters of repetition.
pap64 wrote:But many film studios are guilty of this, one of them being Disney...

So why complain about Pixar using the same formula when Disney used their own for years?
Not true. Your explanation seems to me your confusing "Disney" with "90's Disney" or "Princess Disney". But if you look at the whole company starting with Walt, he NEVER made the same movie again.

Instead of doing a sequel to Snow White or even a carbon-copy of it after it was a huge success, he instead made Pinocchio. A completely different story with completely different characters(only Gideon compares to a Snow White character). But that enough for Walt. He then made Fantasia, which is perhaps the most innovative film to this day as there's never been a film quite like it(<strike>except Fantasia 2000</strike>), he truly took risks just to bring new experiences on film. Dumbo and Bambi maybe about animals, but that's all the similarities they have. They have completely different styles, stories and characters.

There is NO Disney "formula". There was a time where people didn't associated Disney with "princess"(thanks to the lame marketing today) but with quality animation. There's was never a story formula they followed though. In fact the only formula they did was "try and experiment".

Yes, he did make Cinderella, which is nothing more but a carbon-copy of Snow White, but with the economy troubles the company faced, he had no choice but to make a film so similar to Snow White thus it was almost certain to succeed. And by the time Sleeping Beauty was in production, Walt was far more interesting in his theme parks more than he was his movies, which is why the story turned out to be quite a mess.

But with that aside, Walt was almost always original every time. And that's just animated movies. His live-action movies, infinite shorts(though a few had a formula), t.v. shows and other media like theme parks, comic books and merchandise added, and it's impossible to say seriously Disney has a "formula".

Pixar made Toy Story, which is certainly one of the most original films ever. I love that movie. A Bug's Life was just a retelling of the Seven Samurai with Toy Story elements thrown in, but for argument's sake, will say it's relatively original. But Pixar have just remade Toy Story with Monster's Inc., Finding Nemo and Cars. Not to say MI or Cars are bad movies, but Pixar is hardly as original as claimed. It seems at times almost as if they figure if they just remake the same film, no one will ever claim them to be unoriginal because they're just copying themselves. Sadly, it has worked on most people.

Brad Bird is the only real exception to the rule. He has many more stories to tell than most at Pixar(he has cases with copying himself too with The Simpsons/The Incredibles and The Iron Giant/Ratatouille, but he's able to disguise it better).
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.
No one is saying that. What most are trying to point out is that Pixar has made the SAME film over and over and over. No company or filmmaker has ever done as much as Pixar and is able to get away with it. You can still make original executions though, and original presentations. But Pixar hasn't done a lot of that as they constantly get credit for.

I've defended Wall-E as I think it actually looks like an extremely original film. But even if it's the most original film ever made, you can't deny Pixar has formulatic plot-points.
User avatar
Flanger-Hanger
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3746
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:59 pm
Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Headquarters

Post by Flanger-Hanger »

Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote: But with that aside, Walt was almost always original every time. And that's just animated movies. His live-action movies, infinite shorts(though a few had a formula), t.v. shows and other media like theme parks, comic books and merchandise added, and it's impossible to say seriously Disney has a "formula".
Unless you don't count the never ending steam of westerns that ABC forced Disney to make for the Disney Anthology Show and the Disney live action comedies from the 60s and 70s (especially the 70s).
Image
User avatar
Siren
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3749
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 6:45 pm
Location: Florida
Contact:

Post by Siren »

Disney has two formulas.
Princess finds love
Underdog triumphs

Sometimes they mix those formulas together, for instance Aladdin. And I don't see Wall-E being anymore original than Cars, Incredibles, etc. Story wise alone. Its the story of a robot who finds out he can do more than what he was programed to do.
Short Circuit is the same thing.
User avatar
rexcrk
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1073
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 11:43 am

Post by rexcrk »

Luke wrote:Clearly, the robot from "Wake, Rattle & Roll" has also been plagiarized:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/78DW90wxwMg&hl ... ram><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/78DW90wxwMg&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
What a nostaligia trip! 8)
But the thing that makes Woody special, is he'll never give up on you... ever. He'll be there for you, no matter what.
User avatar
MadonnasManOne
Collector's Edition
Posts: 2748
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 4:08 pm

Post by MadonnasManOne »

Once, again, you have the same two (sometimes three) people here on UD that insists that Pixar isn't orginal, and never have been. You know who you are. I believe MOST of the users here are frankly tired of your constant bashing of Pixar, at every single chance. As unoriginal as you say Pixar is, you would think that you would find something else to harp on, but, you insist on complaining about the same old thing. How unoriginal! Ironic, since that's what you consider Pixar to be.

My FAVORITE thing is the one who says that there has NEVER been a Disney formula! HA! That's the funniest thing I've ever read, and the biggest bullcrap statement I've ever heard! Get real!

Pixar doesn't have to be 100% original, all of the time, or most of the time. Neither does Disney. As long as what they do works, and pleases a great many people, then that's what counts.

So, get off of this stupid trip that some of you take, every single time Pixar is brought up. Move on. Get a life. Find something else to harp on. Find something "original" to say, or just don't say anything at all.
Timon/Pumbaa fan
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3675
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 4:45 pm

Post by Timon/Pumbaa fan »

Siren wrote:Disney has two formulas.
Princess finds love
Underdog triumphs[/b]

That's a lousy and wrong statement to make because:

1. "Underdog triumphs" is a very generic plot. There's about a billion ways to tell an underdog story. There's only one way you can actually tell a princess love story.

2. Just looking at the Walt era animated films, the following films that are not underdog movies:
Fantasia
Bambi
The Package films
Alice in Wonderland
Peter Pan
Lady and the Tramp
101 Dalmatians
The Jungle Book
None of these films have strong underdog elements, and the ones that do: Pinocchio and Dumbo are EXTREMELY different films. Pinocchio is not a true underdog movie because Pinocchio has an equal chance of succeeding as he does failing. It's a movie about making the right choices in life. Compare that to Dumbo, a true underdog movie about an elephant who beats the odds just to get back to his mother.

Disney never really had a formula, plain and simple. If you take out Bird's work, it's fair to say Pixar does have a formula. Finding Nemo did absolutely nothing but copy Toy Story piece by piece. Even small plot points like Buzz having an injured arm is just copied in Finding Nemo with his "lucky fin". There's nothing remotely original about it, yet, it's there most popular film.
And I don't see Wall-E being anymore original than Cars, Incredibles, etc. Story wise alone. Its the story of a robot who finds out he can do more than what he was programed to do.
Short Circuit is the same thing.
Well, The Incredibles is Brad Bird's film, who really isn't in the Pixar group until late. But still, that was just a homage to Marvel's work(most specifically Fantastic Four), and while the idea of cars coming to life is original, a lot of it is borrowed from Toy Story 2. Wall-E is not borrowing from Short Circuit though, imo. Short Circuit was really just a robotic version of E.T. Wall-E is really R2-D2 the movie as I actually think it shares more with Star Wars than Short Circuit(or E.T.)

Either way if you take out Bird's work, I think it's hard to deny the claim that Wall-E looks to be Pixar's most original film since Toy Story.
User avatar
Disney's Divinity
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 16239
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 9:26 am
Gender: Male

Post by Disney's Divinity »

There's only one way you can actually tell a princess love story.
That's an extreme exaggeration, obviously tinged by an anti-princess bias. I don't consider B&tB anything like TLM or Sleeping Beauty anything like Snow White. They have similar qualities (as do "underdog" films), but they are hardly the same anyway you want to look at them. This is what happens when you judge films at face value.

Also, to get more on-topic with Pixar, I've never really noticed a formula in their films. The buddy theme is always done in a slightly different way, sort of how romance films look at couples at different periods of a relationship, and there's always A Bug's Life and The Incredibles. Either way, I think Wall-E, Up and The Bear in the Bow are all going to be great movies.
Image
Listening to most often lately:
Taylor Swift ~ ~ "The Fate of Ophelia"
Taylor Swift ~ "Eldest Daughter"
Taylor Swift ~ "CANCELLED!"
User avatar
MadonnasManOne
Collector's Edition
Posts: 2748
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 4:08 pm

Post by MadonnasManOne »

Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote: Disney never really had a formula, plain and simple.
That statement is so funny, I just can't believe you really believe that.
User avatar
Jules
Diamond Edition
Posts: 4623
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 9:20 am
Gender: Male
Location: Malta, Europe
Contact:

Post by Jules »

Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote:1. "Underdog triumphs" is a very generic plot. There's about a billion ways to tell an underdog story. There's only one way you can actually tell a princess love story.
OK, now you've royally pissed me off bashing princess stories. :P T/P fan, you keep trying to logically forward new ideas, only half your ideas fail in keeping up with the logic. It is quite obvious that your 'hate' (it was once love ... I know, I know everything :twisted: ) for the princess films seems to cloud up your vision. Why aren't there a thousand ways to tell a princess story too? Not only does the statement not make sense, but knowing you personal bias against those Disney films seriously undermines the credibility of your posts. :|
User avatar
2099net
Signature Collection
Posts: 9421
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 1:00 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by 2099net »

MadonnasManOne wrote:
Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote: Disney never really had a formula, plain and simple.
That statement is so funny, I just can't believe you really believe that.
I think he means Walt Disney (the person - or when the person was in charge). And it's most certainly not "funny" if you consider Walt Disney's first 7 films against Pixar's first 7 films.

As for later Disney, its debateable, agreed. But I still say the Disney formula is much less noticable than most of Pixar's films.
Most of my Blu-ray collection some of my UK discs aren't on their database
User avatar
steve
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:07 am
Location: Ireland

Post by steve »

Disney never really had a formula, plain and simple.
I think he means Walt Disney (the person - or when the person was in charge).
In case he didn't mean that, The Little Mermaid started the most glaring formula in Disney films in the 90s - the "I Want" Song (a name Disney people came up with themselves!), for example...

Ariel: "Part of Your World"
Belle: "Belle (Reprise)"
Aladdin: "One Jump Ahead (Reprise)"
Simba: "I Just Can't Wait to Be King"
Pocahontas: "Just Around the River Bend"
Quasimodo: "Out There"
Hercules: "Go the Distance"
Mulan: "Reflection"
Tarzan: "Strangers Like Me"
User avatar
Ariel'sprince
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3244
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 6:07 am
Location: beyond the meadows of joy and the valley of contentment
Contact:

Post by Ariel'sprince »

No,the Walt era films had I Want songs:
Snow White-I"m Wishing.
Cinderella-A Dream Is A Wish Your Heart Makes.
Alice-In A World Of My Own.
Aurora-I Wonder.
Anyway Disney has a formula for all the films and the Princess films are different,Timon\Pumbaa Fan just hate the Princesses and Pixar for no reason :roll: :roll: :roll:.
Image
User avatar
steve
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:07 am
Location: Ireland

Post by steve »

Ariel'sprince wrote:No,the Walt era films had I Want songs:
I know, I just meant that with the constant stream of films in the 90s, the pattern was more obvious, that's all. They kicked back into gear with Ariel, and then kinda stayed there.
User avatar
Jules
Diamond Edition
Posts: 4623
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 9:20 am
Gender: Male
Location: Malta, Europe
Contact:

Post by Jules »

And had you not pointed out those "I Want" songs, I never would have realised, steve. :P Which means that there's absolutely no problem with having those "I Want" songs.
User avatar
steve
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:07 am
Location: Ireland

Post by steve »

Julian Carter wrote:And had you not pointed out those "I Want" songs, I never would have realised, steve. :P Which means that there's absolutely no problem with having those "I Want" songs.
I didn't notice them either, but then it was pointed out on The Little Mermaid DVD, and then I kept seeing I Want songs everywhere! But seriously, I personally don't have a problem with the I Want songs.
Post Reply