Page 34 of 66
Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2012 6:46 pm
by sunhuntin
ajmrowland wrote:
I have to add to this that in reality, toys very rarely outlive people. they often get put away in some attic *together with their loved ones* or they get trashed compacted tragically. And usually, they dont last more than a few decades.
thats a sad fact. it always saddens me when i read of parents throwing out their kids toys. not even donating to charity, but actually throwing them out!
im fairly certain the toys ive retained from my childhood will outlive me. maybe not in perfect or even functional condition, but they will exist none the less. the only worrying bit is i have no desire to have kids, so effectively no one leave things to at this stage.
im a tomy train collector. i buy to repair mainly and they get added to the collection. my childhood train, which is over 20 years old now, still runs like new after a bit of repair work a few years ago.
in all honesty, i dont know what would be worse for a toy, assuming it could feel and think like buzz and woody. being played with by another child who may or may not treat them well [ie, play as opposed to scribble on] or end up with someone like me who puts them in a box and barely looks at them? LOL.
Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2012 7:07 pm
by Sotiris
DisneyAnimation88 wrote:I think all four main characters in the film bear a stronge resemblance to their voice actors; I always thought Wreck-It Ralph looked very much like John C. Reilly and Vanellope does have some obvious similarities with Sarah Silverman.
Indeed!
DisneyAnimation88 wrote:From the brief glimpse we get of her in the trailer, I think Jane Lynch's charactes also closely resembles Lynch herself.
I've noticed that too.
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:37 am
by Jules
I've checked out the 1080p trailer of Wreck-It Ralph on Apple Trailers, and it seems I was mistaken about the backgrounds in the Sugar Rush world. They appear photo-realistic, as in any other CG film.
I remember the film-makers bragging that WIR would have four different art directions. While character design is certainly varied (e.g. clearly Vanellope and Calhoun belong in different games), I wish animation and texture were made to be more distinct. This is a missed opportunity. When will they get a chance to work with different art directions within the same film, again? Not for a while ... if ever, methinks.
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 6:52 am
by ajmrowland
sunhuntin wrote:ajmrowland wrote:
I have to add to this that in reality, toys very rarely outlive people. they often get put away in some attic *together with their loved ones* or they get trashed compacted tragically. And usually, they dont last more than a few decades.
thats a sad fact. it always saddens me when i read of parents throwing out their kids toys. not even donating to charity, but actually throwing them out!
im fairly certain the toys ive retained from my childhood will outlive me. maybe not in perfect or even functional condition, but they will exist none the less. the only worrying bit is i have no desire to have kids, so effectively no one leave things to at this stage.
im a tomy train collector. i buy to repair mainly and they get added to the co7llection. my childhood train, which is over 20 years old now, still runs like new after a bit of repair work a few years ago.
in all honesty, i dont know what would be worse for a toy, assuming it could feel and think like buzz and woody. being played with by another child who may or may not treat them well [ie, play as opposed to scribble on] or end up with someone like me who puts them in a box and barely looks at them? LOL.
yeah i worked the compactor at goodwill and couldnt resist sneaking a couple home. Small ones of course.
As for the "realistic textures" really? I never noticed and i dont think that has much bearing on art directions here. After all the characters are all unrealistically high res for video games
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 8:38 pm
by Disney's Divinity
Jules wrote:I remember the film-makers bragging that WIR would have four different art directions. While character design is certainly varied (e.g. clearly Vanellope and Calhoun belong in different games), I wish animation and texture were made to be more distinct. This is a missed opportunity. When will they get a chance to work with different art directions within the same film, again?
I agree. I think this is the part I was most looking forward to, and yet the 3D and designs all came out very generic and straightforward to me.
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:49 pm
by Disney Duster
Well why can't the video games come to life the warm wonderful Disney way they have in the past like Winnie the Pooh or the hats or the little house. It doesn't feel like that Disney magic. It feels like...boom boom we want to be bad guys boom boom violence boom annoyingness explode explode rrrrr!!!! That's not the Disney they've been ('cept Lilo and Stitch and you know how I feel about that).
DisneyAnimation88 wrote:Prolonged and tortured?
I'm sorry but there is absolutely nothing whatsoever that suggests that Woody, Buzz and the rest of the toys are going to lead anything remotely resembling a "tortured life", that is you coming to some kind of weird conclusion that is not based on anything that actually happens at the end of the film. All through the series, the toys' say that unless they are being loved and played with by a child then there is no point to their lives and at the end of Toy Story 3, they are given to a new owner who offers them those things so what on earth is tortured about that? It is not implied at all and up to now, you are the only person I've spoken with who's ever come to such a conclusion, one that vastly differs with what actually happens on-screen, which is what the film should be judged on.
I only mean their memories of their past owners who they can't see anymore or after they die will add to becoming torturous after going through many such occurences and many loved owners leaving.
Wonderlicious wrote:I think that this would never never be the kind of film he'd want to watch.
Well not a lot but I'm still interested and will see it.
ajmrowland wrote:I have to add to this that in reality, toys very rarely outlive people. they often get put away in some attic *together with their loved ones* or they get trashed compacted tragically. And usually, they dont last more than a few decades.
Isn't storing them in the attic meaning they will outlive their owners? And it would be torturous, like I said, losing their owner, not getting played with. But them "not lasting" would relieve them of that.
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:15 am
by ajmrowland
^possibly but not always probable.
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:49 am
by Sotiris
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:45 am
by Super Aurora
Fap fap fap fap. So sexy, fap fap fap.
Give Awesome Mass effect.
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:51 am
by ajmrowland
^last time you were so inappropriate, you got a warning from CJ.
Anyway, her eyes are the size of ariels.
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:55 am
by Sotiris
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 11:17 am
by Super Aurora
ajmrowland wrote:^last time you were so inappropriate, you got a warning from CJ.
You think I care?
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:46 pm
by Dr Frankenollie
Super Aurora wrote:Fap fap fap fap. So sexy, fap fap fap.
Do you really think she is? Why?
Anyway, I finally watched the Wreck-It-Ralph trailer and I have generally negative feelings towards it. The character designs look pretty generic and the 'mimicking' joke was awful. However, I loved John C Reilly in Roman Polanski's
Carnage and I like the film's main concept, so I'll still watch it.
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:49 pm
by disneyprincess11
Yeah. I'm so sorry! Don't know why it didn't work. I agreee with him too.
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:01 pm
by ajmrowland
Super Aurora wrote:ajmrowland wrote:^last time you were so inappropriate, you got a warning from CJ.
You think I care?
no, otherwise I wouldnt've said it.
which makes no sense when you really think about it.
anyway, i'm still excited for this. The designs are generic-though some are obviously inspired by old nintendo-and the mimicking joke fell flat my first view, but as indicated by the comments on that yt page, we are in the minority for caring about such things.
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:08 pm
by Sotiris
A new
image debuted at Annecy (courtesy of
CinéCoulisses).
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:46 pm
by jazzflower92
No wonder he doesn't want to be the villain anymore.It would take a number on one's self esteem.
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:54 pm
by Super Aurora
ajmrowland wrote:Super Aurora wrote:
You think I care?
no, otherwise I wouldnt've said it.
which makes no sense when you really think about it.
You're right. It doesn't make sense for you to bring that up if you knew I didn't care, other than an attempt to provoke something out of it.
Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 2:14 am
by Jules
Hmm ... Is it really so wrong to mention the word "fap"? It's being used humorously. I don't really mind SA's brand of humour. He makes me smile.
And I have to agree with SA, that render of Calhoun must be a heterosexual's wet dream.
Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 8:18 am
by Elladorine
Jules wrote:And I have to agree with SA, that render of Calhoun must be a heterosexual's wet dream.
Or a lesbian's.
