Ratatouille Discussion and Trailers

[Timon/Pumbaa fan]

Okay, first thing is first. TEASER TRAILER. It means just that. It is a tease (revealing very little), about the film. It is minute and a half clip, of which very little, if any, will even appear in the actual film. In my mind, I don't see how you could say that it has "failure written all over it", when you have absolutely NO idea about the story?!

When I said it has "failure written all over it", I was referring to the teaser trailer alone, which looks terrible. I'm actually very open to the idea it can be a great movie(I wasn't excited for Cars, but I ended up really liking it), I just don't see why Pixar feels a need to advertise this film a year ahead. I'm mean, if we can't judge a film because it's "too early" than why show anything at all? Once again, why not wait until Cars is on DVD?

Second, if the audience you saw it with didn't even chuckle, but, laughed out loud at the other CG animated trailers, then the entire audience must have had sticks up their butts! I can say that I couldn't even hear the last few seconds of the TEASER TRAILER, because the audience I saw Cars with was laughing so hard at the comment about "You know, if you can sort of muscle your way past the gag reflex, all kinds of food possibilites open up". If you, and the audience, couldn't find that scene/comment funny, then you must have the driest sense of humor since dirt.

Generally, people are idiots, so we agree on something. I never showed interest in those films. That's why a labled them as "crap". I show more interest in "Ratatoullie"(or however you spell it) more than those other films(except MTR), but frankly, it shows very little promise, (just imo)

Third, you should inform your father that Pixar is making a "rat" film. Disney is distributing it. Either way, trust that this will be a different film than what has been done, before.

He knows it is, he was simply making a joke. But I still think if he thought the idea didn't look original, that some other people might and B.O. scores may not be as high as "Finding Nemo" or "The Incredibles".

Finally, we'll go down this road, again. Pixar has always shown a teaser of a coming film, in front of their current film, regardless of how far away the release date is. It's traditional, the audience expects it (to see what Pixar is doing next), and it is nothing new. Why is that SOOOOO FREAKING hard for some people to understand?!

Because the teaser for MI and Finding Nemo were on the Toy Story 2 and Monster's Inc DVD's. I'm fine if it's on a DVD as a "bonus feature", I'm even fine if it's 6 months for a release date maybe even 8, buy why should we know about a film 12 months before it's released? Read Netty's posts for more.

If you want to call Ratatouille a failure, that's fine, but, do it AFTER the film has come out, and it is judged by a majority to be a failure. Let the dang film come out, first, and watch it! You jump to conclusions with VERY LITTLE information, state your opinion, and expect that what you've said is written in stone. It's ridiculous!

Well I've never "written anything in stone", that's why I said it "looks" like a failure. I'm still going to see it in theaters(I've seen every Pixar film in theaters, 3 of them more than once), so I'm still open to the idea it can be a good movie. I'm just bashing the teaser and what'll be the constant advertising of this film. Why can't Pixar tone down the advertiseing of the film? It'll still make more than enough money at the box office.

I'm sorry if I'm coming off as too harsh, but, statements like this really irritate me, and you make a lot of these types of statements, without actually having seen a film, used a product, etc.

No offense taking. This is what a message board is for after all.

[magicalwands]

Okay, first thing is first. TEASER TRAILER. It means just that. It is a tease (revealing very little), about the film. It is minute and a half clip, of which very little, if any, will even appear in the actual film. In my mind, I don't see how you could say that it has "failure written all over it", when you have absolutely NO idea about the story?!

When I said it has "failure written all over it", I was referring to the teaser trailer alone, which looks terrible. I'm actually very open to the idea it can be a great movie(I wasn't excited for Cars, but I ended up really liking it), I just don't see why Pixar feels a need to advertise this film a year ahead. I'm mean, if we can't judge a film because it's "too early" than why show anything at all? Once again, why not wait until Cars is on DVD?

I don't think these pre-12 months trailers are supposed to be meant for adveritising at all. If you looked at it from an animator's point of view, all it is is a painless and fun thing to animate for 30 seconds. I think it's also so people won't confuse the other crappy CGI movies as Pixar. Like we've seen with Cars, every advertisement looks stupid except Ratatouille. It's also to show what they're working on, what better way to show them then on the big screen? What a better time to show it then before their newest film? Sure you can put it on the dvd, but by then a REAL teaser trailer would already be out and it just wouldn't be as funny because it actually talks about the movie and Pixar can't animate some fun gig to put in the 'pre-teaser'. LOTR did it with 1&2 showing 2&3 trailers, and I never heard people complaining. All this sounds like a pretty poor way to make Pixar look bad.

[MadonnasManOne]

I don't think these pre-12 months trailers are supposed to be meant for adveritising at all. If you looked at it from an animator's point of view, all it is is a painless and fun thing to animate for 30 seconds. I think it's also so people won't confuse the other crappy CGI movies as Pixar. Like we've seen with Cars, every advertisement looks stupid except Ratatouille. It's also to show what they're working on, what better way to show them then on the big screen? What a better time to show it then before their newest film? Sure you can put it on the dvd, but by then a REAL teaser trailer would already be out and it just wouldn't be as funny because it actually talks about the movie and Pixar can't animate some fun gig to put in the 'pre-teaser'. LOTR did it with 1&2 showing 2&3 trailers, and I never heard people complaining. All this sounds like a pretty poor way to make Pixar look bad.

Bingo! We have a winner! I'm glad that you get it, Magicalwands. You make me proud.

[MadonnasManOne]

By the way, here is the link to the official site of Ratatouille.

http://disney.go.com/disneypictures/ratatouille/

Come on, Summer 2007!

[2099net]

I don't think these pre-12 months trailers are supposed to be meant for adveritising at all. If you looked at it from an animator's point of view, all it is is a painless and fun thing to animate for 30 seconds. I think it's also so people won't confuse the other crappy CGI movies as Pixar. Like we've seen with Cars, every advertisement looks stupid except Ratatouille. It's also to show what they're working on, what better way to show them then on the big screen? What a better time to show it then before their newest film? Sure you can put it on the dvd, but by then a REAL teaser trailer would already be out and it just wouldn't be as funny because it actually talks about the movie and Pixar can't animate some fun gig to put in the 'pre-teaser'. LOTR did it with 1&2 showing 2&3 trailers, and I never heard people complaining. All this sounds like a pretty poor way to make Pixar look bad.

Of course it's advertising! Why go to all the expense of animating it if its not for advertising. Even if it could be argued as an animation try-out, why put it on as a teaser, when Disney have other films coming out much sooner which could do with some publicity? Time and advertising space is money, even if given "free" because you're bumping something else off which could be generating money.

When I critisise the inclusion of the Teaser, I'm not singling out Pixar specifically. It's a relatively new method of Hollywood "fighting back" at declining cinema audiences. But I would argue its actually causing declining cinema audiences!

Considering Cars had the biggest promotional push of any Pixar film to date, don't you think its odd that it's got one of the lowest opening weekends? If inflation was taken into account, its probably even lower still. Compared with other films it's not done well at all. Even the so-called "live action" Scooby Doo movie in 2002 got over $54m for its opening weekend (not bad when it was on about 400 less screens).

While I wouldn't by any stretch of the imagination call Cars a failure, Wall Street apparently is according to various sources (but for balance, I suspect some of this is political given Disney's recent purchase of Pixar, and the fact business demands an instant return). Nor am I saying Scooby Doo is a better film (I'm not saying that at all). I'm 110% certain Cars will have almost infinitely longer legs.

But the publicity onslaught has failed. All those trailers, interviews, news items, "infotainment" programmes... Wilson's even been hawking himself around various motorsport events for the past month or so.

Why is that? Why has Cars opened (relatively) poorly? Just the standard decline in theatrical audiences? Or is it as Hollywood would like you to believe because everyone's downloading a copy? Or perhaps the subject matter isn't young girl friendly (this could amount to some of it, but I wouldn't class the base concept of The Incredibles as being young girl friendly either)

Personally, I think its because a lot of people, like me, are getting sick of the promotions, the hype (and yes it is hype Eric - Hype can also just mean 'Excessive publicity') - not just for Cars but all big budgeted movies.

True, it's comparing chalk to cheese in most respects, but if you look at the bigger picture, X-Men 3 did $122m on its opening weekend. Despite being the third film in the franchise. Other film franchises such as Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings generally got weaker opening weekends and smaller box office totals. However, due to the somewhat troubled production of X-Men 3 and its quick turnaround, Fox were unable to promote this film a year in advance (as I'm sure they wanted to). The earliest promotion I can remember for the film came out on the Fantastic Four DVD before Christmas (and that, like most teasers was as much use and interest as a chocolate fireguard).

The past year has had a surprising amount of "surprise" box office successes. I say "surprise" because its only the fact that the studios didn't support them that made their success a surprise. Failure to Launch, Eight Below, Wedding Crashers, Walk the Line and March of the Penguins for example have performed well above the industry's expectations, while many of the over promoted bigger budget movies have performed below the industry's expectations (and incidently it's this underperformance which is fueling stories of box office meltdown, not the success of the medium budgeted and promoted films).

In a typical reaction, Hollywood's answer to over promoted films underperforming is to (wait for it, you'll love this) promote them even more! The old "more is better" way of thinking. This Cars not only had a record breaking (for Disney) promotional push, they were actually proud of this fact! Well, I think it's wrong. I think they're wrong. I think people can see through their marketing, free ticket promotions and "entertainment" programmes which are nothing short of 1/2 hour adverts.

I'm not saying films shouldn't be promoted. That's just nonsense. The box office failures of so many worthy films show what happens when promotion is small or non-existant. But, like everything in life, from candy to excercise, it's best in some form of moderation. Not promoting films over a year away from release would probably be a good start.

I've said all I'm going to say on the subject now. It's all irrelevant to how good the film actually is any way, and I'm not picking on Pixar or Disney to make them look bad. I'm picking on the whole system.

[Disney Duster]

Of course it's advertising! Why go to all the expense of animating it if its not for advertising...I'm picking on the whole system.

Yea, I didn't want to quote the whole thing. I just wanted to say that I agree with almost everything you said, and I think you explained it all very well! I just want to make something clear, though. Are you saying that, since X-Men 3 was advertised a year in advance, and that did well, you're fine with advertising a movie a year before it comes out?

As for my thoughts, I think it's absolutely fine for Pixar to have a teaser trailer for their next film included in the previews before their current film, no matter how long before the film comes out, just because of tradition and loyal fans expectation's. But I don't agree with advertising a movie as much as Cars has been advertised. So basically I'm fine with the very early Pixar teaser, but leave it at that until the movie is going to come out soon.

Also, 2099net, I just wanted to point out that there is a mistake in your signature. You're signature has the quote, "The stupid and powerful and one thing in common. They don't alter their views to match the facts, but alter the facts to match their views" - The Fourth Doctor. The mistake is where it says, "The stupid and powerful and one thing in common." Shouldn't it say, "The stupid and powerful have one thing in common"?

[2099net]

I don't think X-Men 3 was promoted 1 year in advance (but I could be wrong).

It's true that it could be said people did know a third film would be coming at some point although (mainly due to news stories rather than "promotion" as such). There's nothing wrong with that. If Pixar are doing the press interview for Cars they could quite easily mention "currently we're working on Ratatouille" and give a brief description of the film.

Due to various production difficulties (Singer leaving, Ratner coming on board, dropping out, some other director I can't remember the name being hired but was unable to organise a the film with such a brief pre-production schedule, and finally Ratner coming back) Fox couldn't promote the film, even if they wanted to, because they had nothing to promote.

Like I say, the first promotion of "X-Men 3" I can remember was on the Fantastic Four disc. Two minutes of nothing really. But at least that was 6-7 months until its release, not 13!

Thanks for the quote pointer!

[Disney Duster]

Like I say, the first promotion of "X-Men 3" I can remember was on the Fantastic Four disc. Two minutes of nothing really. But at least that was 6-7 months until its release, not 13!

Oops. I misread what you said. You said, "due to the somewhat troubled production of X-Men 3 and its quick turnaround, Fox were unable to promote this film a year in advance (as I'm sure they wanted to)." And I thought it said that they did promoted the film a year in advance. Sorry, 2099net.

And your welcome for the quote pointer!

Hey, as an example to help demonstrate how there's nothing wrong with having a teaser of something that is coming next in relation to a product, remember the teaser for Cinderella III on the Cinderella DVD? That was just a little something to show fans of the film that they could expect something related in the next 2 years(the Cinderella DVD came out in 2005, and Cinderella III will arrive in 2007). But Disney has left it alone since then(no big marketing push yet). You guys don't have a problem with that, do you? So the same should go for Pixar, saying "if you like the movie you're about to watch, here's what we're doing next" with a teaser. I think it's fine as long as the heavy advertising doesn't happen until the premiere date is near.

[PixarFan]

Is it really that big of a deal weather the teaser is first included on the DVD instead of in theaters a few months earlier? Does it change anything? Not really; it's the same teaser! Toy Story 2's home video release had a teaser for Monsters, Inc. over twelve months before MI was released in theaters, yet nobody complained. Then suddenly, Pixar decides to finish their teasers a little earlier and place them in theaters and now people cry foul! If the argument is publicity, then this teaser isn't the problem. The problem with excessive publicity comes in the final weeks or months of promotion, not a year out! If Pixar is going to release a teaser trailer a year beforehand, then that's the last we're going to hear about the movie for six or seven months.

Yes, Cars had too much publicity. Way too much. By the time opening weekend rolled around, I almost felt like I'd already seen the movie. And from all the previews I'd seen plus a few educated guesses, there wasn't much in Cars that surprised me. I desperately hope that the publicity for Ratatouille will not be that overbearing. But if it is, it isn't the fault of this simple 1-minute and 48-second piece of animation that was released with Cars last Friday. This teaser isn't Pixar trying to shove its new movie down our throats, and it doesn't necessarily reflect what the final product will be like. If next year at this time Disney is screaming at you to watch Ratatouille as much as they did for Cars, then you can complain. But until then, just enjoy Ratatouille's teaser for what it is.

Oh this movie has failure written all over it.

When I said it has "failure written all over it", I was referring to the teaser trailer alone

No offence, but that sounds a bit contradictory if you ask me.

[magicalwands]

I don't think these pre-12 months trailers are supposed to be meant for adveritising at all. If you looked at it from an animator's point of view, all it is is a painless and fun thing to animate for 30 seconds. I think it's also so people won't confuse the other crappy CGI movies as Pixar. Like we've seen with Cars, every advertisement looks stupid except Ratatouille. It's also to show what they're working on, what better way to show them then on the big screen? What a better time to show it then before their newest film? Sure you can put it on the dvd, but by then a REAL teaser trailer would already be out and it just wouldn't be as funny because it actually talks about the movie and Pixar can't animate some fun gig to put in the 'pre-teaser'. LOTR did it with 1&2 showing 2&3 trailers, and I never heard people complaining. All this sounds like a pretty poor way to make Pixar look bad.

Of course it's advertising! Why go to all the expense of animating it if its not for advertising. Even if it could be argued as an animation try-out, why put it on as a teaser, when Disney have other films coming out much sooner which could do with some publicity? Time and advertising space is money, even if given "free" because you're bumping something else off which could be generating money.

I see your point with it really being advertising. But remember that Pixar only worked for themselves on Cars and anything before because they were only bought recently. Thus Pixar can't work on Disney's trailers and things. I understand that there are things out there that could use advertising but with their shorts and teasers, Disney knows it's a real treat to the audience because Pixar knows how to entertain a crowd. I used to be the one who also questioned why Pixar advertises so early, but I like them showing their next movie because it's just awesome to see what great movie is in the making right now after this one we're about to see. I have to admit it's kind of "pointless" advertising, but it's one of those chances Pixar takes to make the audience have a good time because they believe in it. Such as having faith that story will make the better film then one full of jokes. One more thing, if all this pre-teaser showing was a waste of time, Pixar wouldn't be doing it and Disney would've stepped in by now.

[MadonnasManOne]

Oh this movie has failure written all over it.

When I said it has "failure written all over it", I was referring to the teaser trailer alone

No offence, but that sounds a bit contradictory if you ask me.

That's exactly what I thought.

At any rate, I'm so happy that several people on this board seem to get the whole point of the teaser trailer, and understand that Pixar is not trying to cram their film down your throat. Just making people aware of what is next. It also doesn't mean that the film is not a good one. That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

So, bravo to those of you who understand the reason behind the teaser trailer, and just enjoy it for what it is. A teaser.

[Timon/Pumbaa fan]

Oh this movie has failure written all over it.

When I said it has "failure written all over it", I was referring to the teaser trailer alone

No offence, but that sounds a bit contradictory if you ask me.

Well how else was I supposed to judge the film? I wasn't saying the film was bad(I haven't seen it after all), I was just saying the teaser looked bad.

At any rate, I'm so happy that several people on this board seem to get the whole point of the teaser trailer, and understand that Pixar is not trying to cram their film down your throat. Just making people aware of what is next.

But that's the point. There's nothing wrong with making people aware of a film, but does it need to be so early? I mean, they have 13 months after all. It also indicates they'll be MUCH more advertisements to come over the next 13 months, like Cars.

Again, PixarFan has confirmed that the teasers for Monster's Inc. and Finding Nemo came until Toy Story 2 and Monster's Inc. were on DVD/VHS. So why not wait until Cars is on DVD? At least then the advertisements would be from a reasonable distance, and the people who REALLY want to see "what's next", they'll be able to see "what's next".

[MadonnasManOne]

At least then the advertisements would be from a reasonable distance, and the people who REALLY want to see "what's next", they'll be able to see "what's next".

Why does it matter how far off the release of the film is? The teaser trailer is just making people aware of it. If you have a problem with it being so far away from the actual release of the film, the next time you go to see a movie, I suggest you go in AFTER the previews have finished. That way, these things will not annoy you so much. Also, what is considered a reasonable distance to some, may not be for others. I don't see why it is such a big deal?! However, you seem to think it is. So, we will just agree to disagree, and move on.

[Andy]

For some of us that are in the UK or other parts of the country where Cars hasnt been released yet heres the english trailer for Ratatouille: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xw82aRqm ... %20trailer

YouTube is accessible to all parts of the world, and it doesn't matter what is uploaded. Once something is released to the public in one country, it's bound to go on the internet for all countries to access.

I think your mistaking what i was trying to say. What i was saying is that those of is in the UK havent been able to see the trailer in english yet because Cars hasnt been released yet, im not saying that youtube is only accessible in this country only.

[PixarFan]

YouTube is accessible to all parts of the world, and it doesn't matter what is uploaded. Once something is released to the public in one country, it's bound to go on the internet for all countries to access.

I think your mistaking what i was trying to say. What i was saying is that those of is in the UK havent been able to see the trailer in english yet because Cars hasnt been released yet, im not saying that youtube is only accessible in this country only.

Let me see if I can clear this up...Andy, a direct link to the downloadable English trailer is already available and has been posted by Hogi Bear here. I'm guessing you missed that when posting the YouTube link, which is why magicalwands responded the way he did. I hope that helps.

Again, PixarFan has confirmed that the teasers for Monster's Inc. and Finding Nemo came until Toy Story 2 and Monster's Inc. were on DVD/VHS. So why not wait until Cars is on DVD? At least then the advertisements would be from a reasonable distance, and the people who REALLY want to see "what's next", they'll be able to see "what's next".

But that wasn't my point when I made my comment. Yes, Monsters, Inc. and Finding Nemo teasers were released on DVD first, but MI's teaser was released on DVD over 12 months before the movie's theatrical debut! Based on what you just said, this was a "reasonable distance." So, it was okay that MI's teaser was released on DVD 12 months in advance, but it's not okay for Ratatouille's teaser to be released in theaters 12 months in advance?

[Elladorine]

Got to see the trailer with Cars, of course. . . really neat character designs. . . and of course since it's Brad Bird and Pixar I know I'm gonna love it.

[Loomis]

Well, without any knowledge of the film (honestly have not been following it), I saw a trailer for Ratatouille the other night.

It won me over instantly with its various descriptions of cheese in the opening moments.

It seems to be a return to the 'secret world of...' style Pixar film, and while that may mean some repetition in the storytelling (i.e. buddy comedy or fish out of water), it is so hard to tell from 90 seconds of footage. It reminded me of the Great Mouse Detective, and not simply because it featured a rodent in the lead role. There is so much potential in the film that this trailer did its job of exciting me.

The Cars trailers, and movie for that matter, never succeeded in garnering my interest. The distinction, I think, is partly due to how much I was bombarded with CARS CARS CARS in the last 12 months. I'll see how I feel about Ratatouille around this time in 2007. Suffice it to say, it excites me, and I haven't felt that way about an animated film for a while.

[Andy]

Let me see if I can clear this up...Andy, a direct link to the downloadable English trailer is already available and has been posted by Hogi Bear here. I'm guessing you missed that when posting the YouTube link, which is why magicalwands responded the way he did. I hope that helps.

Sorry, i didnt know someone had already posted the english trailer...

[Harbinger]

"Ratatouille"
Release Date: June 29, 2007

Pixar, the creators of "Finding Nemo," "The Incredibles" and "Cars" now cook up "Ratatouille," a delicious new animated-adventure centering on an ambitious French Rat named Remy who dreams of becoming a great chef. Because of his passion for cooking, Remy accidentally uproots his family from the French countryside to the sewers of Paris, and finds himself ideally situated beneath a restaurant made famous by his culinary hero, Auguste Gusteau. When Remy helps create a soup that wins rave reviews from the world's most powerful food critic, he sets in motion a hilarious and exciting rat race that wreaks havoc on the entire city, allowing him to achieve the impossible and pursue his true gift. The screenplay, written by Academy Award-winning Brad Bird ("The Incredibles"), is flavored with a colorful cast of characters and exquisite French backdrops making "Rataouille" a tantalizing recipe of imaginative fun and unexpected delight.

http://jimhillmedia.com/blogs/jim_hill/ ... /3073.aspx

I don't know how credible this is. Sorry if already posted.

[Timon/Pumbaa fan]

Wow! After 5 pages of negativity, I gotta say, Jim Hill's summary has got me excited. It sounds NOTHING like the teaser and sounds surprisingly original. Call me crazy, but now I'm actually excited about this film(even if MTR still sounds much cooler ).

Though, here's hoping the next trailer turns out MUCH better than that last boring one. If it doesn't, Pixar will definetely have to work on their advertisments for their next film.