DVDizzy Forum

Clindor wrote:The first trailer/reaser is here:

https://youtu.be/4TojlZYqPUo

The scenes set in our world/plane of existence look beautiful. The Tina Fey bit was a little less inspiring. I expect a paint by numbers Pixar narrative but hope to be proved wrong.

I agree about the Tina Fey bit. So jarring from the teaser.

Aside from the overly cartoon Dreamwork-like faces, color me intrigued. I think this teaser is great, minus the Tina Fey bit, and it teases the story perfectly.

The teaser was OK. I think the main character was miscast. Jamie Foxx's voice doesn't really match the character's design. The bit with the guy trashing his three computers was ridiculous. Tina Fey's character looks cute. It seems like your typical Pixar fare.

I agree with disneyprincess11. I'm sure Tina Rey's character will be better than what this teaser showed. I'm looking forward to seeing more!

Teaser poster.


Source: https://twitter.com/Pixar/status/1192456675157921792

Seems pretentious enough to be a Docter film. I guess it will be better than Onwards, but I'm really not excited about it either.

farerb wrote:Seems pretentious enough to be a Docter film. I guess it will be better than Onwards, but I'm really not excited about it either.

Lol, I've realized that I'm not a big fan of Docter's films myself. Up and Inside Out both are highly overrated imo and Soul seems to be in the vein of his usual films.

JeanGreyForever wrote:

farerb wrote:Seems pretentious enough to be a Docter film. I guess it will be better than Onwards, but I'm really not excited about it either.

Lol, I've realized that I'm not a big fan of Docter's films myself. Up and Inside Out both are highly overrated imo and Soul seems to be in the vein of his usual films.

Yep. The only directors from Pixar whose films I like are Andrew Stanton and Brad Bird. I used to like Inside Out, but then realized how boring it was to have every setting explained by the characters and at times the humor was really juvenile. Riley was basically a robot with no choice or agency and Bing Bong was even more annoying than Olaf. I know Pixar (Docter) wanted me to cry when he died but I couldn't be happier.

farerb wrote:

JeanGreyForever wrote: Lol, I've realized that I'm not a big fan of Docter's films myself. Up and Inside Out both are highly overrated imo and Soul seems to be in the vein of his usual films.

Yep. The only directors from Pixar whose films I like are Andrew Stanton and Brad Bird. I used to like Inside Out, but then realized how boring it was to have every setting explained by the characters and at times the humor was really juvenile. Riley was basically a robot with no choice or agency and Bing Bong was even more annoying than Olaf. I know Pixar (Docter) wanted me to cry when he died but I couldn't be happier.

Same. Stanton and Bird are my two favorite Pixar directors but I really like the work that Lee Unkrich and Darla K. Anderson have done on Toy Story 3 and Coco as well.

I didn't really like the humor in Inside Out either especially with the parents. I completely agree with you on Riley. She was a cipher of a character who left no impression on me whatsoever (except maybe me wanting to give her a whack on the head lol). I actually did like Bing Bong though but I also liked Olaf. He was one of the few redeeming factors of the film for me.

Oh yeah, I like Coco as well. I don't care for Toy Story 3, but I'm not a fan of Toy Story to begin with.

farerb wrote:Oh yeah, I like Coco as well. I don't care for Toy Story 3, but I'm not a fan of Toy Story to begin with.

I actually like all the Toy Story films and A Bug's Life as well. The films which Lasseter has full creative control over (mainly Cars) aren't anywhere near up to the same quality imo. And even Cars, I heard was an idea he stole from someone else.

I wonder if every time Pixar plans a nice movie group writers and directors site down asks "How can be make an animated possibly even sadder than our last movie ?"

Than brian strom for about an hour until they find sadest idea they could find and also a fanastical way forit to happen.

Like maybe thy frist ask "well this os really sad in real life; Now let's add some fanastical elenets too eitther make it at last somewhat appeal tofamily or make a figurtivre conpect literal so it beacomes EVEN MORE SAD !

I like the realistic look of the movie (but the fingers when he's playing piano shows the fingers are not there quite yet). They have come a long way since the first Toy Story.

As for sad topics; it's not that long since Lasseter left. He was very influential, and it takes time for the studio to find a new voice. What the new leadership means in the long run remains to be seen.

The press release contains a few more quotes from the creators: https://www.thewaltdisneycompany.com/pi ... -for-soul/

Sotiris wrote:The teaser was OK. I think the main character was miscast. Jamie Foxx's voice doesn't really match the character's design. The bit with the guy trashing his three computers was ridiculous. Tina Fey's character looks cute. It seems like your typical Pixar fare.

I also thought the teaser was just OK. It did a god job of introducing us to the main premise of the movie, but it didn't make me much more excited for it than I was. Though maybe that's because it didn't show much we didn't know already. I still find it very intriguing and I personally like all of Pete Docter's films, so I'm sure I'll like this one too. The poster reminded me a bit of the VHS cover for Melody Time, but I really like it.

Sotiris wrote:His body proportions are less caricatured but his face remains quite cartoony resulting in a mismatched and slightly off-putting design.

Yeah, it looks a bit weird. I thought it was maybe just the main character, but all the other humans in the teaser look the same way too. Maybe they made that stylistic choice to have a bigger contrast between the real world and the cosmic realms, because the souls look the opposite, their head is more than half their body.

Sotiris wrote:I doubt people will criticize the film for this reason though like they did with TPatF.

I guess you're right. Pixar doesn't seem to get criticized as much as Disney for things like this.

farerb wrote:TBF Toy Story 4 had a realistic environment as well.

Yes, it seems to be the norm now for their films to have photorealistic backgrounds.

I love the more photorealistic backgrounds and more realistic body proportions! I guess it makes it feel very...serious? I know it's a dramady or a comedy with emotion, but, I guess they are balancing seriousness with exaggeration with the faces.

I thought the teaser was great, perfect. It shows us just enough, you know, teases us (:P) and while I'm not super excited for this movie like I hoped I would be (I guess because I thought it would be about Heaven and how cool would it be to see a complex, beautiful animated Heaven?), I still really want to see this movie. I think Jamie Foxx's voice-acting is superb, and I liked Tina Fey's bit. I thought it was kind of funny.

Thanks for the quotes in that press release, D82, I loved reading them:

According to Docter, the idea for the story is 23 years in the making. “It started with my son—he’s 23 now—but the instant he was born, he already had a personality,”says Docter. “Where did that come from? I thought your personality developed through your interaction with the world. And yet, it was pretty clear that we’re all born with a very unique, specific sense of who we are.”

Soul introduces Joe Gardner, a middle-school band teacher whose true passion is playing jazz. “I think Joe is having that crisis that all artists have,” says Powers. “He’s increasingly feeling like his lifelong dream of being a jazz musician is not going to pan out and he’s asking himself ‘Why am I here? What am I meant to be doing?’ Joe personifies those questions.”

On this very forum, in the thread about Wall-E when it first came out, I was saying robots, like those in Wall-E, couldn't feel love because they didn't have souls. Someone on here who was really into Transformers told me people are not born with personalities, but are simply hard drives waiting for information to come in. That disturbed me. From as long as I can remember, I thought our personality, who we truly are, came from within, from birth (and from conception?), and that was what a soul was. This guy said robots could get to be the same as humans, and of course he didn't believe in God, etc. He said parents who think their babies have personalities are just incorrect, that they just think that way just because they're parents. I'm glad this movie is all about why that's hogwash.

I also like the idea of finding out what you are meant to do, and I wonder, what will this star of the film do if he doesn't get to be a jazz player, what will he realize is what he's "meant to be doing?" I bet PIXAR can surprise me.

Disney Duster wrote:On this very forum, in the thread about Wall-E when it first came out, I was saying robots, like those in Wall-E, couldn't feel love because they didn't have souls. Someone on here who was really into Transformers told me people are not born with personalities, but are simply hard drives waiting for information to come in. That disturbed me. From as long as I can remember, I thought our personality, who we truly are, came from within, from birth (and from conception?), and that was what a soul was. This guy said robots could get to be the same as humans, and of course he didn't believe in God, etc. He said parents who think their babies have personalities are just incorrect, that they just think that way just because they're parents. I'm glad this movie is all about why that's hogwash.

I also like the idea of finding out what you are meant to do, and I wonder, what will this star of the film do if he doesn't get to be a jazz player, what will he realize is what he's "meant to be doing?" I bet PIXAR can surprise me.

It's a combination of both. An infant is not a tabula rasa. They already have different personalities, like some being more or less easily scared by high sounds than others. But they are also shaped by the environment they grow up in. Nature and nurture. Maybe some day it becomes possible to create artificial brains that are sentient, but personally I think a consciousness that consists of just digital software is impossible. You need more than that.

And sadly not everybody finds out what they are meant to do, if there is such a spesific thing in life (and Baz Luhrmann claims in "Everybody's Free to Wear Sunscreen" that some of the most interesting people he knows still don't know what to do with their life). Some of those who do are not always able to fulfill what they feel is their purpose. What counts is finding something you love and last but not least, something that fills you with meaning.

Rumpelstiltskin wrote:I like the realistic look of the movie (but the fingers when he's playing piano shows the fingers are not there quite yet).

I noticed that too. His fingers do look weird. The overall design is off-putting to me. He's tall and lanky to the point he looks stretched out. The cartoony face makes him look even more uneven and unappealing.

D82 wrote:The poster reminded me a bit of the VHS cover for Melody Time, but I really like it.

Good observation. They do use the same concept of the piano keys as a staircase. The Soul poster could have been improved in terms of composition by placing the character at the bottom showing him about to walk up the stairs signifying his journey to the afterlife with the light in the "o" in "Soul" symbolizing the light at the end of the tunnel one goes through to reach the beyond. That would have made it more connected to the themes of the movie. Right now, if one looks at the poster without any prior knowledge of what the film's about, they'd think it's just about a musician.

This, like Inside Out ( worst pixar ever ...yes even worse than Cars 2) , holds zero interest to me... Onward again is weird story telling. I am all for original content...but sofar it looks like very weak storywork. Coco was the last Pixar that swept me off my feet...visually and quite decent story telling.

REINIER wrote:This, like Inside Out ( worst pixar ever ...yes even worse than Cars 2) , holds zero interest to me... Onward again is weird story telling. I am all for original content...but sofar it looks like very weak storywork. Coco was the last Pixar that swept me off my feet...visually and quite decent story telling.

I'm glad that there are more Inside Out detractors than I thought. Onward doesn't even feel like Pixar and Soul seems like the worst of Pixar cliches regurgitated. The only original film of Pixar's this whole decade that I actually liked was Coco. However, unlike most here, I've been a huge fan of all the sequels to the classics.

I like the Toy Story sequels!

Rumplestiltskin, you are absolutely right about everything you said.