Wreck-It Ralph (formerly Reboot Ralph)

All topics relating to Disney-branded content.
Locked
FigmentJedi
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 418
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 8:06 pm

Post by FigmentJedi »

disneyprincess11 wrote:
Sotiris wrote: Image
BOWSER AND DR. EGGMAN?! :o How did Disney get permission?!
Disney's had a good relationship with Sega and Nintendo for years.

Hell, with Nintendo, it goes back to when Walt was alive and Nintendo scored the Disney license for playing cards in Japan. Not to mention a few Mickey themed Game And Watches in the 80s and even game tournament stuff being held around what is now Downtown Disney in the 90s.

Sega on the other hand was a longtime staple of Innoventions at Epcot, complete with huge Sonic statue.

Capcom of course, providing Zangief and Dr. Wily, developed all those games in the 90s for Disney.
User avatar
Disney Duster
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 13439
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
Gender: Male
Location: America

Post by Disney Duster »

L&P on the Scales wrote:Weren't Disney involved with the original TRON?
Super Aurora wrote:
Disney Duster wrote: No it's not that. It's that Disney always did movies about things and worlds that were real, not virtual.
Tron/Tron Legacy.
Yea. REAL people entering a virtual world. Even though I specifically meant Disney's Animated Classics, not their live-action films, but I forgot to say that.
Super Aurora wrote:This movie is about a VG character jumping into different video game worlds. And what is it with you and "Fake virtual life"? It's like you hate anything digital and technological.
Yea and I was saying why not take the original story of the villain who wants to stop being a villain an enters other worlds into being book characters entering book worlds, or just a character that enters other worlds? And I thought someone might think I have something against digitalness and technology. I am a little against digitalness because it makes everything just tiny sqaures, it's not the real thing, but other than that I don't hate technology in general, just it taking over/replacing everything.
Image
DisneyAnimation88
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1088
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:00 am

Post by DisneyAnimation88 »

Disney Duster wrote:By the way, were you born in '88? I was too. Best year to be born ever!
No I was actually born a couple of years later. There's not really any relevence to the numbers, they were just something random I added. So I will have to disagree with you on the best year to be born :P .

I get what you've said about the film. I don't necessarily agree with all of it but I do understand the point that you're making. Personally, I'm happy to see Disney try something new and hopefully it will live up to the hype and become a classic but only time will tell.
We're not going to Guam, are we?
User avatar
Dream Huntress
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:08 pm
Location: Somewhere

Post by Dream Huntress »

Disney Duster wrote:Yea and I was saying why not take the original story of the villain who wants to stop being a villain an enters other worlds into being book characters entering book worlds, or just a character that enters other worlds? And I thought someone might think I have something against digitalness and technology. I am a little against digitalness because it makes everything just tiny sqaures, it's not the real thing, but other than that I don't hate technology in general, just it taking over/replacing everything.
I get why some people aren't really happy with everything being digitalized, but the fact is, this is a different time, with different attitudes and new technologies, it would be unrealistic and short sighted if Disney didn't adapt to that.

Back on topic, I really think Wreck it Ralph is going to be a love song to gamers everywhere, I was kinda skeptical about all this at first, I was getting a very Dreamworks vibe from this, but after seeing the article, I'm very optimistic that this is going to turn out well. I hope there's a trailer soon.
Image
FigmentJedi
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 418
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 8:06 pm

Post by FigmentJedi »

Dream Huntress wrote: I get why some people aren'
Back on topic, I really think Wreck it Ralph is going to be a love song to gamers everywhere, I was kinda skeptical about all this at first, I was getting a very Dreamworks vibe from this, but after seeing the article, I'm very optimistic that this is going to turn out well. I hope there's a trailer soon.
I'm predicting that if there isn't one with John Carter, they'll be waiting for E3 to start the real advertising blitz. Would be an appropriate place to do so after all.
User avatar
Sotiris
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 20123
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:06 am
Gender: Male
Location: Fantasyland

Post by Sotiris »

Steve Hulett wrote:My morning was spent at the Riverside Drive Hat Building. The word on Wreck-It Ralph is...

"Animation has been going full bore. Lighting and finaling are getting ready for big ramp ups. There's going to be new people hired next month. ..."

"They had a screening in the hat's first-floor theater yesterday. Iger and Rich Ross were there. They missed some of the lines because of the laughter. There's a lot of gags in it, a lot of referencing of newer video games. The consensus is that the story works and its funny. Now we just have to get it made. This is one of the shortest schedules we've had. ..."

I asked if there was any worry that the video game references could date the picture in ten or twenty years. Nobody is concerned about that. They want it to be a hit next Fall when Ralph gets released.

(There's a Wreck-It Ralph display in the building's entrance hall. So you want to see character sketches and some artwork, just talk your way past the gate guard on Riverside Drive and feast your eyes.)
Source: http://animationguildblog.blogspot.com/ ... t-diz.html
ImageImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Jules
Diamond Edition
Posts: 4593
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 9:20 am
Gender: Male
Location: Malta, Europe

Post by Jules »

Gah! I didn't grow up with a Nintendo or a Sega, so these references will be lost on me. I did, however, spend many hours on the Commodore 64 and the Sony PlayStation as a kid. Hope those two systems are represented in the film.
FigmentJedi
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 418
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 8:06 pm

Post by FigmentJedi »

Julian Carter wrote:Gah! I didn't grow up with a Nintendo or a Sega, so these references will be lost on me. I did, however, spend many hours on the Commodore 64 and the Sony PlayStation as a kid. Hope those two systems are represented in the film.
... How did you evade Nintendo or Sega while getting a Commodore?
User avatar
Disney Duster
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 13439
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
Gender: Male
Location: America

Post by Disney Duster »

Dream Huntress wrote:
Disney Duster wrote:Yea and I was saying why not take the original story of the villain who wants to stop being a villain an enters other worlds into being book characters entering book worlds, or just a character that enters other worlds? And I thought someone might think I have something against digitalness and technology. I am a little against digitalness because it makes everything just tiny sqaures, it's not the real thing, but other than that I don't hate technology in general, just it taking over/replacing everything.
I get why some people aren't really happy with everything being digitalized, but the fact is, this is a different time, with different attitudes and new technologies, it would be unrealistic and short sighted if Disney didn't adapt to that.
It's not about adapting to times because Walt never did things that were modern he always did things that felt more classical and relatable to any time, for instance he didn't make a movie about animatronics even though they existed in his modern day. I'm just explaining what I mean, it's not about technology taking over it's about what Disney used to be about.
Image
User avatar
Jules
Diamond Edition
Posts: 4593
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 9:20 am
Gender: Male
Location: Malta, Europe

Post by Jules »

FigmentJedi wrote: ... How did you evade Nintendo or Sega while getting a Commodore?
I was born in '89, so the C64 wasn't really my generation. It belonged to my then 19 year old big brother (he'll be 42 this year), but I got to play on it as much as I'd liked. When I was 8 I got a Sony PlayStation, which I loved. I never really felt the need for any other console. The Nintendo 64 or Sega Dreamcast never really caught on in my country anyway. Only in the last seven years has the local market become saturated with Xboxes and Nintendo products.

One more thing. When I was 6 (circa 1995), I remember a good deal of my classmates getting a console they referred to as a "Micro Genius". Sometime ago I looked it up on the internet and it turns out it was a NES rip-off able to run NES game cartridges ... probably not even a legal product. I suspect most Maltese kids back then got such machines rather the official NES or SNES. Sadly, I've never even seen a NES or SNES in my life, though I have used emulators to familiarise myself with their games.
User avatar
Dream Huntress
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:08 pm
Location: Somewhere

Post by Dream Huntress »

Disney Duster wrote: It's not about adapting to times because Walt never did things that were modern he always did things that felt more classical and relatable to any time, for instance he didn't make a movie about animatronics even though they existed in his modern day. I'm just explaining what I mean, it's not about technology taking over it's about what Disney used to be about.
So you're point, once again, is that, again, the Disney studios can never, never, never, never, never, like never, do anything even remotely different than what they did 20 years ago, never, no matter how good, funny, entertaining or high quality the story might be.
Image
User avatar
Candy-Bonita95
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 7:45 am
Location: Toronto

Post by Candy-Bonita95 »

Dream Huntress wrote:
Disney Duster wrote: It's not about adapting to times because Walt never did things that were modern he always did things that felt more classical and relatable to any time, for instance he didn't make a movie about animatronics even though they existed in his modern day. I'm just explaining what I mean, it's not about technology taking over it's about what Disney used to be about.
So you're point, once again, is that, again, the Disney studios can never, never, never, never, never, like never, do anything even remotely different than what they did 20 years ago, never, no matter how good, funny, entertaining or high quality the story might be.
No,what he meant is that present Disney will never as "classic" as the classics

But he could be wrong with the idea of Walt basing idea on modern culture of his time.Walt did use modern culture in his work,but so was his competition.(Particularly Looney Tunes).Disney Studios is not in a technology crisis or a period of movies about inanimate objects but in a state in which they must captivate the audience again.Not just attract but captivate.
User avatar
pap64
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3535
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:57 pm
Location: Puerto Rico
Contact:

Post by pap64 »

Like I said before, I knew this movie would upset Disney purists because it is a brand new territory for the company and one that is extremely contemporary: video games.

Yet, Disney HAS dabbled in contemporary stories before, even when Walt Disney was alive. Take for example, 101 Dalmatians. NOW it is considered to be a timeless classic, but back then it was bold of them to focus on a modern day story involving dogs, kidnapping and even potential murder in 1960s London and using a brand new animation system which made the animation look sketchy. It was a story told for the times. Yet it was so well made that it eventually became an all-time classic. People loved it, they kept watching it and it quickly became a classic.

Now, will Wreck it Ralph be a classic? No one knows for sure as the movie isn't even out. Yet people are dismissing it based on its concept alone. I think people should focus more on the quality of the story rather than what it is about. Wreck it Ralph has the potential of being popular since its story seems to be classic as well as appeal to the nostalgic mindset of adult gamers while younger gamers with its modern day mentality. Again, it could work, it could fail, but it is too early to tell at this point.
ImageImageImageImage

Image
User avatar
blackcauldron85
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 16506
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 7:54 am
Gender: Female
Contact:

Post by blackcauldron85 »

I mean, the background and setting of the story is video games, but surely when watching it, you won't be thinking, "OMG, I'm watching a 90-minute video game!" I mean, I'm sure we'll get absorbed into the story and care about the characters and all...!
Image
User avatar
pap64
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3535
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:57 pm
Location: Puerto Rico
Contact:

Post by pap64 »

blackcauldron85 wrote:I mean, the background and setting of the story is video games, but surely when watching it, you won't be thinking, "OMG, I'm watching a 90-minute video game!" I mean, I'm sure we'll get absorbed into the story and care about the characters and all...!
EXACTLY

The story (if I am not mistaken), is about how people are perceived to be evil based on looks or occupation. The plot of the Fix It Felix game is that they destroyed Ralph's home in order to make a building, so when Ralph tried to fight back, he was made the bad guy while the "good" guy was praised for his actions.

I doubt the film will get all philosophical about it, but it will talk about how sometimes we praise the wrong heroes. Someone already said that Felix could turn out to be the villain in the end, and quite frankly, I would LOVE to see it happen. Even if it's Pixar-ish, it would drive the plot to a different level.

Also, I keep hearing that this is ripping off Despicable Me and Megamind. I don't see it. The only similarity is that the focus is on a supposed "villain", but there are plenty of differences. In Despicable Me, Gru is a villain that enjoys being one, but learns about the importance of fatherhood. Megamind has fully accepted his villain status, but later learns that he could be something more. In Ralph, it seems that he admits to be a bad guy because it was the job he was given in his game world. It sounds to me like the story is learning to overcome prejudices and go outside your comfort zone if you want to make a change happen.
ImageImageImageImage

Image
User avatar
Disney Duster
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 13439
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
Gender: Male
Location: America

Post by Disney Duster »

Still don't know if you guys are gettin' me.

I was just wondering if Walt Disney always intended his studio to make classic, real-living things, like even a story set in majestic London with talking fantasy puppies. Wreck-it-Ralph will be the first time we could ever question if the characters are really living or just virtual life, whereas in previous Disney works you were always sure the characters had a living soul with real, not virtual or animatronic, but real emotions, and I'm just wondering if Walt and his past men ever thought Disney would do that (they probably didn't) and if they would let that happen (don't know, but I don't think so). Disney used to mean something. Putting that essence into new things is one thing, changing it (into something else) is another.
Image
DisneyAnimation88
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1088
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:00 am

Post by DisneyAnimation88 »

I get what you're saying, but I think that you're massively overthinking the concept behind this film. I don't see why it would be so hard to believe that these characters could be given emotions and feelings; no one has any problem with talking animals or magical beings or extraterrestial life on earth in Disney films so, to me at least, I have no doubts that Disney can make these characters as believable and endearing as any other character they have created. To me, this quote from Walt Disney himself settles any dispute here:
"Around here, however, we don't look backwards for very long. We keep moving forward, opening up new doors and doing new things, because we're curious.....And curiosity keeps leading us down new paths."
We're not going to Guam, are we?
User avatar
RyGuy
Special Edition
Posts: 685
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:50 pm
Location: Orange County, California

Post by RyGuy »

We won't know whether they succeeded in "putting the essence" into video game characters until we see the movie.

But since they managed to do it before with planes, boats, cars and houses (even in Walt's day), I think there's a shot they could succeed here as well.

(assuming one believes in the "essence" of course :) )
User avatar
blackcauldron85
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 16506
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 7:54 am
Gender: Female
Contact:

Post by blackcauldron85 »

Idk if "Disney Essence" goes into Pixar films, too, but one could argue that Woody's Round-Up was *just* a TV show...
Image
User avatar
Heartless
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 296
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:56 pm

Post by Heartless »

Disney Duster wrote:Still don't know if you guys are gettin' me.

I was just wondering if Walt Disney always intended his studio to make classic, real-living things, like even a story set in majestic London with talking fantasy puppies. Wreck-it-Ralph will be the first time we could ever question if the characters are really living or just virtual life, whereas in previous Disney works you were always sure the characters had a living soul with real, not virtual or animatronic, but real emotions, and I'm just wondering if Walt and his past men ever thought Disney would do that (they probably didn't) and if they would let that happen (don't know, but I don't think so). Disney used to mean something. Putting that essence into new things is one thing, changing it (into something else) is another.
This argument is so ridiculous it's not even funny.
Animals don't have 'real emotions' or a living soul or whatever you're talking about either, and look at all the Disney movies based around animals that you adore.

It's absurd to me to think that just because a character has a 'virtual life' it cannot be 'really alive'.. That's the entire point of it all is bringing virtual characters to life. I guess that would make all of the characters in Toy Story not really alive either.. :roll:

I can't even get my thoughts together correctly right now, this line of thinking frustrates me so much.
Open your mind up more.
Image
"Good and bad are labels created by people. Nature doesn't have such concepts."
Locked