Meet The Robinsons

Post by **chernabog** » March 28th, 2006, 2:44 pm

I feel exactly the same way. He felt like a classic Disney villain to me, really theatrical and OTT, like Cruella DeVille. I hope they manage to kee him in because there hasn't been a great Disney villain since Yzma in The Emperor's New Groove.

Post by **Meg** » March 28th, 2006, 3:17 pm

Yeah, I hope they keep him too! He was just so cool in those two MTR clips.

Post by **ShyViolet** » March 28th, 2006, 10:18 pm

I don't know if this is completely true or not, but it's worth reading....

http://www.jimhillmedia.com/article.php?id=1899

Post by **Ben** » March 29th, 2006, 8:08 am

The thing I'm worried about with the whole Disney/Pixar thing is that...Pixar don't do villains.

They don't really have good old fashioned "baddies" - their films mostly have characters up against a tough situation, but so far all I can think of was Spacey's grasshopper in A Bug's Life.

Even Al in TS2 was really an over enthusuastic collector who bore little overall threat, while Pete couldn't be described in the same way as Cruella, Medusa, Jafar, etc, or that GREAT looking guy in the Robinsons...

Shame if we get watered down movies which could have been more...oh I don't know...PLAIN FUN!

Post by **Gooch** » March 29th, 2006, 8:53 am

How about Syndrome? or Randall in Monsters Inc.?

Post by **Kaszubas** » March 29th, 2006, 11:21 am

...and Sid from Toy Story

Only Finding Nemo hasn't personified evil (villain) so far.

Post by **Ben** » March 29th, 2006, 12:13 pm

I wouldn't count Sid...he has no real motive. But Syndrome and Randall - yeah, I forgot those.

I guess Pixar's villains have not left that much of an impression on me though!

Post by **chernabog** » March 29th, 2006, 12:15 pm

Yeah I agree with Ben. Aside from Hopper in A Bugs Life, Pixar haven't had any really great villains. Sid worked well in the film but think about how often you see his face on any merchandising... NEVER. Al and Pete were bad guys but didn't really stick in the memory. I suppose Randall was ok, but Syndrome had nothing unique about him. He felt like a really generic character. Aside from Hopper (and possibly Randall) cg has failed to offer any memorable baddies. Once again another draw back of the medium.

Post by **Brandon Neeld** » March 29th, 2006, 2:01 pm

Ok - Syndrome rant here...

Last Spring the TV network Bravo brought together a number of minds from the world of Superheroes on TV, in comics, in books, and on film to rank what it considers to be the top 20 super- heros, villains, and vixens of all time. Syndrome was ranked 16th on the villains list - a decent showing for a single character considering longevity of the character was a factor in choosing and at the time the movie was only 6 months old, still new but out of the pop culture mainstream. When talking about why Syndrome though, everyone made it clear that it was his uniqueness. He's not your archetypical villain that wants to get filthy rich and take over the world. Instead, he already is filthy rich and want to be a superhero of all things! He's also multi-sided. He has all the evil genius class and poise that's shown by Lex Luther or Goldfinger, yet you get moment of humanity and that redneck little boy shines through when he wipes his nose in passing while walking to the plane or prances around the containment unit like a little girl. There's really no doubt in my mind that Pixar can do villains and Syndrome is IMO one of the best there is.

Also, even if you don't like Syndrome, you know these guys have studdued villains intensely. The Incredibles took great care following certain Super Villain rules and playing up on the stereotypes like monologuing. I think Pixar has the potential to franchise great villains; although how this will relate to advising on Disney movies only time will tell.

/Syndrome Rant

Post by **chernabog** » March 29th, 2006, 2:12 pm

Fair enough. though I happen to believe the Incredibles is hugely overrated, not only Pixar's weakest effort but also one of the least satisfying animated movies in recent years. (Not counting the Dreamworks films which I fully expect to be awful each time). All I got from Syndrome was a villain who had no dimensions whatsoever. Take away the drive to show up Mr Incredible from when he was a child and all you're left with is a bad guy who wants to kill the good guys. Also, I don't pay much attention to anything the Bravo channel has to say.

Post by **Meg** » March 29th, 2006, 2:33 pm

I love The Incredibles - to each their own, I guess.

Anyway, back to MTR - I don't want to turn this into a "The Incredibles is teh best movie eva!" - "No, it was horrible!" type thread.

Post by **chernabog** » March 29th, 2006, 2:37 pm

Ok I apologise. To be fair it has grown on me with repeat viewings. As for MTR, I really don't know what to expect. Part of me is extremely excited because it is Disney after all, but there's a part of me that thinks Disney won't take on board any of Pixar's suggestions and make another average movie.

Post by **Meg** » March 29th, 2006, 2:40 pm

It's okay - I've just spent too much time on the Rotten Tomatoes forums and a red light goes up whenever I smell a like/dislike film thread.

Anyway, I'm hoping MTR will be great - might even see it in 3-D, if I here it's good.

Post by **chernabog** » March 29th, 2006, 2:43 pm

I'm really hoping they have the 3-D technology installed in more cinemas over here for MTR. For Chicken Little we only had it in Manchester and London, two cities I'm nowhere near. And it wasn't even that a big a deal over here either.

Post by **Ben** » March 29th, 2006, 3:13 pm

I actually didn't get a lot out of the 3D thing.

The biggest bother was the green "EXIT" signs that were continually reflected in my ChickLit specs (wherever we sat), and to be honest the pace of the film was so frantic that there wasn't much the 3D added in terms of spectacle.

In fact, I'd rather see a movie on a bigger screen than in 3D. But Imax 3D, like with Ghosts Of The Abyss...now that rocked!

Meet The Robinsons

Wow....