Bolt

Features, Shorts, Live-Action and Direct-To-Video
Post Reply
AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 261
Joined: November 15th, 2005
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank

Post by Sullivan » November 20th, 2008, 3:52 pm

Droosan is incorrect. The song "Barking at the Moon" is by Jenny Lewis.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1642
Joined: December 16th, 2004
Location: Burbank, Calif.

Post by droosan » November 20th, 2008, 5:22 pm

That's totally my bad. Sorry. :oops:

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 261
Joined: November 15th, 2005
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank

Post by Sullivan » November 20th, 2008, 10:04 pm

NP.

BTW, Bolt just got a "Certified Fresh" rating at Rotten Tomatoes. It's currently at 86%, which is better than Cars.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 2949
Joined: October 24th, 2004

Post by GeorgeC » November 20th, 2008, 10:24 pm

OOOHHHH!

Cute Tinkerbell in Once's profile image. Who is she?

Cosplayer, or Disney castmember?

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1471
Joined: October 7th, 2007
Location: Unknown

Post by Once Upon A Dream » November 21st, 2008, 5:44 am

Sullivan wrote:Droosan is incorrect. The song "Barking at the Moon" is by Jenny Lewis.
Oh,thanks for clearing this :D.
And thanks George :D she's TinkerBell from the Disney parks in the TinkerBell film premeire on El Captian.
[img]http://i43.tinypic.com/bfqbtk.jpg[/img]

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 493
Joined: November 11th, 2007
Location: NY

Post by Foxtale » November 21st, 2008, 10:27 am

Thank goodness there is only one or two miley cirus songs, (no offense to those that like her) but I don't think I could stand to listen to much more than for one song. :P Hopefully I will get to go see the movie today. I hope its okay. ^.^
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v188/Foxtale/almostthere_signature_smaller.jpg[/img]

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1471
Joined: October 7th, 2007
Location: Unknown

Post by Once Upon A Dream » November 21st, 2008, 10:57 am

I like her voice,I wonder how John Travolta sounds.
Here's a pre-parade in the Disney parks:
[img]http://i43.tinypic.com/bfqbtk.jpg[/img]

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 493
Joined: November 11th, 2007
Location: NY

Post by Foxtale » November 21st, 2008, 3:30 pm

Just saw Bolt a few hours ago in 3D. It was a wonderful movie. I agree with the criticism that it isn't something radically different but I think it was well put together and very enjoyable. Scenes and things from the movie seemed familiar (like I just saw something they did in it in a movie I watched at year ago) but the way they did them made the movie flow well.

Even though everyone criticizes the pigeons for looking too much like the Animaniacs ones, I felt like they were more of a heartfelt tribute than a rip-off. I loved the pigeon theme throughout the movie.
From the New York to the California pigeons, to the southern pigeons, I thought the jokes were perfect. I love the way the move. ^.^
Also the animals, although obviously caricatures, were very believable as animals.
Bolt as a puppy was super cute!!!! Bolt reminded me of my dog a lot. What got me (even though this is a more personal level) was his favorite toy was a squeaky carrot, which is also my dog's favorite toy!
Overall I think the movie was great, worthwhile to watch and much better than the previews give it credit for. Don't let the Miley Cyrus hype fool, you, the movie has heart and is beautiful to watch. Even though I saw it in 3d it would have been just the same in 2d, the 3d just enhanced the image, no cheap 3d gags or anything. (cept in the coming attractions).

Just one question for you guys, I remember reading awhile back that the backgrounds and styles of this movie are supposed to be more 'painterly'. Can someone describe what they did/were trying to do with this movie compared to other cgi animated films?
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v188/Foxtale/almostthere_signature_smaller.jpg[/img]

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 261
Joined: November 15th, 2005
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank

Post by Sullivan » November 21st, 2008, 5:49 pm

I think this quote answers it as best I can without reference images. I recommend picking up "The Art of Bolt" for those.


http://www.wildaboutmovies.com/behind_t ... SCENES.php

Unlike many computer-animated films that have a limited number of locations and environments, “Bolt” is a virtual road picture that takes its trio of animal travelers from New York City to Hollywood with colorful detours in Ohio, Nevada and points in between. On top of that, the filmmakers chose a look and style for the film that suggested a looser, more painterly approach. This decision would push the boundaries of the medium and take “Bolt” and company on a journey as colorful as the cast itself.

Director Byron Howard explains, “Paul Felix, our brilliant art director, had the idea of giving the backgrounds a painterly look to soften it. CG is great in a lot of ways, but the thing that it does best is create perfectly straight lines and perfectly curved, smooth surfaces. There can be a tendency for things to look too hard- or clean-edged. So Paul and a bunch of geniuses actually created software to put brushstrokes onto the edges of objects and backgrounds throughout the entire film. It gives the film a warm, lived-in look, and it makes it much more comfortable to watch.”

“Paul’s a big fan of Disney history and he loves the look of the old hand-painted
backgrounds,” adds director Chris Williams. “He really wanted to try and get some of that into
the CG era. He came up with something very rich and textural for Bolt’s world. It feels very
inviting.”

Collaborating with Felix and the filmmakers to create the look of the film was Adolph Lusinsky, director of look and lighting.

“Another major influence on us in creating the look for ‘Bolt’ was some of the early ‘70s films—especially the groundbreaking work of director Robert Altman and legendary cinematographers Gordon Willis and Vilmos Zsigmond,” says Lusinsky. “They found beauty in natural light. We were interested in presenting our world as it is, instead of something idealized. We mixed the painterly approach with cinematography techniques—lighting, exposure
and different lenses—to create a really unique world of textural quality. It feels very tangible and adds a lot of realism.

“A lot of times in CG films, the hard edges can take you out of the picture, so we wanted to add a level of realism by not providing too much detail,” continues Lusinsky. “For example, with computers it’s possible to show bricks on a building going back to infinity; you can count every single brick. In our film, you might see the first few bricks on a wall really clearly, but once you go back 30 feet, it might become very abstracted to a simpler read. This was a completely different approach than we’ve taken before.”

Lusinsky and his team traveled all over the country, including RV parks in Ohio, the desert outside Las Vegas, shipping yards in San Francisco, and the streets of New York City to study lighting conditions and how they might relate to the film. The design and lighting team were able to capture the essence of these locations and put them to use in the film. Spencer observes, “We wanted the film to have the feel of a live-action film in terms of lighting. Realistic lighting is the key to believability even though our world is caricatured. We didn’t want it to feel like it was manufactured by the computer.

“One of the ideas that John [Lasseter] always talks about is creating a believable world,” continues Spencer. “We have a cat, a dog and a hamster living in the real world so we worked hard to create a believable world for our characters that the audience would embrace.”
Also, there are some patent applications covering this. So if you're really into computer graphics, you could look those up.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 493
Joined: November 11th, 2007
Location: NY

Post by Foxtale » November 21st, 2008, 9:23 pm

Thank you Sullivan! I understand it more now. I wish I knew more about computer animation and computer programming. I will go look at the art of Bolt book. I now have to images from it and compare them to other cgi films. ^.^ Even without doing that there is such a noticeable difference in the film. It did seem more inviting and gave it a more human and real touch ^.^

Is this the same technology they were going to use for Rapunzel or were they going to push it even further?
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v188/Foxtale/almostthere_signature_smaller.jpg[/img]

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 416
Joined: August 11th, 2008

Post by Neal » November 22nd, 2008, 2:10 am

Wow! I really liked BOLT. Laughed many times throughout, puppy Bolt also reminded me of my dog, it didn't make me feel as sentimental as Robinsons did but still a very good film!

The painterly style was okay. I don't think I liked it. Sometimes it just rubbed me the wrong way. Either do traditional or CGI, but don't mix them.
Feature Animation Favorites:
  • Tekkonkinkreet, Watership Down, A Town Called Panic, Howl's Moving Castle, Rio 2096, Mind Game, Fantastic Planet

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 241
Joined: April 24th, 2006

Post by YCougar » November 22nd, 2008, 2:36 am

Just got back from seeing the movie - my first ever 3D experience!

While you do know the general landmarks of the story, I really enjoyed letting the film take me to its destination. And of course the ending was always the gray area - you have an idea of how they're going to do it, but you're never quite sure what to expect.
I thought it was kind of hilarious and awesome that they ended it with the Bolt show jumping the shark - aliens and a fudged explanation for "Penny"'s sudden appearance change, heh heh!

And while some may have thought it was corny, I did like how Bolt got to save the day for real at the end - as soon as the studio caught fire and he heard Penny's calls for help, I knew it was coming. I like it even better that they didn't rub it in our faces to make an all-too-perfect parallel to the end of that first post-superbark scene. Just let it exist and it stands on its own.
But man, this thing was GORGEOUS. Animation was astounding and the scenery was (I thought) incredible. There was only one scene where the "painterly" look pulled me out of the movie (bit sloppy), but other than that... man. I grew up in Ohio, so to see Queen Anne's lace growing in the backgrounds in the Ohio scenes just felt so right to me. (and that old RV couple wearing scarlet and gray, hee hee) Hooray research! And the grass... ugh, it was so pretty and just the right kind of unrealistic that feels realistic.

And because I am a sappy sucker, it made me well up a couple times. C:

I wouldn't say that it tops Kung-Fu Panda or Wall-E, but it's definitely a step in the right direction for Disney. Kudos to everyone involved.

(I didn't know beforehand that Powell was doing the score. So that was why I was enjoying it so much. That guy has been busy...)

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3845
Joined: May 31st, 2005
Location: Maryland

Post by Meg » November 22nd, 2008, 8:06 am

Saw last night in 3-D as well...Really enjoyed it! Was a lot of fun, I highly recommend it.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 608
Joined: January 22nd, 2007

Post by Whippet Angel » November 22nd, 2008, 11:58 am

I haven't seen it yet, but I just got the "Art of" book yesterday. There's some incredibly gorgeous art in there. ^___^

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 5976
Joined: September 1st, 2006

Post by Daniel » November 22nd, 2008, 1:01 pm

I haven't seen Bolt either, I might go sometime this week.

BTW, great to see you back, YCougar! :)

Post Reply