Inside Out

Features, Shorts, Live-Action and Direct-To-Video
Post Reply
AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1639
Joined: December 16th, 2004
Location: Burbank, Calif.

Re: Inside Out

Post by droosan » June 21st, 2015, 5:08 am

Sid Philips wrote:
EricJ wrote:"Circle 7 script that Pixar wanted to use for their Monsters Inc. sequel but couldn't."
There is no proof of that from anywhere.

Forget it, Sid. It's Cloudtown. 8)



I saw the movie again on Saturday night, and enjoyed it just as much (maybe more!) the second time around. :)

Michael Giacchino's score is indeed wonderful; the main theme is simple yet memorable, and seems effortlessly adapted to the emotional punch of the action on-screen: quiet & contemplative in sad moments, super-bombastic in the climax, etc. I also really like the fact that it's 100% orchestral (which is not to say that songs mightn't have 'worked' for the movie; I just think the score works well enough that it doesn't need them). The CD soundtrack for Inside Out does include the song bed from the Lava short, though.

A little moment that I didn't catch the first time (spoilers follow) ..
When Joy is in the memory dump, she finds the blue 'core memory' Sadness had generated in the classroom (the one which had caused her to panic, ending-up in whisking her and Sadness away from Headquarters, in the first place). She then places that memory into her bag with the other 'happy' core memories .. and returns it to Sadness, after they get back.

Joy is very much like Woody .. well-intentioned, but overly-zealous; in some ways, she is almost the antagonist of the story.

Joy's love for Riley is unquestionable (the scene in which she interrupts the 'bad' dream on Riley's first night in the new house in order to 'share' a skate with her is nothing short of magical :o ) .. but her machinations to keep Sadness in her 'circle' -- and to minimize the other emotions' roles -- took on a slightly darker tone in my second viewing. :twisted:

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19766
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Re: Inside Out

Post by Ben » June 21st, 2015, 6:06 am

Once Disney bought Pixar, they could have had access to whatever they wanted...indeed, it was said somewhere that Pixar did look through Circle 7's materials for some sequel or other (either Toy Story 3, Monsters or Nemo...can't remember which...but this was on a disc supplement).

User avatar
AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 1597
Joined: March 27th, 2008

Re: Inside Out

Post by Dan » June 21st, 2015, 9:56 am

droosan wrote:A little moment that I didn't catch the first time (spoilers follow) ..
When Joy is in the memory dump, she finds the blue 'core memory' Sadness had generated in the classroom (the one which had caused her to panic, ending-up in whisking her and Sadness away from Headquarters, in the first place). She then places that memory into her bag with the other 'happy' core memories .. and returns it to Sadness, after they get back.

Joy is very much like Woody .. well-intentioned, but overly-zealous; in some ways, she is almost the antagonist of the story.

Joy's love for Riley is unquestionable (the scene in which she interrupts the 'bad' dream on Riley's first night in the new house in order to 'share' a skate with her is nothing short of magical :o ) .. but her machinations to keep Sadness in her 'circle' -- and to minimize the other emotions' roles -- took on a slightly darker tone in my second viewing. :twisted:
In the Q&A that followed the film at the Insider Access screening, Amy was asked who her favorite Pixar character (who were not from Inside Out) was. She had two, but heavily noted how she studied Tom Hanks as Woody a lot to get a feel for how to portray a character who was, as you said, well-intentioned, but overly-zealous. The other character she liked was Larry The Cable Guy as Mater because she would cry laughing watching him and felt his comic timing was brilliant.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3604
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Re: Inside Out

Post by EricJ » June 21st, 2015, 10:59 am

Ben wrote:Once Disney bought Pixar, they could have had access to whatever they wanted...indeed, it was said somewhere that Pixar did look through Circle 7's materials for some sequel or other (either Toy Story 3, Monsters or Nemo...can't remember which...but this was on a disc supplement).
We had the writers on their own blog and at the conventions showing us only the storyboards of the first 10 minutes, where Mike & Sully go back through the door to give Boo a birthday present, only to find the family moved away and an old grandma in the bed instead (Mike: "She hasn't aged well...") After that, it's only hearsay where the story went from there, although the idea of pre-teen Boo growing up was strongly hinted ("We aged Boo up accordingly"). Along with the idea of M&S "stranded" on the outside, which did briefly end up in University.
Pixar has repeatedly said the writers on the staff were impressed and would have used that script if they could (like the "Daycare" ending from Circle's Toy Story 3 found its way into Pixar's), but for some strange reason couldn't go into details about why they didn't. Still, it was enough to give Rob Muir and Bob Hilgenberg their first big break at Disney, working on "Tink & the Great Fairy Rescue".
droosan wrote:Michael Giacchino's score is indeed wonderful; the main theme is simple yet memorable, and seems effortlessly adapted to the emotional punch of the action on-screen: quiet & contemplative in sad moments, super-bombastic in the climax, etc.
Joy is very much like Woody .. well-intentioned, but overly-zealous; in some ways, she is almost the antagonist of the story.
Joy's love for Riley is unquestionable (the scene in which she interrupts the 'bad' dream on Riley's first night in the new house in order to 'share' a skate with her is nothing short of magical :o ) .. but her machinations to keep Sadness in her 'circle' -- and to minimize the other emotions' roles -- took on a slightly darker tone in my second viewing. :twisted:
The Woody comparison's a good one, and the reason I thought her "annoying optimist"--yes, I even liked her with an accordion--character had real depth, and more than the last time Disney tried warning us about the perils of crazy annoying optimistic girls (albeit with a female writer/director).
Going in, I kept waiting for what I've come to refer to as the "Not A Flying Toy" moment, where at some point, ALL Pixar protagonists encounters the climactic crushing disillusionment that makes them come to realize the one thing they've believed in has been wrong all these years (even Cars 2 attempted one, but it ended up buried somewhat), and that's the unexpected poignant plot twist that inevitably punches the grownup fans in the gut. Wasn't sure where we'd get one in this story, but they delivered once again.
And yes, Giacchino's score was the first time in about twelve years where I had to go look it up on iTunes the same day as coming home from the movie (the opening and the skating scene).
droosan wrote:The CD soundtrack for Inside Out does include the song bed from the Lava short, though.
So far, I've not heard anyone mention about Lava (starring the Mighty Favog), and I'm guessing there's a reason for that.
Like the Blue Umbrella short, feels like more of an excuse to work out some technical ideas (new landscape/water textures?), but as a short, it's just sort of....there. :|

Just off the subject, the Disney parks have been strangely closemouthed about whether we'll see the Emotions at the parks apart from the parades, even though they did show up at the fan-blog premiere.
Maybe they reconsidered and thought Sadness was too much of a downer. (Some of us like Eeyore with the Pooh characters, though!)
Last edited by EricJ on June 21st, 2015, 2:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 17
Joined: July 5th, 2007

Re: Inside Out

Post by Sid Philips » June 21st, 2015, 1:58 pm

"Pixar has repeatedly said the writers on the staff were impressed and would have used that script if they could "

Again, there is ZERO proof anyone from Pixar ever said this. And as the other commenter said, Pixar could have used anything they wanted once Disney owned them.

Writers are, by nature, self promoting. Nothing wrong with that, but they're imaginations are getting the better of them. They most likely had a contract of a certain length, so Disney threw them a bone (until their contract ran out) to be 2 of 7 writers on that awful Tinkerbell movie. Notice they haven't worked since. The tinker bell movie came out 2010, which means they would have completed their typing in 2009.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3604
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Re: Inside Out

Post by EricJ » June 21st, 2015, 2:35 pm

Sid Philips wrote:Again, there is ZERO proof anyone from Pixar ever said this. And as the other commenter said, Pixar could have used anything they wanted once Disney owned them.
Think I'm going to have to ask for a legal ruling on that one--Writer credit's a thorny issue in Hollywood, as noted by Walt's commissioning of a book for "Lady & the Tramp" to say "We based it on that", and dodge a lot of complications regarding two dozen failed original-screenplay drafts.
Pixar could borrow influence from the Circle scripts, but as far as Authorship regulations, it was safe to say that they now legally owned the title to a Monsters, Toy or Nemo sequel, so long as what went under it was 100% originally created by the producers, and wasn't unreasonably using work previously owned by another company, current or defunct. Better safe than sorry.
Legal issues aside, Lasseter reportedly made "clean-slate" the official policy to all Pixar Circle-cleanups.

And to be honest, I liked the tween-Boo idea too, not to mention that even the harshest critic admitted that Rescue was the first Tink movie that didn't suck. :)
Last edited by EricJ on June 21st, 2015, 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 1597
Joined: March 27th, 2008

Re: Inside Out

Post by Dan » June 21st, 2015, 3:35 pm

Box Office Mojo is projecting Inside Out, while will still lose the weekend to Jurassic World, will do far better than expectations by ending the weekend at around $91 million. That's around $20 million more than expected and place it roughly $10 million behind Jurassic World.

The $91 million intake will make it the second highest opening for a Pixar film behind Toy Story 3 (which made $110.3 million in 2010). It will also be the highest opening for an original property (non-sequel/prequel or franchise entry) ever, surpassing Avatar at $77 million in 2009.

Source: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=4072

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 8282
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Re: Inside Out

Post by ShyViolet » June 21st, 2015, 4:45 pm

Wow! That's awesome. :). Seeing it tomorrow...then I'll finally be able to read this thread lol!
Pinky, are you pondering what I’m pondering?

I think so, Brain, but if we didn’t have ears, wouldn’t we sort of look like weasels?

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 347
Joined: May 25th, 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
Contact:

Re: Inside Out

Post by Vernadyn » June 22nd, 2015, 4:53 am

There's so much about Inside Out that's just utterly fantastic. Chief among those is how Docter and his team are able to create a resonant, poignant film without having to include devastatingly traumatic events like in, say, Grave of the Fireflies. It reminded me to treasure those simple moments in life and was uplifting without being preachy--a contrast to the admirable yet flawed Tomorrowland.

Inside Out is probably Docter's most consistently masterful film. I didn't disdain Up like many for not being emotional throughout as it was for its first 10 minutes, but it is, for the most part, a light adventure (though one with a meaningful core). And Monsters, Inc. did seem to have a lot of sequences of Mike and Sully running down bland office corridors. I'll probably find similarly insignificant flaws in Inside Out when I see it again, but almost everything clicks together so seamlessly. I suppose one flaw I can think of now is that some of the thoughts/emotions of certain characters could be seen as stereotypical. But I guess that's a risk when you're making a film that appeals to a universal audience. The film doesn't seem overtly calculated; instead, I sense that Docter's tastes tend to jibe with those of the general audience for the most part.

For a film about emotions, I was thrilled to find so many well-done, emotionally affecting scenes. (Not to say I'm a sucker for absolutely everything. I never really connected with the kid subplot in Despicable Me. And in The Rescuers, although I feel sympathy for Penny when Medusa calls her a "homely" girl, the following song immediately spins off into cornball territory). And yes, Giacchino's score was great; I especially enjoyed his theme for the core memories (which plays during the last part of the end credits.) He's had a superb year; Jupiter Ascending, Tomorrowland, and this more than make up for the merely OK Jurassic World.

I'm particularly curious about the filmmakers' intent regarding one issue in the film
The film never resolves whether Riley made up with her best friend. The way the film played the scene, there wasn't an irreparable rupture, and the friend wasn't a major character anyway. But the destruction of "Friendship Island" (and all the islands, admittedly) came across as such a monumental event. I'd like to think that Docter and Co. intentionally left that unresolved--after all, many of us tend to drift away from at least some of our childhood friends. It's a nice acknowledgment that life--and friends--move on. It was certainly better than making matters too tidy by having them reconnect at the end (or maybe they did and I missed it).
Jurassic World may rule at the box office, but in terms of quality, Inside Out is light years beyond.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3604
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Re: Inside Out

Post by EricJ » June 22nd, 2015, 1:40 pm

Vernadyn wrote:I'm particularly curious about the filmmakers' intent regarding one issue in the film
The film never resolves whether Riley made up with her best friend. The way the film played the scene, there wasn't an irreparable rupture, and the friend wasn't a major character anyway. But the destruction of "Friendship Island" (and all the islands, admittedly) came across as such a monumental event. I'd like to think that Docter and Co. intentionally left that unresolved--after all, many of us tend to drift away from at least some of our childhood friends. It's a nice acknowledgment that life--and friends--move on. It was certainly better than making matters too tidy by having them reconnect at the end (or maybe they did and I missed it).
They probably didn't, but it's pretty clear she made new friends on the hockey team. Things move on.
That wasn't the unresolved question--The question I had was:
At the end, we see inside everyone else's head--the mom, the teacher's, etc.--and everyone else has emotions that resemble them, but Riley has a male Fear and Anger?? :wink:
Jurassic World may rule at the box office, but in terms of quality, Inside Out is light years beyond.
Yep, another year where a mediocre "Wow, they brought a Spielberg film back after twenty years!" pilgrimage box-office eclipses all the better films that summer...Or, wait, has that ever happened before? :lol:

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 347
Joined: May 25th, 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
Contact:

Re: Inside Out

Post by Vernadyn » June 23rd, 2015, 12:50 am

Regarding the genders of Riley's emotions:
I seem to remember reading an interview with Docter in which he said that the emotions resemble the person as he/she grows older. That explains the parents, teacher, and bus driver, but the boy at the hockey game and the girl wearing eye shadow couldn't have been that much older than Riley. But the glimpses into the heads of those kids are so brief (and played for laughs) that I didn't really pay much attention to the emotions' genders. Still, that doesn't explain why Riley's emotions don't all have blond hair. I suppose one could come up with some psychoanalytical explanation of how the movie is about an identity crisis for Riley and only after she overcomes it can the emotions start to resemble blah blah blah. But I suspect the real reason the emotions don't resemble Riley is because the filmmakers wanted to create a set of "universal" characters the audience could relate to.
So yes, it's not airtight story logic, but it's great that this film can provoke such food for thought. Kind of like when there was that puffery about The Incredibles being Ayn Rand-ian, and Brad Bird responded by saying that it was great that a mainstream animated film could inspire such discussion and argument in the first place.

AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 7284
Joined: October 16th, 2004
Contact:

Re: Inside Out

Post by James » June 23rd, 2015, 12:24 pm

Vernadyn wrote:...Given the other sniffly-unmentionable subplots, Riley's story in the movie comes about as close to that "What if Boo grew up into a 11-12-yo. and couldn't see monsters anymore?" ...
Just a side note, but I think the girl that played Boo had a role in this movie.Have to double check that later.

User avatar
AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 1597
Joined: March 27th, 2008

Re: Inside Out

Post by Dan » June 24th, 2015, 9:50 pm

Didn't see this here and wasn't sure it was on the front page. Here's a promo clip (aka not seen in the movie) they sent out a while back. :mrgreen:


AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1639
Joined: December 16th, 2004
Location: Burbank, Calif.

Re: Inside Out

Post by droosan » June 26th, 2015, 7:12 am

Here's a list of easter eggs inside Inside Out (spoiler warning, natch!)

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 8282
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Re: Inside Out

Post by ShyViolet » June 29th, 2015, 1:47 pm

Pinky, are you pondering what I’m pondering?

I think so, Brain, but if we didn’t have ears, wouldn’t we sort of look like weasels?

Post Reply