list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Monsters, Inc. on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Monsters_Inc/201413/default.aspx Title: Monsters, Inc.
Year: 2001
Director: Peter Docter, Lee Unkrich, David Silverman
Plot: After exploring the worlds of toys and bugs in the two Toy Story films and A Bug's Life, the award-winning computer animation company Pixar delves into the realm of monsters with its fourth feature. Hulking, blue-furred behemoth James P. "Sully" Sullivan (John Goodman) and his one-eyed assistant Mike Wazowski (Billy Crystal) are employed by Monsters, Inc., a scream processing factory. It seems that the denizens of their realm thrive on the screams of kids spooked by monsters lurking under their beds and in their closets. It's the job of Sully, Mike, and their co-workers, including sarcastic Randall Boggs (Steve Buscemi), crab-like CEO Henry J. Waternoose (James Coburn), and lovely snake-headed receptionist Celia (Jennifer Tilly) to keep the frights flowing. When Sully and Mike are followed back into the monster world by a very unafraid little human girl named Boo (Mary Gibbs), they are exiled to her universe, where they discover that such a modern-day mythological specimen as the Abominable Snowman is a fellow refugee. ~ Karl Williams, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 108
Number of Lists: 119
Number of blog posts: 3
Number of discussion threads: 7
SpoutRating: 4
]]>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 03:15:39 GMTMonsters, Inc.2001Peter Docter, Lee Unkrich, David SilvermanAfter exploring the worlds of toys and bugs in the two <a href=/films/90113/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Toy Story</a> films and <a href=/films/129197/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>A Bug's Life</a>, the award-winning computer animation company Pixar delves into the realm of monsters with its fourth feature. Hulking, blue-furred behemoth James P. "Sully" Sullivan (<a href="/players/P____27679/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>John Goodman</a>) and his one-eyed assistant Mike Wazowski (<a href="/players/P____86318/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Billy Crystal</a>) are employed by Monsters, Inc., a scream processing factory. It seems that the denizens of their realm thrive on the screams of kids spooked by monsters lurking under their beds and in their closets. It's the job of Sully, Mike, and their co-workers, including sarcastic Randall Boggs (<a href="/players/P_____9838/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Steve Buscemi</a>), crab-like CEO Henry J. Waternoose (<a href="/players/P___195536/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>James Coburn</a>), and lovely snake-headed receptionist Celia (<a href="/players/P____71015/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jennifer Tilly</a>) to keep the frights flowing. When Sully and Mike are followed back into the monster world by a very unafraid little human girl named Boo (Mary Gibbs), they are exiled to her universe, where they discover that such a modern-day mythological specimen as the Abominable Snowman is a fellow refugee. ~ Karl Williams, All Movie Guide108Tag Target (>10)119374http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t24506udhvp.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Monsters_Inc/201413/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/mbsgirl/archive/2009/11/10/44344.aspx Post By: mbsgirl
Post To: mbsgirl Blog
Post Date: 11/10/2009 5:24:31 PM
Body: mONSTER iNC IS A SCARE FACTORY WHERE U SCARE KIDS AND KEEP THE BULBS GOIN THEY ARE A TEAM TO WORK UNITED TO SULLY AND LAVULSKE WILL FIND THER WAY THRUOGH THIS TO MAKE THIS PRMLEM BETTA BYEEEE
]]>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:24:31 GMTmbsgirlmbsgirl Blog11/10/2009 5:24:31 PMmONSTER iNC IS A SCARE FACTORY WHERE U SCARE KIDS AND KEEP THE BULBS GOIN THEY ARE A TEAM TO WORK UNITED TO SULLY AND LAVULSKE WILL FIND THER WAY THRUOGH THIS TO MAKE THIS PRMLEM BETTA BYEEEE http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_August_25_Monster_Madness/625/34435/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: pippin06
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 8/27/2008 8:42:27 AM
Body: I don't watch too many monster movies. Why, you ask? When I was younger, the following movies gave me nightmares because of my seriously overactive imagination (no joke): Clash of the Titans (Medusa) Ghostbusters (the "Dogs") Gremlins (the scary Gremlins) ET (ET) Return of the Jedi (Jabba the Hutt...but only for a minute) There were probably others too, I just can't remember them right now. So now, I can't watch monstery scary things. Horror is probably my least favorite film genre; I've seen so very few and only ones I feel comfy watching. Just call be a big wimp. I don't mind. Now, I like do cute monsters, like the Muppets' Sweetums (see: The Muppet Movie) or a wisecracking Billy Crystal-type green cue ball looking thing in Monsters Inc. I also like movies with monstrous people - really good villains. But I'm not such a fan of monsters. Though the "smoke monster" in Lost, which is my favorite show, is pretty creepy even it's just super-fast, super-intelligent smoke, as is The X-Files, which has tons of monsters in it. Go fig. Though, for some reason, I really want to see Cloverfield. But I'm a huge JJ Abrams fan, so I'm forgiving the whole monster motif for that film because JJ touched it.
]]>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:42:27 GMTpippin06Weekly Theme8/27/2008 8:42:27 AMI don't watch too many monster movies. Why, you ask? When I was younger, the following movies gave me nightmares because of my seriously overactive imagination (no joke): Clash of the Titans (Medusa) Ghostbusters (the "Dogs") Gremlins (the scary Gremlins) ET (ET) Return of the Jedi (Jabba the Hutt...but only for a minute) There were probably others too, I just can't remember them right now. So now, I can't watch monstery scary things. Horror is probably my least favorite film genre; I've seen so very few and only ones I feel comfy watching. Just call be a big wimp. I don't mind. Now, I like do cute monsters, like the Muppets' Sweetums (see: The Muppet Movie) or a wisecracking Billy Crystal-type green cue ball looking thing in Monsters Inc. I also like movies with monstrous people - really good villains. But I'm not such a fan of monsters. Though the "smoke monster" in Lost, which is my favorite show, is pretty creepy even it's just super-fast, super-intelligent smoke, as is The X-Files, which has tons of monsters in it. Go fig. Though, for some reason, I really want to see Cloverfield. But I'm a huge JJ Abrams fan, so I'm forgiving the whole monster motif for that film because JJ touched it. http://www.spout.com/blogs/christhilk/archive/2008/8/26/34430.aspx Post By: ChrisThilk
Post To: ChrisThilk Blog
Post Date: 8/26/2008 10:01:11 PM
Body: Much like I’ve engaged in DIY film fests of The Godfather or Marx Brothers or other topics, I decided to watch all the Pixar films I currently own back to back. Starting off withToy Story and its sequel I then moved to Monsters, Inc, Finding Nemo and then Cars. Each film gets a little bit longer but also features a little more in the way of character shading. The characters of Cars are more fully realized than those of Toy Story (no easy task, it’s true) and so are able to inhabit a more fully realized larger world as a result. I think what most sticks out at me about these films is that they’re massively entertaining but in a way that does not require full brain shut-off. You don’t necessarily *need* to be fully engaged to enjoy them but it’s so much more rewarding if you’re paying attention to the breadth of Pixar’s creations. That’s not just in terms of the little visual easter eggs that are dropped into the movies but the character development and real honest-to-goodness story arcs that are created. Pixar does such a better job than any of their animated competitors are doing in creating films that don’t rely on cheap gags to be entertaining for all ages it’s a little sick. Originally posted on:Chris Thilk
]]>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 02:01:11 GMTChrisThilkChrisThilk Blog8/26/2008 10:01:11 PMMuch like I’ve engaged in DIY film fests of The Godfather or Marx Brothers or other topics, I decided to watch all the Pixar films I currently own back to back. Starting off withToy Story and its sequel I then moved to Monsters, Inc, Finding Nemo and then Cars. Each film gets a little bit longer but also features a little more in the way of character shading. The characters of Cars are more fully realized than those of Toy Story (no easy task, it’s true) and so are able to inhabit a more fully realized larger world as a result. I think what most sticks out at me about these films is that they’re massively entertaining but in a way that does not require full brain shut-off. You don’t necessarily *need* to be fully engaged to enjoy them but it’s so much more rewarding if you’re paying attention to the breadth of Pixar’s creations. That’s not just in terms of the little visual easter eggs that are dropped into the movies but the character development and real honest-to-goodness story arcs that are created. Pixar does such a better job than any of their animated competitors are doing in creating films that don’t rely on cheap gags to be entertaining for all ages it’s a little sick. Originally posted on:Chris Thilk http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_August_25_Monster_Madness/625/34368/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: leeroy711
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 8/25/2008 5:51:37 PM
Body: [quote user="mercurial"] I loved how Matinee made fun of and embraced the cheesy monster movies of the 1950's and 1960's with MANT! And the really hardcore monsters in my book are Jeff Goldblum in The Fly (especially when he gets his prickly fly penis and wants to mate), the monster in Jeepers Creepers (that opening scene with the monsters truck steadily approaching the brother and sister is intense), and King Kong (the 1933 original) is great aside from the racist subtext. [/quote] I just bought Matinee used on VHS for $2 at Bookmans so I could show my kids. They loved it and I had forgotton how much I liked it. I made me wish I had grown up a few generations earlier. As far as The Fly is concerned, I liked the Jeff Goldblum version but another movie I made my kids sit through was the original with Vinnie Price. My seven year old ate it up. He loves the end with the little fly with a human head crying, "HELP MEEEEEE, HELP MEEEEE" It's interesting, he will quote that and "FEEEEED MEEEE SEEMOOORE" so much more often than anything from Monsters Inc. or Little Monsters I too really liked the Jeepers Creepers monster, and I thought the movie as a whole stood on it's own two feet as well. The sequel wasn't horrible, but it wasn't very good either.
]]>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 21:51:37 GMTleeroy711Weekly Theme8/25/2008 5:51:37 PM[quote user="mercurial"] I loved how Matinee made fun of and embraced the cheesy monster movies of the 1950's and 1960's with MANT! And the really hardcore monsters in my book are Jeff Goldblum in The Fly (especially when he gets his prickly fly penis and wants to mate), the monster in Jeepers Creepers (that opening scene with the monsters truck steadily approaching the brother and sister is intense), and King Kong (the 1933 original) is great aside from the racist subtext. [/quote] I just bought Matinee used on VHS for $2 at Bookmans so I could show my kids. They loved it and I had forgotton how much I liked it. I made me wish I had grown up a few generations earlier. As far as The Fly is concerned, I liked the Jeff Goldblum version but another movie I made my kids sit through was the original with Vinnie Price. My seven year old ate it up. He loves the end with the little fly with a human head crying, "HELP MEEEEEE, HELP MEEEEE" It's interesting, he will quote that and "FEEEEED MEEEE SEEMOOORE" so much more often than anything from Monsters Inc. or Little Monsters I too really liked the Jeepers Creepers monster, and I thought the movie as a whole stood on it's own two feet as well. The sequel wasn't horrible, but it wasn't very good either. http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_August_25_Monster_Madness/625/34365/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: mercurial
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 8/25/2008 5:32:57 PM
Body: Without straying too far from the topic (my idea of a monster is fairly broad), here we go: From my childhood I was always equally scared shitless and mesmerized by the monsters in Legend (mainly Tim Curry as the Lord of Darkness and that creepy green Swamp Witch) as well as those in Clash of the Titans (Medusa gave me nightmares for years). Gremlins was a great monster movie as well as Little Shop of Horrors when I was growing up. And I'm gonna go ahead and include Jaws cause that son of a bitch was a monster if I'd every seen one. I loved how Matinee made fun of and embraced the cheesy monster movies of the 1950's and 1960's with MANT! On the comedic side, Tremors was always good for a laugh. Ghostbusters and Freaked are probably on the top of the list of hilarious monster movies. Monsters, Inc should also get an honorable mention. And the really hardcore monsters in my book are Jeff Goldblum in The Fly (especially when he gets his prickly fly penis and wants to mate), the monster in Jeepers Creepers (that opening scene with the monsters truck steadily approaching the brother and sister is intense), and King Kong (the 1933 original) is great aside from the racist subtext.
]]>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 21:32:57 GMTmercurialWeekly Theme8/25/2008 5:32:57 PMWithout straying too far from the topic (my idea of a monster is fairly broad), here we go: From my childhood I was always equally scared shitless and mesmerized by the monsters in Legend (mainly Tim Curry as the Lord of Darkness and that creepy green Swamp Witch) as well as those in Clash of the Titans (Medusa gave me nightmares for years). Gremlins was a great monster movie as well as Little Shop of Horrors when I was growing up. And I'm gonna go ahead and include Jaws cause that son of a bitch was a monster if I'd every seen one. I loved how Matinee made fun of and embraced the cheesy monster movies of the 1950's and 1960's with MANT! On the comedic side, Tremors was always good for a laugh. Ghostbusters and Freaked are probably on the top of the list of hilarious monster movies. Monsters, Inc should also get an honorable mention. And the really hardcore monsters in my book are Jeff Goldblum in The Fly (especially when he gets his prickly fly penis and wants to mate), the monster in Jeepers Creepers (that opening scene with the monsters truck steadily approaching the brother and sister is intense), and King Kong (the 1933 original) is great aside from the racist subtext. http://www.spout.com/blogs/usesoap/archive/2008/6/29/31874.aspx Post By: usesoap
Post To: usesoap Blog
Post Date: 6/29/2008 8:19:02 PM
Body: Alright, Pixar. I've had it. I am past the point of being tired trying to find new and creative ways to use superlatives that are as endlessly creative and fresh as your films. Seriously, does everything you do have to be so superiorly textured and nuanced, inviting hours of “rewatchability?” (There, see? I now have to resort to making up words just to keep up. I hope you can sleep well at night in your money-lined pillows.) “WALL*E” is not a film to watch, it is one to consume. Layered with more craft and care than any film released so far this year. Readers of this paper's film column will no doubt attest to the fact that it is on rare occasion that I report to resoundingly glowing praise or hyperbole often (unless, of course, Adam Sandler is involved – kidding!). But time and time again, I find myself overwhelmed with Pixar's ability to take the most simple of concepts – the childhood love of toys (“Toy Story,” “Toy Story 2”) the bond between parent and child (“Finding Nemo” directed by WALL*E's Andrew Stanton, “The Incredibles”), the importance of teamwork (“Monsters Inc.,” “A Bug's Life,” “Ratatouille”) and here, the rudimentary necessity of tactile social interaction – and make it alternately fresh, nostalgic, exciting, comfortable and gloriously rendered both emotionally and graphically. WALL*E is short for Waste Allocation Lift Loader Earth-class, a cuddly little bundle of microchips that is alone in its Earth-bound duty of cleaning up the mountainous waste left behind by a fleeing human race centuries prior. It seems a big conglomerate (imagine Wal-Mart injected with anabolic steroids) made a mess of things after it took over running (and ruining) the globe and jettisoned its population for a little while as it attempted to clean up its mess. Seven hundred years later, WALL*E is the remaining inhabitant, dutifully filling his days with trash duty, but developed enough to find other, more meaningful diversions. For example, he has adopted a pet cockroach (naturally), collects miscellaneous scraps and parts, and settles in from time to time with a Betamax version of “Hello Dolly”). Thematically, the first 40 minutes or so is very similar to last year's “I am Legend,” as a non-speaking WALL*E does just enough to occupy time, but is painfully lonely and just wants a hand (or synthetic replication thereof) to hold. Unlike “I am Legend,” “WALL*E” does not suck royally after that setup. He is visited by an Extraterrestrial Vegitation Evaluator (EVE), which is a sleek new robot model sent to the planet in search of burgeoning life. EVE is like a new iPod to WALL*E's cassette player, but regardless of format, the song remains the same – WALL*E is immediately smitten. After a coy courting period (with lasers), WALL*E tags along on EVE's spaceship, which is housed on a floating Earth, populated with gelatinous mounds of flesh that are the human race. No longer do people rely on such tired traditions as “walking,” they simply jet around their new home in personal Barc-o-loungers, communicate entirely through computer screens and happily subsist on whatever the Big Brother-like corporate owners of the ship (the same ones that spoiled the planet) tell them to. To reveal more would spoil the wonder of “WALL*E.” It's clear that the filmmakers in that coveted Pixar house have a passion for film as well as storytelling. From silent-era slapstick that would make Buster Keaton proud, to space journeys capable of bringing a tear to George Lucas's eye, to nods of golden-age movie musicals, “WALL*E” serves as a loving, guided tour through the coveted vaults of cinematic history. There are scenes within that will induce tears, but not because of maudlin plot contrivances that do everything but old an onion under your eyes. There are moments of ecstatic marvel and whimsy throughout that make this so much more than a just another celluloid babysitter for the kiddos. And you can dispute or politicize the film's dyspeptic world view all you want (though does anyone else see the irony of a film featuring a society of computer-enslaved blobs of humanity created by a computer animation studio that works for years on one project?), but in this increasingly heated political climate, there is a reason the word “change” is bandied about so often. As over-simplified as it may sound, “Wall*E” serves as an animated testament to our ability to do just that. But just as the morbidly obese captain of the human cargo ship in “WALL*E” proves, it is only accomplished by a innate willingness to do so. It may all sound trite, but as the best films in our short cinematic history, “WALL*E” makes you believe that anything is possible. P.S. Don't arrive late or you will miss a wonderful Looney Tunes-era short called “Presto,” featuring a rabbit that could out-wascal Bugs Bunny
]]>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 00:19:02 GMTusesoapusesoap Blog6/29/2008 8:19:02 PMAlright, Pixar. I've had it. I am past the point of being tired trying to find new and creative ways to use superlatives that are as endlessly creative and fresh as your films. Seriously, does everything you do have to be so superiorly textured and nuanced, inviting hours of &ldquo;rewatchability?&rdquo; (There, see? I now have to resort to making up words just to keep up. I hope you can sleep well at night in your money-lined pillows.) &ldquo;WALL*E&rdquo; is not a film to watch, it is one to consume. Layered with more craft and care than any film released so far this year. Readers of this paper's film column will no doubt attest to the fact that it is on rare occasion that I report to resoundingly glowing praise or hyperbole often (unless, of course, Adam Sandler is involved &ndash; kidding!). But time and time again, I find myself overwhelmed with Pixar's ability to take the most simple of concepts &ndash; the childhood love of toys (&ldquo;Toy Story,&rdquo; &ldquo;Toy Story 2&rdquo;) the bond between parent and child (&ldquo;Finding Nemo&rdquo; directed by WALL*E's Andrew Stanton, &ldquo;The Incredibles&rdquo;), the importance of teamwork (&ldquo;Monsters Inc.,&rdquo; &ldquo;A Bug's Life,&rdquo; &ldquo;Ratatouille&rdquo;) and here, the rudimentary necessity of tactile social interaction &ndash; and make it alternately fresh, nostalgic, exciting, comfortable and gloriously rendered both emotionally and graphically. WALL*E is short for Waste Allocation Lift Loader Earth-class, a cuddly little bundle of microchips that is alone in its Earth-bound duty of cleaning up the mountainous waste left behind by a fleeing human race centuries prior. It seems a big conglomerate (imagine Wal-Mart injected with anabolic steroids) made a mess of things after it took over running (and ruining) the globe and jettisoned its population for a little while as it attempted to clean up its mess. Seven hundred years later, WALL*E is the remaining inhabitant, dutifully filling his days with trash duty, but developed enough to find other, more meaningful diversions. For example, he has adopted a pet cockroach (naturally), collects miscellaneous scraps and parts, and settles in from time to time with a Betamax version of &ldquo;Hello Dolly&rdquo;). Thematically, the first 40 minutes or so is very similar to last year's &ldquo;I am Legend,&rdquo; as a non-speaking WALL*E does just enough to occupy time, but is painfully lonely and just wants a hand (or synthetic replication thereof) to hold. Unlike &ldquo;I am Legend,&rdquo; &ldquo;WALL*E&rdquo; does not suck royally after that setup. He is visited by an Extraterrestrial Vegitation Evaluator (EVE), which is a sleek new robot model sent to the planet in search of burgeoning life. EVE is like a new iPod to WALL*E's cassette player, but regardless of format, the song remains the same &ndash; WALL*E is immediately smitten. After a coy courting period (with lasers), WALL*E tags along on EVE's spaceship, which is housed on a floating Earth, populated with gelatinous mounds of flesh that are the human race. No longer do people rely on such tired traditions as &ldquo;walking,&rdquo; they simply jet around their new home in personal Barc-o-loungers, communicate entirely through computer screens and happily subsist on whatever the Big Brother-like corporate owners of the ship (the same ones that spoiled the planet) tell them to. To reveal more would spoil the wonder of &ldquo;WALL*E.&rdquo; It's clear that the filmmakers in that coveted Pixar house have a passion for film as well as storytelling. From silent-era slapstick that would make Buster Keaton proud, to space journeys capable of bringing a tear to George Lucas's eye, to nods of golden-age movie musicals, &ldquo;WALL*E&rdquo; serves as a loving, guided tour through the coveted vaults of cinematic history. There are scenes within that will induce tears, but not because of maudlin plot contrivances that do everything but old an onion under your eyes. There are moments of ecstatic marvel and whimsy throughout that make this so much more than a just another celluloid babysitter for the kiddos. And you can dispute or politicize the film's dyspeptic world view all you want (though does anyone else see the irony of a film featuring a society of computer-enslaved blobs of humanity created by a computer animation studio that works for years on one project?), but in this increasingly heated political climate, there is a reason the word &ldquo;change&rdquo; is bandied about so often. As over-simplified as it may sound, &ldquo;Wall*E&rdquo; serves as an animated testament to our ability to do just that. But just as the morbidly obese captain of the human cargo ship in &ldquo;WALL*E&rdquo; proves, it is only accomplished by a innate willingness to do so. It may all sound trite, but as the best films in our short cinematic history, &ldquo;WALL*E&rdquo; makes you believe that anything is possible. P.S. Don't arrive late or you will miss a wonderful Looney Tunes-era short called &ldquo;Presto,&rdquo; featuring a rabbit that could out-wascal Bugs Bunny http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/6/25/31666.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 6/25/2008 1:01:30 PM
Body: Until last year’s brilliantly directed Ratatouille, all of Pixar’s animated features could be summed up with one word (toys, bugs, monsters, fish, superheroes, cars). Then the more complex plot synopsis of “rat functions as a culinary Cyrano in a French restaurant’s kitchen” came along and ruined the studio’s tradition of simplistic scenarios. Fortunately, this year Pixar is back on track with Wall-E, a movie that can be summed up as being about, in a word, robots. But in their pipeline they’ve got a couple sequels (Cars 2, Toy Story 3) and a couple multi-word synopses (2009’s Up and 2011’s The Bear and the Bow are, at the least, each described with two words: old man and fairy tale, respectively. Only 2011’s Newt could have been pitched using a single word: newts. So, while Pixar seems like it currently has enough on their hands, I’d like to suggest a few more single-word pitches for animated films in order to get things back to basics: Birds - They’ve given us a movie featuring a variety of bugs and a movie featuring a variety of sea creatures, so the obvious next place to go is a movie featuring a variety of birds. And since Pixar has already made a short about birds (For the Birds), they already have a starting point to jump off from. Animals - I guess it’s a pretty general word, but Pixar really needs to give us their answer to either (or both) Madagascar or (and) Kung Fu Panda. Maybe since DreamWorks has taken care of the African animals and the Asian animals, Pixar can go with the most interesting animal continent: Australia. Penguins - Yes, they’re birds and they’re animals, but this pitch needs to be separate. Though we’ve already seen Sony’s Surf’s Up and Warner Bros.’ Happy Feet, this still needs to be done, just so Pixar can win an Oscar with it and make up for losing to Happy Feet last year. Dinosaurs - Another one to make up, this time for Disney’s bomb from 2000, Dinosaur. Also, because every non-Pixar movie needs a Pixar equivalent (Antz vs. A Bugs Life; Shrek vs. Monsters, Inc.; Shark Tale vs. Finding Nemo; Robots vs. Wall-E; etc.) and we haven’t yet seen Pixar do a prehistoric pic in response to Fox’s Ice Age franchise. Bees - If DreamWorks can do both Antz and Bee Movie, then Pixar needs another kind of bug movie, too, preferably one with flying insects. Preferably to make us forget Jerry Seinfeld’s obnoxious promotions, also. Band - I think what Brad Bird did for superhero movies (it was both the best of its kind and the best spoof of its kind) should be done for rock bands. Plus, isn’t it about time Pixar made a real musical animated feature? Fruit - Pixar’s answer to VeggieTales, or simply it’s contribution to the long tradition of animated talking foods, from the vegetable cart on Pinwheel to the singing burger in Better Off Dead. Supermarket - If fruit is too specific, here’s a more general idea: anthropomorphic grocery items, from the produce aisle to the whatever is on the opposite side of the store aisle (in my local market it’s meats). This would be a great opportunity for more product suggestion (a la Apple Computers in Wall-E and Trix cereal in Presto), or even pure, blatant product placement. Furniture - A little bit Pee-Wee’s Playhouse, a lot bit Brave Little Toaster. Basically, Pixar needs to give Luxo Jr. a feature already. Disney - Since Pixar is owned by the Walt Disney Company, and since our old friends Mickey, Minnie, Donald, Goofy and Pluto haven’t had a good movie in a long, long time, I think it only makes sense that John Lasseter should produce a computer-animated movie featuring the classic Disney gang. Past attempts to make CG versions of the characters have been disappointing, but if anyone can make it work, Lasseter can. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:01:30 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com6/25/2008 1:01:30 PM Until last year’s brilliantly directed Ratatouille, all of Pixar’s animated features could be summed up with one word (toys, bugs, monsters, fish, superheroes, cars). Then the more complex plot synopsis of “rat functions as a culinary Cyrano in a French restaurant’s kitchen” came along and ruined the studio’s tradition of simplistic scenarios. Fortunately, this year Pixar is back on track with Wall-E, a movie that can be summed up as being about, in a word, robots. But in their pipeline they’ve got a couple sequels (Cars 2, Toy Story 3) and a couple multi-word synopses (2009’s Up and 2011’s The Bear and the Bow are, at the least, each described with two words: old man and fairy tale, respectively. Only 2011’s Newt could have been pitched using a single word: newts. So, while Pixar seems like it currently has enough on their hands, I’d like to suggest a few more single-word pitches for animated films in order to get things back to basics: Birds - They’ve given us a movie featuring a variety of bugs and a movie featuring a variety of sea creatures, so the obvious next place to go is a movie featuring a variety of birds. And since Pixar has already made a short about birds (For the Birds), they already have a starting point to jump off from. Animals - I guess it’s a pretty general word, but Pixar really needs to give us their answer to either (or both) Madagascar or (and) Kung Fu Panda. Maybe since DreamWorks has taken care of the African animals and the Asian animals, Pixar can go with the most interesting animal continent: Australia. Penguins - Yes, they’re birds and they’re animals, but this pitch needs to be separate. Though we’ve already seen Sony’s Surf’s Up and Warner Bros.’ Happy Feet, this still needs to be done, just so Pixar can win an Oscar with it and make up for losing to Happy Feet last year. Dinosaurs - Another one to make up, this time for Disney’s bomb from 2000, Dinosaur. Also, because every non-Pixar movie needs a Pixar equivalent (Antz vs. A Bugs Life; Shrek vs. Monsters, Inc.; Shark Tale vs. Finding Nemo; Robots vs. Wall-E; etc.) and we haven’t yet seen Pixar do a prehistoric pic in response to Fox’s Ice Age franchise. Bees - If DreamWorks can do both Antz and Bee Movie, then Pixar needs another kind of bug movie, too, preferably one with flying insects. Preferably to make us forget Jerry Seinfeld’s obnoxious promotions, also. Band - I think what Brad Bird did for superhero movies (it was both the best of its kind and the best spoof of its kind) should be done for rock bands. Plus, isn’t it about time Pixar made a real musical animated feature? Fruit - Pixar’s answer to VeggieTales, or simply it’s contribution to the long tradition of animated talking foods, from the vegetable cart on Pinwheel to the singing burger in Better Off Dead. Supermarket - If fruit is too specific, here’s a more general idea: anthropomorphic grocery items, from the produce aisle to the whatever is on the opposite side of the store aisle (in my local market it’s meats). This would be a great opportunity for more product suggestion (a la Apple Computers in Wall-E and Trix cereal in Presto), or even pure, blatant product placement. Furniture - A little bit Pee-Wee’s Playhouse, a lot bit Brave Little Toaster. Basically, Pixar needs to give Luxo Jr. a feature already. Disney - Since Pixar is owned by the Walt Disney Company, and since our old friends Mickey, Minnie, Donald, Goofy and Pluto haven’t had a good movie in a long, long time, I think it only makes sense that John Lasseter should produce a computer-animated movie featuring the classic Disney gang. Past attempts to make CG versions of the characters have been disappointing, but if anyone can make it work, Lasseter can. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/What_An_Ending/Touching_Endings/343/13378/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: blakngold
Post To: What An Ending
Post Date: 7/7/2007 11:15:47 PM
Body: You know Pixar has really come out with some great films. They just played Monsters, Inc. on ABC tonight and I caught the last 10 minutes of it. The ending was perfect and very touching. It reminded me a little bit of the ending in Sideways which I loved and I think is a truly underrated comedy. The two endings both end at the door which opens to something that the two main characters both truly need. We only see the main characters on the final shot and they are looking at or about to see their future and what will bless them with true happiness. They are both bittersweet endings and will always have a place on my favorite endings!
]]>Sun, 08 Jul 2007 03:15:47 GMTblakngoldWhat An Ending7/7/2007 11:15:47 PMYou know Pixar has really come out with some great films. They just played Monsters, Inc. on ABC tonight and I caught the last 10 minutes of it. The ending was perfect and very touching. It reminded me a little bit of the ending in Sideways which I loved and I think is a truly underrated comedy. The two endings both end at the door which opens to something that the two main characters both truly need. We only see the main characters on the final shot and they are looking at or about to see their future and what will bless them with true happiness. They are both bittersweet endings and will always have a place on my favorite endings! http://www.spout.com/groups/Totally_Over_rated/Re_Your_overrated_list/170/6288/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: Totally Over-rated
Post Date: 3/12/2007 12:27:14 PM
Body: [quote user="Windbreaker"] Interesting, Riss, that your list contains some of my favorites: Collateral, Crash, Wedding Singer, Toy Story, and Gladiator. [/quote]Heh, and your list contains some of my favorites! A Clockwork Orange, Reservoir Dogs, Magnolia. And Sin City is pretty close to my top too.Would I expect these to be on any kind of best list? Well that's hard to say. A Clockwork Orange is the most likely.
]]>Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:27:14 GMTRisseladaTotally Over-rated3/12/2007 12:27:14 PM[quote user="Windbreaker"] Interesting, Riss, that your list contains some of my favorites: Collateral, Crash, Wedding Singer, Toy Story, and Gladiator. [/quote]Heh, and your list contains some of my favorites! A Clockwork Orange, Reservoir Dogs, Magnolia. And Sin City is pretty close to my top too.Would I expect these to be on any kind of best list? Well that&#39;s hard to say. A Clockwork Orange is the most likely. http://www.spout.com/groups/Totally_Over_rated/Re_Your_overrated_list/170/6261/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Windbreaker
Post To: Totally Over-rated
Post Date: 3/10/2007 12:29:33 AM
Body: Looks like the original list is getting plenty of debate. It feels like a tangent to list some of my own. I took a look at the IMDb Top 250 list and came up with the following over-rated flicks. Keep in mind, I'm not saying they're bad -- just not worthy of "Best Of" lists.American BeautyAmerican History XA Clockwork OrangeReservoir DogsSin CityV For VendettaMagnoliaMonsters, Inc.Interesting, Riss, that your list contains some of my favorites: Collateral, Crash, Wedding Singer, Toy Story, and Gladiator.
]]>Sat, 10 Mar 2007 05:29:33 GMTWindbreakerTotally Over-rated3/10/2007 12:29:33 AMLooks like the original list is getting plenty of debate. It feels like a tangent to list some of my own. I took a look at the IMDb Top 250 list and came up with the following over-rated flicks. Keep in mind, I&#39;m not saying they&#39;re bad -- just not worthy of "Best Of" lists.American BeautyAmerican History XA Clockwork OrangeReservoir DogsSin CityV For VendettaMagnoliaMonsters, Inc.Interesting, Riss, that your list contains some of my favorites: Collateral, Crash, Wedding Singer, Toy Story, and Gladiator. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/love/MemberTagFilms.aspxlove
Number of films tagged: 12477

Number of people who tagged: 336

Number of times used: 1475

]]>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:13:41 GMT124773361475Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/funny/MemberTagFilms.aspxfunny
Number of films tagged: 606

Number of people who tagged: 315

Number of times used: 939

]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:40:23 GMT606315939Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/comedy/MemberTagFilms.aspxcomedy
Number of films tagged: 1085

Number of people who tagged: 253

Number of times used: 1339

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 18:42:37 GMT10852531339Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/family/MemberTagFilms.aspxfamily
Number of films tagged: 6288

Number of people who tagged: 226

Number of times used: 1138

]]>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:09:21 GMT62882261138Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/hilarious/MemberTagFilms.aspxhilarious
Number of films tagged: 222

Number of people who tagged: 165

Number of times used: 331

]]>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:39:04 GMT222165331Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/friendship/MemberTagFilms.aspxfriendship
Number of films tagged: 6791

Number of people who tagged: 154

Number of times used: 978

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:40 GMT6791154978Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/beautiful/MemberTagFilms.aspxbeautiful
Number of films tagged: 258

Number of people who tagged: 149

Number of times used: 415

]]>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 13:42:06 GMT258149415Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/fantasy/MemberTagFilms.aspxfantasy
Number of films tagged: 1044

Number of people who tagged: 128

Number of times used: 480

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:54:25 GMT1044128480Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/cute/MemberTagFilms.aspxcute
Number of films tagged: 209

Number of people who tagged: 98

Number of times used: 313

]]>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:39:21 GMT20998313Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/children/MemberTagFilms.aspxchildren
Number of films tagged: 212

Number of people who tagged: 66

Number of times used: 270

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:28:15 GMT21266270Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/personal-classic/MemberTagFilms.aspxpersonal-classic
Number of films tagged: 180

Number of people who tagged: 64

Number of times used: 274

]]>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:21:00 GMT18064274Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/animation/MemberTagFilms.aspxanimation
Number of films tagged: 295

Number of people who tagged: 58

Number of times used: 209

]]>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 21:34:12 GMT29558209Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/original/MemberTagFilms.aspxoriginal
Number of films tagged: 77

Number of people who tagged: 52

Number of times used: 94

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 02:02:07 GMT775294Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/kidnapping/MemberTagFilms.aspxkidnapping
Number of films tagged: 2851

Number of people who tagged: 49

Number of times used: 172

]]>Sun, 16 Aug 2009 05:39:42 GMT285149172Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/monster/MemberTagFilms.aspxmonster
Number of films tagged: 1143

Number of people who tagged: 41

Number of times used: 95

]]>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:22:02 GMT11434195Tag