list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Short Circuit 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/Short_Circuit/31157/default.aspx Title: Short Circuit
Year: 1986
Director: John Badham
Plot: Struck by lightning, an endearing little robot known only as "Number 5" escapes from an experimental electronics firm. Technician Steve Guttenberg and his indecipherable East Indian assistant Fisher Stevens set out to locate Number 5 before the military can go through with its plans to destroy the robot. Number 5 takes refuge with loopy Ally Sheedy, who is convinced that the mechanical man is an extraterrestrial. Hoping to teach the "alien" all about Earth, Ally fills Number 5's memory banks with reams of pop culture--and then the real fun begins. Short Circuit is so carefully contrived to push the right audience buttons that one is made to feel ungrateful if one doesn't laugh. This E.T. wannabe was popular enough to warrant a 1988 sequel, titled (brace yourself!) Short Circuit II. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 52
Number of Lists: 31
Number of blog posts: 6
Number of discussion threads: 5
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Sun, 10 May 2009 20:47:40 GMTShort Circuit1986John BadhamStruck by lightning, an endearing little robot known only as "Number 5" escapes from an experimental electronics firm. Technician <a href="/players/P____29352/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Steve Guttenberg</a> and his indecipherable East Indian assistant <a href="/players/P____68124/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Fisher Stevens</a> set out to locate Number 5 before the military can go through with its plans to destroy the robot. Number 5 takes refuge with loopy <a href="/players/P____65029/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Ally Sheedy</a>, who is convinced that the mechanical man is an extraterrestrial. Hoping to teach the "alien" all about Earth, Ally fills Number 5's memory banks with reams of pop culture--and then the real fun begins. Short Circuit is so carefully contrived to push the right audience buttons that one is made to feel ungrateful if one doesn't laugh. This E.T. wannabe was popular enough to warrant a 1988 sequel, titled (brace yourself!) Short Circuit II. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide52Tag Target (>10)31653http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t63733h08wv.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Short_Circuit/31157/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/3/10/40945.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/10/2009 6:01:08 PM
Body: If you buy the kids only one new video release this week, make it Pinocchio. Obviously. But if you have enough spending money to buy two, pick up Howard the Duck as well. Finally on DVD in America (with a Special Edition no less), the infamous flop is anything but a great film. Yet it is hardly one of the worst films of the 1980s, despite its reputation. For the past 23 years, I’ve stood by my childhood love for Howard the Duck, constantly acknowledging that I even owned Ellis Weiner’s novelization of the film. Technically, the best reason to defend the movie’s existence is that it directly led to the creation of Pixar. But this reason doesn’t influence anyone to watch the thing. So, in order to defend the movie’s onscreen worth, I’ve come up with ten points for why you should pick up the new Howard the Duck disc and not feel at all guilty about doing so. 1. It’s No Longer the Worst Lucasfilm Production Take your pick — there’s The Phantom Menace or there’s Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, either of which could certainly take the prize for being the worst movie to come from George Lucas in his 40 years producing films. Well, maybe not worse than More American Graffiti. But both films were far bigger creative and franchise disappointments than Howard the Duck (financial success is another story, of course), and so they have a relative sort of wretchedness that places them in the bottom of Lucas’ Sarlacc pit of a career. Even if you’re one of those defend-to-the-end Star Wars fanboys who will argue the pros of Menace, at least then consider Willow to be worse than Howard the Duck. The blatant Lord of the Rings rip-off has its historical relevance, but looking back on it now, it’s even more dated than Howard. And regardless of how groundbreaking it was, Willow’s visual effects don’t hold up quite as well as Howard’s old-fashioned, and oft-celebrated craftsmanship. But that’s another point… 2.  The Special Effects Are Technically Brilliant Those of us who prefer go-motion and other non-CGI effects work will always pay respect to ILM’s achievements on Howard the Duck, particularly their efforts with the Dark Overlord creature in the movie’s final act. People unfortunately tend to focus on the $2 million duck suit (see point #3), but even then Howard didn’t deserve its Razzie for Worst Visual Effects. To compare it to digital creatures, the monster would fit in just fine in either of the Men in Black movies. And for its own time, it was a magnificent creation. So it existed alongside a silly costumed creature in an overpriced B-movie, it still deserved an Oscar nomination for F/X in 1987, a year the Academy recognized Little Shop of Horrors and Poltergeist II: The Other Side (and incomparable winner Aliens). 3. The Duck Suit is Still Better Than Most CGI Those of us who grew up with Muppets, Chewbacca and other non-computer-generated fantasy creatures had no problem with Howard the Duck’s titular fowl being represented as a dwarf in a duck suit. The issue with the effect, though, is that allegedly Lucas had wanted Howard to be a CG creation, but the technology just wasn’t there yet. So, costumes and robotics, all of which reportedly cost $2 million, were viewed as a relative disappointment. But think of how few great CG characters there have been in the past 20 years, and then seriously attempt to argue that Howard would have been any better if made in the years of CGI supremacy. Now, also remember that 1986 was a year that gave us fine puppetry, costumed dwarfs and robotics like that found in Labyrinth (also a Lucasfilm production), Little Shop of Horrors, Legend, Short Circuit, Flight of the Navigator, Troll (sure, why not?) and, yes, Howard the Duck. So really, the only thing disappointing about the duck suit is that it doesn’t really look like the comic book character upon which it’s based. Of course, it’s not likely that a CG version of Howard would have been any more faithful. 4. Parallels, Puns and Playful Philosophy Some fans of the original Howard the Duck comics could argue that the duck suit is hardly the worst offense of unfaithfulness. Other complaints might be the alteration of Beverly’s career or the occasional sacrifice of the comic’s tone in order to pander to younger audiences. But real sticklers may take issue with Howard’s origin, the inclusion of Duckworld (which did come from the comics but wasn’t Howard creator Steve Gerber’s idea of what the character’s home world was like) and the punny parallels that came with it. Yet for those of us who love corny jokes and puns, the idea of an alternate world where everything’s the same, just with descendants of ducks rather than apes, is a lot of fun. It’s the same appreciation that allowed me to enjoy the ska scene and the similarly parallel worlds of The Flintstones and Dinosaurs and the parodies in MAD Magazine. In the first few minutes, we get treated to the following cheesy but delicious sight and audio gags: a Rolling Egg magazine, a Playduck magazine, movie posters for “Splahsdance,” “Breeders of the Lost Stork” and My Little Chickadee (starring W.C. Fowls and Mae Nest), and commercials for feather fungus treatment and the Crazy Eddie spoof “Crazy Webby.” This, plus the opening credit narration and theory of Duckworld evolution were enjoyable to a kid in the midst of learning about Darwin and pondering the existence of alternate worlds. 5. Jeffrey Jones as Dr. Jenning/Dark Overlord Between Howard the Duck and Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, Jeffrey Jones was one of the biggest and best villains of the summer of ‘86. For kids, anyway. But even adults recognized the quality of Jones’ performance in Howard, as Dr. Jenning, the scientist who becomes possessed by the Dark Overlord. To cult audiences, he may have seemed like just another Dr. Lizardo/Lord Worfin (of The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension), but while John Lithgow was fine and nutty, Jones is much creepier and much, much more evil, even when he finds time to be deadpan hilarious during the greatest scene in the film, in the “cajun sushi” diner. 6. The Diner Scene Although it’s mostly thanks to Jones that this scene is so memorable, it’s not just his performance alone that makes it so terrific. Every time I watch the movie, I look forward to the entire episode, from Jones/Jenning/Dark Overlord’s exposition to the waitress’ interactions with the “family” to Howard’s pie and quack-fu fight with a bunch of rednecks. And I will always recommend the movie for this scene alone. It includes a lot of disturbing elements, such as Beverly’s claim that she’s Howard’s girlfriend and the angry mob’s desire to kill and cook a talking duck man, that might have worked better had Howard been represented as an animated character rather than a guy in a suit (bestiality and homicide is just fine in Who Framed Roger Rabbit? and Looney Tunes cartoons), but it’s also one of the weirdest and funniest scenes from any comic book adaptation ever. 7. Lea Thompson as Beverly Switzler I would go so far as to argue that Lea Thompson’s crimped-haired Beverly is the hottest female comic book character come to (cinematic) life, but that is certainly subjective. Plenty of people probably prefer Kirsten Dunst, Halle Berry, Jennifer Garner, Michelle Pfeiffer, Pamela Anderson or even Margot Kidder. But Thompson is definitely in there as one of the greatest physical incarnations of a comic book femme d’ fantasy, and the scene where she goes to bed with Howard wearing barely a bit of lingerie (as creepy as the scene is infamous for being) is up there with Dunst’s wet tshirt/upside-down kiss in Spider-Man and any of Pfeiffer’s bondage-bound Catwoman scenes in Batman Returns as one of the hottest moments from any comic book adaptation ever. 8. Cherry Bomb and the Howard the Duck soundtrack Beverly may not have been a rocker in the comics, but this was the 1980s, and you had to have a great synthpop soundtrack, so the character was given a change in career as the leader of a Runaways-inspired band called Cherry Bomb. And for having beaten out more musical contenders for the role, including The Go-Go’s Belinda Carlisle and Tori Amos (then of Y Can’t Tori Read), Lea Thompson does quite well singing such catchy tunes as “Howard the Duck” and “Hunger City.” Cherry Bomb’s music also had some help from Thomas Dolby, George Clinton, Joe Walsh and Stevie Wonder. As for the rest of the soundtrack, Oscar-winning composer John Barry (Out of Africa; the James Bond films) contributes a very fine score. 9. It’s For Kids Because everyone always defends the Star Wars prequels as being for kids, as if that’s really an excuse for faulty filmmaking, I’m going to do the same here. But to do that, I guess I have to also defend the idea that it is indeed a movie for kids. Watching the thing, it’s hard to tell, because there is a lot of content and humor that only adults can or should appreciate, and certainly one of the biggest criticisms with the movie is it’s fluctuations between wanting to be a biting, sarcastic comic book adaptation for older audiences and fans of the source and needing to be a silly movie for kids. But for all the duck nudity, sexuality and other material better suited to mature audiences, there’s not really anything harmful to a kid, and there’s millions of us ‘80s children who grew up okay to prove it. So, while you adults may not be able to enjoy Howard the Duck anymore, even as a nostalgic artifact, your kids will probably like it as much as you used to. 10. It’s Not Redundant Unlike some comic book adaptations, Howard the Duck isn’t a straight lift from the pages of the source material, and it’s better off for it. Some fans of the comic may be annoyed with Howard’s appearance or Beverly’s occupation or the absence of any of Howard’s usual foes, but those of us who saw the movie first can appreciate the differences, because these allow for a better introduction to and curiosity about the comic. In a way, it’s to the original Marvel series as The Incredibles is to the graphic novel of Watchmen (though it’s certainly not anywhere near as smart nor well-crafted as The Incredibles). Now, if you still aren’t sure whether or not you should get the DVD, watch some (or all) of the movie on Hulu: Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:01:08 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com3/10/2009 6:01:08 PMIf you buy the kids only one new video release this week, make it Pinocchio. Obviously. But if you have enough spending money to buy two, pick up Howard the Duck as well. Finally on DVD in America (with a Special Edition no less), the infamous flop is anything but a great film. Yet it is hardly one of the worst films of the 1980s, despite its reputation. For the past 23 years, I’ve stood by my childhood love for Howard the Duck, constantly acknowledging that I even owned Ellis Weiner’s novelization of the film. Technically, the best reason to defend the movie’s existence is that it directly led to the creation of Pixar. But this reason doesn’t influence anyone to watch the thing. So, in order to defend the movie’s onscreen worth, I’ve come up with ten points for why you should pick up the new Howard the Duck disc and not feel at all guilty about doing so. 1. It’s No Longer the Worst Lucasfilm Production Take your pick — there’s The Phantom Menace or there’s Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, either of which could certainly take the prize for being the worst movie to come from George Lucas in his 40 years producing films. Well, maybe not worse than More American Graffiti. But both films were far bigger creative and franchise disappointments than Howard the Duck (financial success is another story, of course), and so they have a relative sort of wretchedness that places them in the bottom of Lucas’ Sarlacc pit of a career. Even if you’re one of those defend-to-the-end Star Wars fanboys who will argue the pros of Menace, at least then consider Willow to be worse than Howard the Duck. The blatant Lord of the Rings rip-off has its historical relevance, but looking back on it now, it’s even more dated than Howard. And regardless of how groundbreaking it was, Willow’s visual effects don’t hold up quite as well as Howard’s old-fashioned, and oft-celebrated craftsmanship. But that’s another point… 2.  The Special Effects Are Technically Brilliant Those of us who prefer go-motion and other non-CGI effects work will always pay respect to ILM’s achievements on Howard the Duck, particularly their efforts with the Dark Overlord creature in the movie’s final act. People unfortunately tend to focus on the $2 million duck suit (see point #3), but even then Howard didn’t deserve its Razzie for Worst Visual Effects. To compare it to digital creatures, the monster would fit in just fine in either of the Men in Black movies. And for its own time, it was a magnificent creation. So it existed alongside a silly costumed creature in an overpriced B-movie, it still deserved an Oscar nomination for F/X in 1987, a year the Academy recognized Little Shop of Horrors and Poltergeist II: The Other Side (and incomparable winner Aliens). 3. The Duck Suit is Still Better Than Most CGI Those of us who grew up with Muppets, Chewbacca and other non-computer-generated fantasy creatures had no problem with Howard the Duck’s titular fowl being represented as a dwarf in a duck suit. The issue with the effect, though, is that allegedly Lucas had wanted Howard to be a CG creation, but the technology just wasn’t there yet. So, costumes and robotics, all of which reportedly cost $2 million, were viewed as a relative disappointment. But think of how few great CG characters there have been in the past 20 years, and then seriously attempt to argue that Howard would have been any better if made in the years of CGI supremacy. Now, also remember that 1986 was a year that gave us fine puppetry, costumed dwarfs and robotics like that found in Labyrinth (also a Lucasfilm production), Little Shop of Horrors, Legend, Short Circuit, Flight of the Navigator, Troll (sure, why not?) and, yes, Howard the Duck. So really, the only thing disappointing about the duck suit is that it doesn’t really look like the comic book character upon which it’s based. Of course, it’s not likely that a CG version of Howard would have been any more faithful. 4. Parallels, Puns and Playful Philosophy Some fans of the original Howard the Duck comics could argue that the duck suit is hardly the worst offense of unfaithfulness. Other complaints might be the alteration of Beverly’s career or the occasional sacrifice of the comic’s tone in order to pander to younger audiences. But real sticklers may take issue with Howard’s origin, the inclusion of Duckworld (which did come from the comics but wasn’t Howard creator Steve Gerber’s idea of what the character’s home world was like) and the punny parallels that came with it. Yet for those of us who love corny jokes and puns, the idea of an alternate world where everything’s the same, just with descendants of ducks rather than apes, is a lot of fun. It’s the same appreciation that allowed me to enjoy the ska scene and the similarly parallel worlds of The Flintstones and Dinosaurs and the parodies in MAD Magazine. In the first few minutes, we get treated to the following cheesy but delicious sight and audio gags: a Rolling Egg magazine, a Playduck magazine, movie posters for “Splahsdance,” “Breeders of the Lost Stork” and My Little Chickadee (starring W.C. Fowls and Mae Nest), and commercials for feather fungus treatment and the Crazy Eddie spoof “Crazy Webby.” This, plus the opening credit narration and theory of Duckworld evolution were enjoyable to a kid in the midst of learning about Darwin and pondering the existence of alternate worlds. 5. Jeffrey Jones as Dr. Jenning/Dark Overlord Between Howard the Duck and Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, Jeffrey Jones was one of the biggest and best villains of the summer of ‘86. For kids, anyway. But even adults recognized the quality of Jones’ performance in Howard, as Dr. Jenning, the scientist who becomes possessed by the Dark Overlord. To cult audiences, he may have seemed like just another Dr. Lizardo/Lord Worfin (of The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension), but while John Lithgow was fine and nutty, Jones is much creepier and much, much more evil, even when he finds time to be deadpan hilarious during the greatest scene in the film, in the “cajun sushi” diner. 6. The Diner Scene Although it’s mostly thanks to Jones that this scene is so memorable, it’s not just his performance alone that makes it so terrific. Every time I watch the movie, I look forward to the entire episode, from Jones/Jenning/Dark Overlord’s exposition to the waitress’ interactions with the “family” to Howard’s pie and quack-fu fight with a bunch of rednecks. And I will always recommend the movie for this scene alone. It includes a lot of disturbing elements, such as Beverly’s claim that she’s Howard’s girlfriend and the angry mob’s desire to kill and cook a talking duck man, that might have worked better had Howard been represented as an animated character rather than a guy in a suit (bestiality and homicide is just fine in Who Framed Roger Rabbit? and Looney Tunes cartoons), but it’s also one of the weirdest and funniest scenes from any comic book adaptation ever. 7. Lea Thompson as Beverly Switzler I would go so far as to argue that Lea Thompson’s crimped-haired Beverly is the hottest female comic book character come to (cinematic) life, but that is certainly subjective. Plenty of people probably prefer Kirsten Dunst, Halle Berry, Jennifer Garner, Michelle Pfeiffer, Pamela Anderson or even Margot Kidder. But Thompson is definitely in there as one of the greatest physical incarnations of a comic book femme d’ fantasy, and the scene where she goes to bed with Howard wearing barely a bit of lingerie (as creepy as the scene is infamous for being) is up there with Dunst’s wet tshirt/upside-down kiss in Spider-Man and any of Pfeiffer’s bondage-bound Catwoman scenes in Batman Returns as one of the hottest moments from any comic book adaptation ever. 8. Cherry Bomb and the Howard the Duck soundtrack Beverly may not have been a rocker in the comics, but this was the 1980s, and you had to have a great synthpop soundtrack, so the character was given a change in career as the leader of a Runaways-inspired band called Cherry Bomb. And for having beaten out more musical contenders for the role, including The Go-Go’s Belinda Carlisle and Tori Amos (then of Y Can’t Tori Read), Lea Thompson does quite well singing such catchy tunes as “Howard the Duck” and “Hunger City.” Cherry Bomb’s music also had some help from Thomas Dolby, George Clinton, Joe Walsh and Stevie Wonder. As for the rest of the soundtrack, Oscar-winning composer John Barry (Out of Africa; the James Bond films) contributes a very fine score. 9. It’s For Kids Because everyone always defends the Star Wars prequels as being for kids, as if that’s really an excuse for faulty filmmaking, I’m going to do the same here. But to do that, I guess I have to also defend the idea that it is indeed a movie for kids. Watching the thing, it’s hard to tell, because there is a lot of content and humor that only adults can or should appreciate, and certainly one of the biggest criticisms with the movie is it’s fluctuations between wanting to be a biting, sarcastic comic book adaptation for older audiences and fans of the source and needing to be a silly movie for kids. But for all the duck nudity, sexuality and other material better suited to mature audiences, there’s not really anything harmful to a kid, and there’s millions of us ‘80s children who grew up okay to prove it. So, while you adults may not be able to enjoy Howard the Duck anymore, even as a nostalgic artifact, your kids will probably like it as much as you used to. 10. It’s Not Redundant Unlike some comic book adaptations, Howard the Duck isn’t a straight lift from the pages of the source material, and it’s better off for it. Some fans of the comic may be annoyed with Howard’s appearance or Beverly’s occupation or the absence of any of Howard’s usual foes, but those of us who saw the movie first can appreciate the differences, because these allow for a better introduction to and curiosity about the comic. In a way, it’s to the original Marvel series as The Incredibles is to the graphic novel of Watchmen (though it’s certainly not anywhere near as smart nor well-crafted as The Incredibles). Now, if you still aren’t sure whether or not you should get the DVD, watch some (or all) of the movie on Hulu: Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/11/18/37417.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 11/18/2008 6:00:57 PM
Body: It’s no secret that I have a soft spot for all things science fiction-related, and when it involves robots of any kind (the odd exception being the actual movie Robots, which I avoided like the plague) then I’m in like Flynn. The more non-human looking the robot, the more I’ll love it. (Which is probably why Disney’s own The Black Hole has some of the coolest movie robots in it. V.I.N.C.E.N.T.? Maximillian? Great stuff. Where’s my Blu-ray, Disney?) One of the movies this past year that actually got me into the theaters more than once was Disney/Pixar’s WALL•E, which comes out on DVD today. They’ve added a ton of special features to the film, especially (of course) if you buy the three-disc special edition, which includes a digital copy of the movie that you can toss on your iPhone, laptop, digital watch, toaster oven, or shaving mirror. Despite the fact that director Andrew Stanton says WALL•E has “no environmental message” whatsoever, it’s a bit ironic that on the commentary track he starts out by explaining that in the development process they wondered what would happen if so much trash piled up that humans had to leave the earth in order to clean it up. Sounds environmental enough to me. Luckily, the fact that Stanton continues to insist there’s no underlying meaning, and that he never made the connection between WALL•E and Johnny 5 from Short Circuit hasn’t detracted from my enjoyment of the film. Pixar decided to revisit the WALL•E universe by creating a short film using new animation and some recycled footage. The idea was that it would be a nifty little special feature for the DVD, which it is, but it makes me yearn for a sequel to WALL•E — which is a sign of Disney’s marketing magic at work. The short film is BURN•E, and I got the chance to see a little early and to talk with the director of the short, Angus MacLean. The DVD also includes the short magician vs. rabbit film Presto, and these two shorts alone are worth the price you’ll pay for this robotic wonder. Check out our interview with MacLean below the jump. Is there any Pixar film that you would have loved to work on, but didn’t get the chance to? I would have loved t o have worked on the original Toy Story which is the only Pixar feature that I was not involved in. I also wish that I could have worked on some of those Listerine commercials. I noticed that BURN•E does a fist-pump when he cuts through the door. What gave you the idea to include that? That is a bit of an inside joke. Brad Bird’s pet peeve is the movie cliche’ where a character does that fist-pump an says “YESSSS!” I think that I put that joke in just to irritate him. I think there is an easter egg on the Rataouille DVD that explains this. So if you watch that before you see BURN•E, the short will be 34% funnier. So when will we get to see BURN•E in Lego like you did with WALL•E? I designed a Lego BURN•E as a crew gift as a thank you for the hard work. I ordered the pieces, made custom decals and instructions and hand packaged each of the sets. If there is interest, I will post a picture on Flickr soon. WALL•E stands for Waste Allocation Load Lifter, Earth class. What does BURN•E stand for? BURN•E stands for: Basic Utility Repair Nano Engineer. I have since heard from some people that it actually be BURN•A because the “E” in WALL•E stands for “Earth-Class” and the “A” would be the appropriate “Axiom-Class”. Now I could argue that maybe BURN•E was a robot on earth that then was installed on the Axiom, but A: I would be lying and B: What is the point? If that is the biggest problem you have with the film, then I have done my job. Now put yourself i my shoes- you have to name this robot. The name BURN•E is funny and breaks the continuity of the film or BURN•A which is more accurate to the feature and is not funny at all. Which would you choose? I thought so. I do love that geeks pick up on this and I am happy to be creating this controversy. I’d probably do the same thing were I not involved. How much of an animated film is software and how much is the result of an “artist’s” vision and his/her ability to bring that vision to life? What role does software play in the pricess? Is it a mere tool, like, say, video editing software, or does it allow animators to do things they could not do with ink and paper? WALL•E was mostly created by a computer robot we have here at Pixar called the EntertainmentBot 3000. Nah, the computer is just a big, dumb pencil. Why’d you decide to give BURN•E of all the characters in WALL•E his own short? A.M.: I thought he was a fun character to animate. After I had animated the shot with him in the feature I wanted to know what happened to him. I wanted to answer that question with this short. How hard was it to think of a name that sounded like a robot but was a pun for a human name (Bernie)? His name internally had been “Repair Bot” When I started the short, I envisioned him as being called WELD•R. About two days later Jim Reardon, the head of WALL•E Story handed me a drawing he had done of the word BURN•E burned into metal. After that there was no going back. Q: Is it harder to do an animated film with little dialogue? Does it put more pressure on the animation to do the talking? Because of this, was WALL•E harder character to create than some of your others? It’s not harder to animate, but it is way more work in the story board process. At what point during the development of WALL•E did you start planning the story of BURN•E? Did they construct any plot points in the feature to facilitate the short, or vice versa? I came up with and started boarding the short approximately 5 months before WALL•E was completed. However, no plot points were changed in the feature to make the short work. There were things that were changed in that one shot in WALL•E that featured BURN•E after it had been finished. The light spire that he welds was not originally in the shot. How did you go about choosing scenes from WALL•E that BURN•E could impact? Did you have to scrap any ideas that just wouldn’t fit with the existing story? I came up with as many places in the movie as I could think of to cut back to. We cut whatever wasn’t funny or slowed the pace down. Oddly enough the scene from the feature that sparked the original idea for BURN•E was cut from the feature. The scene is too complicated to explain. Maybe that’s why it never made it. Having been the directing animator on WALL•E, what did that involve? The Directing Animator’s job is to help the other animators keep their animation on model so that the acting and movement are consistent for each of the characters over the entire film. They work to be both a surrogate voice of the Director when he/she is available, and also offer acting and performance suggestions. Directing Animators also help to define the motion and character of the main characters in the film. The Directing Animator reports directly to the Supervising Animators. On WALL•E (as well as The Incredibles) I worked under the Supervision Animators Alan Barillaro and Steven Hunter. They interface more with the production staff about the direction and management of the WALL•E animation department. They also serve as both a surrogate voice of the Director and also offer acting and performance suggestions as well. Time permitting, Supervising Animators will also help to define the motion and character of the main characters in the film. How did you get selected to direct BURN•E? Now that you’ve done it, what would you do differently? I think it was opportunity met with preparation. Andrew liked the idea of the DVD short being about BURN•E. He encouraged me to storyboard the film. After the story was approved, Andrew asked if I would be interested. What do you think was the hardest thing to get right in the short? There was a lot of difficult shots to pull off in this film. From a technical perspective, the shot with WALL•E touching Saturn’s rings that transitions into the pebble meteor was the hardest to pull off. The Effects Supervisor, Bill Watral did a fabulous job stitching the shot from the film and a bunch of new elements that were on a literally planetary scale. On the performance side, the shot where SUPPLY•R drops the light on the ground was the trickiest to get right. There was something in the boards that was really funny that was extremely difficult to capture. BURN•E has a very “Pixar” feel to it as an animated short. What is it about repetitive failure (Lifted, One Man Band, and now BURN•E) that is so funny? Humor usually comes about when result doesn’t match the expectation. If everything in an characters’ life goes well it’s hard to relate to and probably not as funny. Where do you actually start on design with so many different kinds of robots? In the WALL•E universe most of the robots are designed and built around the idea of function first, character second. With the character of WALL•E we figured out his motion as a trash compactor first. After that had been firmly established we then worked on how to define his character based on the limitations of him being a trash compactor Are there any easter eggs we should watch out for? There are a few small nods here and there to various sci-fi properties. I won’t go through all of them, but I will mention that there is a graphic on the elevator inside the Axiom that reads “ELV 426″ indicating that this is elevator number four hundred and twenty-six. This is of course (pushing my glasses up on my nose) a reference to LV-426 the planet that is the setting of the movie Alien and Aliens. How hard was it to get the right type of emotion out of a robot? It is always our goal as animators to make our work clearly communicate the thought process of the characters to the audience. It was particularly challenging for us on BURN•E as well as WALL•E because of the limited nature of the designs and the lack of dialogue. Both characters limited designs are are appealing, but more work must be done in the story process to communicate his intentions. WIth BURN•E and with WALL•E, if the audience can’t tell what the character is thinking or what is going on, then they lose interest very quickly. Disney / Pixar’s WALL•E Special Edition includes a ton of special features, like the excellent The Pixar Story documentary, directed by Leslie Iwerks (it’s been on cable a lot recently), the two mentioned short films, deleted scenes, and a lot more stuff. If you pick up the Blu-ray edition (highly recommended) you’ll get arcade games, fly-throughs of the set, a geek track by some of the crazy kids at Pixar, and a kitchen sink. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 18 Nov 2008 23:00:57 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com11/18/2008 6:00:57 PM It’s no secret that I have a soft spot for all things science fiction-related, and when it involves robots of any kind (the odd exception being the actual movie Robots, which I avoided like the plague) then I’m in like Flynn. The more non-human looking the robot, the more I’ll love it. (Which is probably why Disney’s own The Black Hole has some of the coolest movie robots in it. V.I.N.C.E.N.T.? Maximillian? Great stuff. Where’s my Blu-ray, Disney?) One of the movies this past year that actually got me into the theaters more than once was Disney/Pixar’s WALL•E, which comes out on DVD today. They’ve added a ton of special features to the film, especially (of course) if you buy the three-disc special edition, which includes a digital copy of the movie that you can toss on your iPhone, laptop, digital watch, toaster oven, or shaving mirror. Despite the fact that director Andrew Stanton says WALL•E has “no environmental message” whatsoever, it’s a bit ironic that on the commentary track he starts out by explaining that in the development process they wondered what would happen if so much trash piled up that humans had to leave the earth in order to clean it up. Sounds environmental enough to me. Luckily, the fact that Stanton continues to insist there’s no underlying meaning, and that he never made the connection between WALL•E and Johnny 5 from Short Circuit hasn’t detracted from my enjoyment of the film. Pixar decided to revisit the WALL•E universe by creating a short film using new animation and some recycled footage. The idea was that it would be a nifty little special feature for the DVD, which it is, but it makes me yearn for a sequel to WALL•E — which is a sign of Disney’s marketing magic at work. The short film is BURN•E, and I got the chance to see a little early and to talk with the director of the short, Angus MacLean. The DVD also includes the short magician vs. rabbit film Presto, and these two shorts alone are worth the price you’ll pay for this robotic wonder. Check out our interview with MacLean below the jump. Is there any Pixar film that you would have loved to work on, but didn’t get the chance to? I would have loved t o have worked on the original Toy Story which is the only Pixar feature that I was not involved in. I also wish that I could have worked on some of those Listerine commercials. I noticed that BURN•E does a fist-pump when he cuts through the door. What gave you the idea to include that? That is a bit of an inside joke. Brad Bird’s pet peeve is the movie cliche’ where a character does that fist-pump an says “YESSSS!” I think that I put that joke in just to irritate him. I think there is an easter egg on the Rataouille DVD that explains this. So if you watch that before you see BURN•E, the short will be 34% funnier. So when will we get to see BURN•E in Lego like you did with WALL•E? I designed a Lego BURN•E as a crew gift as a thank you for the hard work. I ordered the pieces, made custom decals and instructions and hand packaged each of the sets. If there is interest, I will post a picture on Flickr soon. WALL•E stands for Waste Allocation Load Lifter, Earth class. What does BURN•E stand for? BURN•E stands for: Basic Utility Repair Nano Engineer. I have since heard from some people that it actually be BURN•A because the “E” in WALL•E stands for “Earth-Class” and the “A” would be the appropriate “Axiom-Class”. Now I could argue that maybe BURN•E was a robot on earth that then was installed on the Axiom, but A: I would be lying and B: What is the point? If that is the biggest problem you have with the film, then I have done my job. Now put yourself i my shoes- you have to name this robot. The name BURN•E is funny and breaks the continuity of the film or BURN•A which is more accurate to the feature and is not funny at all. Which would you choose? I thought so. I do love that geeks pick up on this and I am happy to be creating this controversy. I’d probably do the same thing were I not involved. How much of an animated film is software and how much is the result of an “artist’s” vision and his/her ability to bring that vision to life? What role does software play in the pricess? Is it a mere tool, like, say, video editing software, or does it allow animators to do things they could not do with ink and paper? WALL•E was mostly created by a computer robot we have here at Pixar called the EntertainmentBot 3000. Nah, the computer is just a big, dumb pencil. Why’d you decide to give BURN•E of all the characters in WALL•E his own short? A.M.: I thought he was a fun character to animate. After I had animated the shot with him in the feature I wanted to know what happened to him. I wanted to answer that question with this short. How hard was it to think of a name that sounded like a robot but was a pun for a human name (Bernie)? His name internally had been “Repair Bot” When I started the short, I envisioned him as being called WELD•R. About two days later Jim Reardon, the head of WALL•E Story handed me a drawing he had done of the word BURN•E burned into metal. After that there was no going back. Q: Is it harder to do an animated film with little dialogue? Does it put more pressure on the animation to do the talking? Because of this, was WALL•E harder character to create than some of your others? It’s not harder to animate, but it is way more work in the story board process. At what point during the development of WALL•E did you start planning the story of BURN•E? Did they construct any plot points in the feature to facilitate the short, or vice versa? I came up with and started boarding the short approximately 5 months before WALL•E was completed. However, no plot points were changed in the feature to make the short work. There were things that were changed in that one shot in WALL•E that featured BURN•E after it had been finished. The light spire that he welds was not originally in the shot. How did you go about choosing scenes from WALL•E that BURN•E could impact? Did you have to scrap any ideas that just wouldn’t fit with the existing story? I came up with as many places in the movie as I could think of to cut back to. We cut whatever wasn’t funny or slowed the pace down. Oddly enough the scene from the feature that sparked the original idea for BURN•E was cut from the feature. The scene is too complicated to explain. Maybe that’s why it never made it. Having been the directing animator on WALL•E, what did that involve? The Directing Animator’s job is to help the other animators keep their animation on model so that the acting and movement are consistent for each of the characters over the entire film. They work to be both a surrogate voice of the Director when he/she is available, and also offer acting and performance suggestions. Directing Animators also help to define the motion and character of the main characters in the film. The Directing Animator reports directly to the Supervising Animators. On WALL•E (as well as The Incredibles) I worked under the Supervision Animators Alan Barillaro and Steven Hunter. They interface more with the production staff about the direction and management of the WALL•E animation department. They also serve as both a surrogate voice of the Director and also offer acting and performance suggestions as well. Time permitting, Supervising Animators will also help to define the motion and character of the main characters in the film. How did you get selected to direct BURN•E? Now that you’ve done it, what would you do differently? I think it was opportunity met with preparation. Andrew liked the idea of the DVD short being about BURN•E. He encouraged me to storyboard the film. After the story was approved, Andrew asked if I would be interested. What do you think was the hardest thing to get right in the short? There was a lot of difficult shots to pull off in this film. From a technical perspective, the shot with WALL•E touching Saturn’s rings that transitions into the pebble meteor was the hardest to pull off. The Effects Supervisor, Bill Watral did a fabulous job stitching the shot from the film and a bunch of new elements that were on a literally planetary scale. On the performance side, the shot where SUPPLY•R drops the light on the ground was the trickiest to get right. There was something in the boards that was really funny that was extremely difficult to capture. BURN•E has a very “Pixar” feel to it as an animated short. What is it about repetitive failure (Lifted, One Man Band, and now BURN•E) that is so funny? Humor usually comes about when result doesn’t match the expectation. If everything in an characters’ life goes well it’s hard to relate to and probably not as funny. Where do you actually start on design with so many different kinds of robots? In the WALL•E universe most of the robots are designed and built around the idea of function first, character second. With the character of WALL•E we figured out his motion as a trash compactor first. After that had been firmly established we then worked on how to define his character based on the limitations of him being a trash compactor Are there any easter eggs we should watch out for? There are a few small nods here and there to various sci-fi properties. I won’t go through all of them, but I will mention that there is a graphic on the elevator inside the Axiom that reads “ELV 426″ indicating that this is elevator number four hundred and twenty-six. This is of course (pushing my glasses up on my nose) a reference to LV-426 the planet that is the setting of the movie Alien and Aliens. How hard was it to get the right type of emotion out of a robot? It is always our goal as animators to make our work clearly communicate the thought process of the characters to the audience. It was particularly challenging for us on BURN•E as well as WALL•E because of the limited nature of the designs and the lack of dialogue. Both characters limited designs are are appealing, but more work must be done in the story process to communicate his intentions. WIth BURN•E and with WALL•E, if the audience can’t tell what the character is thinking or what is going on, then they lose interest very quickly. Disney / Pixar’s WALL•E Special Edition includes a ton of special features, like the excellent The Pixar Story documentary, directed by Leslie Iwerks (it’s been on cable a lot recently), the two mentioned short films, deleted scenes, and a lot more stuff. If you pick up the Blu-ray edition (highly recommended) you’ll get arcade games, fly-throughs of the set, a geek track by some of the crazy kids at Pixar, and a kitchen sink. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/I_Love_Childrens_Movies/Re_Wall_e/372/37379/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: csprague
Post To: I Love Childrens Movies
Post Date: 11/17/2008 4:16:25 PM
Body: [quote user="TheWorkingDead"] Well, Abby(or Indie? How would you like your name shortened for convenience?), I have to say that I was excited about Wall-E from the start. Something about that early trailer, and the way he said his name, it gave me a chill. But, I've also learned to just trust Pixar. I stayed away from Cars in the theatre because it looked kinda dumb, and I have an intense dislike of Larry the Cable Guy. And yet on video I thought it was sweet and funny, and obviously made with love. Probably the slightest of their films, but still great. And Wall-E. Wow. I think I say, about every Pixar movie, that it's the greatest, so expect me to be saying this again next year, but Wall-E knocked my socks off. I loved every damn minute of it. Forget the animation(which blew me away at parts), and forget that Wall-E looks like Johnny 5(which is excusable, because it's a pretty convenient design for emoting), the story and artistry and experimentalism were miles beyond what we normally expect in our summer movie fare, let alone kids movies. What other kids movie(these days) would completely ignore dialogue for the majority of it, or spend several minutes on a slow, beautiful dance in space? Or throw in live action bits and old musical scenes? Also, I think Pixar just brings out the kid in me. And I feel like such a baby, because I almost always cry(or get misty, in a manly sort of way) at these films. The scene that broke my heart was when Wall-E first gets into space, and knocks on the ship window to get EVE's attention and show her the stars. A perfect summation of the film; Hopeful, wondrous, heartbreaking and beautiful. (I know this is hyperbole filled, but so what, I loved the movie) [/quote] I am a little behind on seeing this film and a little behind on this discussion, but I can't help but respond in complete agreement. I love this movie! Wall-e is this insanely/mind-numbingly adorable cross between R2D2 and the robot in Short Circuit. I think they did a lot of things well in this movie, the animation, the music, and the story line. But really I think it was made even better by it's lack of verbal dialogue. When you don't have the option of words you have to do a really good job with body language and movement. They did a fabulous job with the comedy and the emotional atmosphere. I laughed a lot more than i expected, and I was surprisingly moved by Wall-E's romantic attachment to Eve. All they ever said were each other's names, but everything was in how they said it. It was so great. I can't wait to watch it again.
]]>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 21:16:25 GMTcspragueI Love Childrens Movies11/17/2008 4:16:25 PM[quote user="TheWorkingDead"] Well, Abby(or Indie? How would you like your name shortened for convenience?), I have to say that I was excited about Wall-E from the start. Something about that early trailer, and the way he said his name, it gave me a chill. But, I've also learned to just trust Pixar. I stayed away from Cars in the theatre because it looked kinda dumb, and I have an intense dislike of Larry the Cable Guy. And yet on video I thought it was sweet and funny, and obviously made with love. Probably the slightest of their films, but still great. And Wall-E. Wow. I think I say, about every Pixar movie, that it's the greatest, so expect me to be saying this again next year, but Wall-E knocked my socks off. I loved every damn minute of it. Forget the animation(which blew me away at parts), and forget that Wall-E looks like Johnny 5(which is excusable, because it's a pretty convenient design for emoting), the story and artistry and experimentalism were miles beyond what we normally expect in our summer movie fare, let alone kids movies. What other kids movie(these days) would completely ignore dialogue for the majority of it, or spend several minutes on a slow, beautiful dance in space? Or throw in live action bits and old musical scenes? Also, I think Pixar just brings out the kid in me. And I feel like such a baby, because I almost always cry(or get misty, in a manly sort of way) at these films. The scene that broke my heart was when Wall-E first gets into space, and knocks on the ship window to get EVE's attention and show her the stars. A perfect summation of the film; Hopeful, wondrous, heartbreaking and beautiful. (I know this is hyperbole filled, but so what, I loved the movie) [/quote] I am a little behind on seeing this film and a little behind on this discussion, but I can't help but respond in complete agreement. I love this movie! Wall-e is this insanely/mind-numbingly adorable cross between R2D2 and the robot in Short Circuit. I think they did a lot of things well in this movie, the animation, the music, and the story line. But really I think it was made even better by it's lack of verbal dialogue. When you don't have the option of words you have to do a really good job with body language and movement. They did a fabulous job with the comedy and the emotional atmosphere. I laughed a lot more than i expected, and I was surprisingly moved by Wall-E's romantic attachment to Eve. All they ever said were each other's names, but everything was in how they said it. It was so great. I can't wait to watch it again. http://www.spout.com/groups/Worst_Movie_Ever/Re_Alright_who_here_secretly_LOVES_terrible_movie/104/37052/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: Worst Movie Ever
Post Date: 11/7/2008 10:13:12 AM
Body: [quote user="pippin06"] I have never gone to the theater for a bad movie because I can't see spending that money up front (especially when I know it's going to be bad). However, I own a few clunkers for their sentimental value, which I occasionally pull out. They had to have cost $5 or less because I don't believe in paying more for some of these flicks. The one that pops immediately to mind is Short Circuit. That is NOT a good movie, in just about any way you can define it, but I have some sort of ridiculous nostalgia for "Your mama was a snowblower!" And, by default, it's sort of an 80s classic; they made at least one sequel. [/quote] Oh man you are so right. I just watched Short Circuit again recently for the first time since I was a kid I'm sure. I remembered so many of the lines. Somehow these lines became "classic". BUT THE MOVIE IS HORRRRRIBLE!
]]>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 15:13:12 GMTRisseladaWorst Movie Ever11/7/2008 10:13:12 AM[quote user="pippin06"] I have never gone to the theater for a bad movie because I can't see spending that money up front (especially when I know it's going to be bad). However, I own a few clunkers for their sentimental value, which I occasionally pull out. They had to have cost $5 or less because I don't believe in paying more for some of these flicks. The one that pops immediately to mind is Short Circuit. That is NOT a good movie, in just about any way you can define it, but I have some sort of ridiculous nostalgia for "Your mama was a snowblower!" And, by default, it's sort of an 80s classic; they made at least one sequel. [/quote] Oh man you are so right. I just watched Short Circuit again recently for the first time since I was a kid I'm sure. I remembered so many of the lines. Somehow these lines became "classic". BUT THE MOVIE IS HORRRRRIBLE! http://www.spout.com/groups/Worst_Movie_Ever/Re_Alright_who_here_secretly_LOVES_terrible_movie/104/37046/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: pippin06
Post To: Worst Movie Ever
Post Date: 11/7/2008 7:45:57 AM
Body: I have never gone to the theater for a bad movie because I can't see spending that money up front (especially when I know it's going to be bad). However, I own a few clunkers for their sentimental value, which I occasionally pull out. They had to have cost $5 or less because I don't believe in paying more for some of these flicks. The one that pops immediately to mind is Short Circuit. That is NOT a good movie, in just about any way you can define it, but I have some sort of ridiculous nostalgia for "Your mama was a snowblower!" And, by default, it's sort of an 80s classic; they made at least one sequel.
]]>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 12:45:57 GMTpippin06Worst Movie Ever11/7/2008 7:45:57 AMI have never gone to the theater for a bad movie because I can't see spending that money up front (especially when I know it's going to be bad). However, I own a few clunkers for their sentimental value, which I occasionally pull out. They had to have cost $5 or less because I don't believe in paying more for some of these flicks. The one that pops immediately to mind is Short Circuit. That is NOT a good movie, in just about any way you can define it, but I have some sort of ridiculous nostalgia for "Your mama was a snowblower!" And, by default, it's sort of an 80s classic; they made at least one sequel. http://www.spout.com/blogs/jakestevens/archive/2008/11/2/36876.aspx Post By: JakeStevens
Post To: JakeStevens Blog
Post Date: 11/2/2008 12:05:56 PM
Body: A childhood favorite, it seems to have lost little of its appeal as it passes the 20 year anniversary. Sure it's silly, sure it's far-fetched, sure it stars Steve Guttenberg, but the characters are so off-the-wall and loveable that you'd be hard pressed to walk away from this film and NOT be at least entertained. Particularly affable is "Johnny" Number 5, the naive robot-cum-humanoid at the center of the film. It's surprisingly easy to get lost in his world (Wall*E eat your heart out) AND it's fun for the whole family - and I mean everyone.
]]>Sun, 02 Nov 2008 17:05:56 GMTJakeStevensJakeStevens Blog11/2/2008 12:05:56 PMA childhood favorite, it seems to have lost little of its appeal as it passes the 20 year anniversary. Sure it's silly, sure it's far-fetched, sure it stars Steve Guttenberg, but the characters are so off-the-wall and loveable that you'd be hard pressed to walk away from this film and NOT be at least entertained. Particularly affable is "Johnny" Number 5, the naive robot-cum-humanoid at the center of the film. It's surprisingly easy to get lost in his world (Wall*E eat your heart out) AND it's fun for the whole family - and I mean everyone. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/5/15/29222.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 5/15/2008 11:00:53 AM
Body: Maybe this really is the year of “product suggestion”, a term coined recently by Risky Biz blogger Steven Zeitchik after noticing the subtle hint of a McDonalds logo on the driver’s helmet and race car in Speed Racer. Following that, we now have Pixar suggesting iPods and other Apple products through its new animated film Wall-E. If you take a good look at the sleek robot character Eve, you might be reminded of the typical Apple product design, and apparently it’s not so coincidental. Wall-E director Andrew Stanton told Fortune magazine of Eve’s development and the benefit of having Steve Jobs as your umbrella: “I wanted Eve to be high-end technology - no expense spared - and I wanted it to be seamless and for the technology to be sort of hidden and subcutaneous,” Andrew Stanton, Wall-E’s director, told Fortune. “The more I started describing it, the more I realized I was pretty much describing the Apple playbook for design.” It is, of course, not the first time a product has inspired a film character - think of the murderous HAL 9000 robot in “2001: A Space Odyssey,” based loosely on big IBM mainframes of the day. Personally, I think Eve looks more like a hand-held fan I once had, but then I don’t really see the Double Arches in Speed Racer either. I guess I’m just not as consumer-oriented as some people. Yet it’s true that Stanton worked closely, at least for a day, with Apple designer Johnny Ive (whose name reminds me of Johnny Five, from Short Circuit, who definitely, if even unconsciously, influenced Wall-E’s title character, but I digress). There’s just a hint of irony in having such subliminal product placement in a movie that clearly comments on the effects of consumerism (Wall-E’s function is to clean up all the trash left on Earth 700 years in the future). But when your parent company is mostly owned by the guy who also heads a company that sells fancy electronic gadgets, it’d be a complete missed opportunity to not do as Stanton has done. So, should we be looking for a new iPod this summer? One that’s feminine, is capable of flying, and with which we’ll fall in love — enough to quit our jobs, as Wall-E does? [via Fark.com] Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 15 May 2008 15:00:53 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com5/15/2008 11:00:53 AMMaybe this really is the year of “product suggestion”, a term coined recently by Risky Biz blogger Steven Zeitchik after noticing the subtle hint of a McDonalds logo on the driver’s helmet and race car in Speed Racer. Following that, we now have Pixar suggesting iPods and other Apple products through its new animated film Wall-E. If you take a good look at the sleek robot character Eve, you might be reminded of the typical Apple product design, and apparently it’s not so coincidental. Wall-E director Andrew Stanton told Fortune magazine of Eve’s development and the benefit of having Steve Jobs as your umbrella: “I wanted Eve to be high-end technology - no expense spared - and I wanted it to be seamless and for the technology to be sort of hidden and subcutaneous,” Andrew Stanton, Wall-E’s director, told Fortune. “The more I started describing it, the more I realized I was pretty much describing the Apple playbook for design.” It is, of course, not the first time a product has inspired a film character - think of the murderous HAL 9000 robot in “2001: A Space Odyssey,” based loosely on big IBM mainframes of the day. Personally, I think Eve looks more like a hand-held fan I once had, but then I don’t really see the Double Arches in Speed Racer either. I guess I’m just not as consumer-oriented as some people. Yet it’s true that Stanton worked closely, at least for a day, with Apple designer Johnny Ive (whose name reminds me of Johnny Five, from Short Circuit, who definitely, if even unconsciously, influenced Wall-E’s title character, but I digress). There’s just a hint of irony in having such subliminal product placement in a movie that clearly comments on the effects of consumerism (Wall-E’s function is to clean up all the trash left on Earth 700 years in the future). But when your parent company is mostly owned by the guy who also heads a company that sells fancy electronic gadgets, it’d be a complete missed opportunity to not do as Stanton has done. So, should we be looking for a new iPod this summer? One that’s feminine, is capable of flying, and with which we’ll fall in love — enough to quit our jobs, as Wall-E does? [via Fark.com] Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/risselada/archive/2007/11/24/21977.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: Risselada Blog
Post Date: 11/24/2007 2:37:14 PM
Body: Short CircuitHate me for growing up. I remember enjoying this movie to some extent when I was a kid. I even was surprised how many lines felt familiar when I just recently watched it again. But also upon watching it again I found the movie stupid and the experience painful. There's something so strange about some of these classic mainstream comedies that somehow seems like it took it's strongest hold in the 80's (but I know there have been and probably always will be films like this). Something about how throughout the whole movie you kind of feel both totally detached and this feeling like you should be engrossed. The movie does everything to keep you away by just giving you snippets of things, editing through ridiculous plot before you can really examine how stupid it all is, feeding you lines of dialogue that are simplified with Hollywood Squares type of humor and leads nowhere or tells you exactly what it wants you to feel. At the end of the movie you sense that the character emotions, themes, and musical score are suggesting something epic has occurred. But when you think back you can hardly remember anything that actually happened. I've said little about Short Circuit specifically, but I don't know if I have to. A characteristic of Short Circuit that I feel most other movies of this type also share is this blatent sort of worship of other generally shitty pop culture. It's like all this stuff blends together. Johnny 5's personality comes from watching TV and his name comes from a song. It reminds you that most of the entertainment world is just shitty musical acts blending and breeding with crappy television, movies, and ads. I feel like there are thousands of movies like this and if I end up watching another one, maybe I'll just copy and paste this blog for those reviews as well.Rating: 2/10
]]>Sat, 24 Nov 2007 19:37:14 GMTRisseladaRisselada Blog11/24/2007 2:37:14 PMShort CircuitHate me for growing up. I remember enjoying this movie to some extent when I was a kid. I even was surprised how many lines felt familiar when I just recently watched it again. But also upon watching it again I found the movie stupid and the experience painful. There&#39;s something so strange about some of these classic mainstream comedies that somehow seems like it took it&#39;s strongest hold in the 80&#39;s (but I know there have been and probably always will be films like this). Something about how throughout the whole movie you kind of feel both totally detached and this feeling like you should be engrossed. The movie does everything to keep you away by just giving you snippets of things, editing through ridiculous plot before you can really examine how stupid it all is, feeding you lines of dialogue that are simplified with Hollywood Squares type of humor and leads nowhere or tells you exactly what it wants you to feel. At the end of the movie you sense that the character emotions, themes, and musical score are suggesting something epic has occurred. But when you think back you can hardly remember anything that actually happened. I&#39;ve said little about Short Circuit specifically, but I don&#39;t know if I have to. A characteristic of Short Circuit that I feel most other movies of this type also share is this blatent sort of worship of other generally shitty pop culture. It&#39;s like all this stuff blends together. Johnny 5&#39;s personality comes from watching TV and his name comes from a song. It reminds you that most of the entertainment world is just shitty musical acts blending and breeding with crappy television, movies, and ads. I feel like there are thousands of movies like this and if I end up watching another one, maybe I&#39;ll just copy and paste this blog for those reviews as well.Rating: 2/10 http://www.spout.com/groups/Best_movie_quotes/Re_Most_Quotes/17/18642/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: AlienLazer
Post To: Best movie quotes
Post Date: 8/23/2007 6:31:13 PM
Body: [quote user="Risselada"]Short Circuit! I was just testing out Netflix view online feature the other day for the first time. I was browsing and watned to watch something I'd already seen before. I saw Short Circuit and remembered seeing it as a kid. Holy shit this is one of the most retarded movies I've ever seen! I will admit the Indian guy had a few good lines though. And Ally Sheedy is pretty hot.[/quote]LOL... ditto on that opinion, but pippin06 is right on the point that there was some funny ones in there. I guess it's the "retarded" movies that have all the good cetch phrases. Well, what else are they good for. Jon used to run around saying "Jonny 5" all the time. Lame, huh? Oh, well. lol
]]>Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:31:13 GMTAlienLazerBest movie quotes8/23/2007 6:31:13 PM[quote user="Risselada"]Short Circuit! I was just testing out Netflix view online feature the other day for the first time. I was browsing and watned to watch something I&#39;d already seen before. I saw Short Circuit and remembered seeing it as a kid. Holy shit this is one of the most retarded movies I&#39;ve ever seen! I will admit the Indian guy had a few good lines though. And Ally Sheedy is pretty hot.[/quote]LOL... ditto on that opinion, but pippin06 is right on the point that there was some funny ones in there. I guess it&#39;s the "retarded" movies that have all the good cetch phrases. Well, what else are they good for. Jon used to run around saying "Jonny 5" all the time. Lame, huh? Oh, well. lol http://www.spout.com/groups/Best_movie_quotes/Re_Most_Quotes/17/18536/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: Best movie quotes
Post Date: 8/22/2007 12:15:38 PM
Body: Short Circuit! I was just testing out Netflix view online feature the other day for the first time. I was browsing and watned to watch something I'd already seen before. I saw Short Circuit and remembered seeing it as a kid. Holy shit this is one of the most retarded movies I've ever seen! I will admit the Indian guy had a few good lines though. And Ally Sheedy is pretty hot.
]]>Wed, 22 Aug 2007 16:15:38 GMTRisseladaBest movie quotes8/22/2007 12:15:38 PMShort Circuit! I was just testing out Netflix view online feature the other day for the first time. I was browsing and watned to watch something I&#39;d already seen before. I saw Short Circuit and remembered seeing it as a kid. Holy shit this is one of the most retarded movies I&#39;ve ever seen! I will admit the Indian guy had a few good lines though. And Ally Sheedy is pretty hot. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/love/MemberTagFilms.aspxlove
Number of films tagged: 12479

Number of people who tagged: 338

Number of times used: 1481

]]>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 05:51:34 GMT124793381481Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/comedy/MemberTagFilms.aspxcomedy
Number of films tagged: 1087

Number of people who tagged: 253

Number of times used: 1342

]]>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:38:30 GMT10872531342Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/romance/MemberTagFilms.aspxromance
Number of films tagged: 7163

Number of people who tagged: 169

Number of times used: 1005

]]>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:16:35 GMT71631691005Tag 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/80s/MemberTagFilms.aspx80s
Number of films tagged: 87

Number of people who tagged: 90

Number of times used: 162

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:41 GMT8790162Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/escape/MemberTagFilms.aspxescape
Number of films tagged: 2868

Number of people who tagged: 76

Number of times used: 279

]]>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:51:44 GMT286876279Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/life/MemberTagFilms.aspxlife
Number of films tagged: 1082

Number of people who tagged: 52

Number of times used: 224

]]>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:13:43 GMT108252224Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/chase/MemberTagFilms.aspxchase
Number of films tagged: 880

Number of people who tagged: 44

Number of times used: 109

]]>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 05:13:34 GMT88044109Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/teacher/MemberTagFilms.aspxteacher
Number of films tagged: 1225

Number of people who tagged: 40

Number of times used: 84

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:24:37 GMT12254084Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/80s-classic/MemberTagFilms.aspx80s-classic
Number of films tagged: 44

Number of people who tagged: 34

Number of times used: 108

]]>Thu, 23 Oct 2008 04:37:46 GMT4434108Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/scientist/MemberTagFilms.aspxscientist
Number of films tagged: 1408

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 77

]]>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:47:27 GMT14083177Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Changed-My-Life/MemberTagFilms.aspxChanged-My-Life
Number of films tagged: 46

Number of people who tagged: 27

Number of times used: 60

]]>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 03:22:35 GMT462760Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/robot/MemberTagFilms.aspxrobot
Number of films tagged: 463

Number of people who tagged: 27

Number of times used: 53

]]>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 07:02:37 GMT4632753Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/humanity/MemberTagFilms.aspxhumanity
Number of films tagged: 141

Number of people who tagged: 25

Number of times used: 44

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 02:03:00 GMT1412544Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/technology/MemberTagFilms.aspxtechnology
Number of films tagged: 688

Number of people who tagged: 23

Number of times used: 54

]]>Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:02:23 GMT6882354Tag