Pixar is a cinematic laboratory that allows us to see their better experiments and incidentally gets support to continue. They have a long tradition — as long as I can recall — of making short films to play before their expensive features. These shorts focus on some cinematic technique that Pixar wants to push past the state of the art. In every case, that bold experiment in the short is what is used in the feature. It is embedded, not so obvious, but it is there, helping to make the thing fresh.
Disney on the other hand is a box office manager. Like the other studios, they care little about the product or even the health of the talent. They want box office receipts and lots of them. If you have been following the story, Pixar gave the rights to Toy Story sequels to Disney as part of the original deal. They ended up making TS2 themselves in defense of what they knew would be dumb. After being bought by Disney, they now have no choice.
Elsewhere, you will see that I did not like Toy Story 3. Not at all. There is no advance, no adventure, no dynamism. I think what they wanted to do was play with dimensionality in 3 and had some very clever ideas ready. Think of more, much more of Mr. Potatohead on a taco. So they started on this short. But Disney fell back to what worked the last time, and they are the boss.
As bland as TS3 is, this is incredible. I would have paid the full IMAX price just for it. There is a thin sort of story. All Pixar stories are small lessons in life, and this is no different. But the story is insignificant other than showing the harmony of symmetry. We have two beings of course, and two phases of the day. But the real two-ness is the two- dimensional cartoon of Disney fame and the three-dimensional one that Pixar pretty much invented.
A great deal about the world in film is different in these two approaches. Can they be married? Can the flat values of Disney be combined with the deeper worlds of Pixar? To judge from this, yes. But to judge from the feature that followed, no.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
Disney on the other hand is a box office manager. Like the other studios, they care little about the product or even the health of the talent. They want box office receipts and lots of them. If you have been following the story, Pixar gave the rights to Toy Story sequels to Disney as part of the original deal. They ended up making TS2 themselves in defense of what they knew would be dumb. After being bought by Disney, they now have no choice.
Elsewhere, you will see that I did not like Toy Story 3. Not at all. There is no advance, no adventure, no dynamism. I think what they wanted to do was play with dimensionality in 3 and had some very clever ideas ready. Think of more, much more of Mr. Potatohead on a taco. So they started on this short. But Disney fell back to what worked the last time, and they are the boss.
As bland as TS3 is, this is incredible. I would have paid the full IMAX price just for it. There is a thin sort of story. All Pixar stories are small lessons in life, and this is no different. But the story is insignificant other than showing the harmony of symmetry. We have two beings of course, and two phases of the day. But the real two-ness is the two- dimensional cartoon of Disney fame and the three-dimensional one that Pixar pretty much invented.
A great deal about the world in film is different in these two approaches. Can they be married? Can the flat values of Disney be combined with the deeper worlds of Pixar? To judge from this, yes. But to judge from the feature that followed, no.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.