Did anybody see Wall-E? — Page 3

shimy said:

negative1 said:

shimy said:

here is a link to papers published on ratatuie

 

http://graphics.pixar.com/

 yes, i know the papers are there..

again, who cares? unless you can understand them, apply them, or deal with them,

it's all eye-candy.......revolutionary? more like evolutionary....not to knock pixars

techniques.......but until there is a huge breakthrough ...this is status quo.....

go to the siggraph conferences if you want to see the real innovations/innovators...

later

-1

I also just want to point out, i have minimal experience with actual computer animation, and i can at least appreciate some of the stuff they are talking about in the abstracts. Did you even look at the abstracts?

yes, as i mentioned above, i did look at the abstracts..

so mister critic, if you have a minimal experience, what are you getting out of it?

(and yes, i see your comments below, but you're just parroting what pixar tells you)..

don't you think there are other companies that exist? didn't i mention that disney, dreamworks, et al

also made many cg movies, that intersect with the pixar timeline, don't you think other computer

animators have been using these techniques, and other in non-commercial films, advertisements,

and videogames?

pixar is not god, far from it.......................although granted in the commercial space, they HAVE had

a lot of success, which is fine.......................................and granted i don't work as a movie critic,

so i have my own qualms about what i like..........................esthetically judging art, and the intrinsic

beauty of (computer) art are two completely different things.............................and if you want to

judge the artistic integrity and factor in the technical accomplishments that's also a very hard thing

to do............

Wow did you just say that. i thought you had all this back ground in CG, you of all people should be able to appreciate that. what do you want thats revolutionary. hell if your standards of revolutionary are that high i should point out that thought toy story was the first animated movie of that length. they had been making short movies like that for a long time. so you could call that evolutionary too. What was so revolutionary in all the other movies then.

revolutionary to me, is something that has never been done before , that impresses me, and can also be technically innovative in

the sense that it enters into a new realm of thought/detail/complexity/process...

here's a short breakdown from memory, and using some web pages:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1973 Westworld  -the same year as the first SIGGRAPH conference - provided digitally processed, pixellated versions of motion photography

1977 star wars - vector graphics, other cg effects

1979 alien - cg landing of ship

1981 Looker - pixar short film used shading

1982 tron - ray tracing, rendering, lighting, shading

1982 star trek 2 - particle rendering

1984 the last star fighter - photo realistic rendering

1985 young sherlock holmes - first major cgi character (pixar)

1988 who framed roger rabbit - cg and live action

1989 abyss - cg water creature

1991 terminator 2 - liquid metal creature effects / morphing

1994 jurassic park - cg dinosaurs creatures effects

1995 toy story - first full length feature cg film effects

2001 shrek and final fantasy - more character effects, human renderings

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

here's a twenty part detailed series, (and note the LACK of recent pixar movies)

http://www.filmsite.org/visualeffects1.html

i'm not going to bore you with even more details...but the early work was critical

http://web.cs.wpi.edu/~matt/courses/cs563/talks/history.html

and of course, another timeline:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_CGI_in_film_and_television

I am also curious what your opinion of a huge break through is going to be. Some of the stuff in that movie had huge breakthroughs. Techniques they used to develop ways to have object deformation due to impact is pretty big. As they talked about in the paper, In movies before directors and animators would try to avoid direct contact as much as possible because it was hard to make it look like you had actual contact, not floating objects.

did you notice that nothing (besides what pixar spouts as their own 'breakthroughs', isn't really

noted by too many others?

did you notice how much harder it is to actually figure out a new 'breakthrough' that hasn't been done before,

that isn't incremental?

no...............most techniques are just finer refinements of previous ones, as i stated before......

or they're implentations that are closer approximations to reality than previously existed,

but HAVE been approximated before...

i noticed you really had to go out of your way to point out what they are doing...

that's because there's less actions/features/abilities out there that aren't known..

so what does it come down to?

magnitude.........................................yeah, so the new star wars animated cg film won't

be breaking in anything new either........but maybe they are doing something new?

i can't tell..........................maybe they're rendering more efficiently, maybe they have

new shaders, or lighting techniques......

for something to truly amaze me, or consider it, it really has to be literally something that hasn't been

seen before.....and not just an improvement in a previous area..

I'm sorry but you just dont seem very credible anymore, you're making these blanket statements, using flash words like revolutionary, and Breakthroughs, but what exactly are your problems with the movies. Surely you are not just looking directly at the finished product and judging it on the broad aspects the overall look, and not paying attention to detail. Because as you said yourself your very interested in CG. It almost seems like you dislike the stylization as apposed to the actual computer graphics, and if thats your arguement. Then your critiziums need to be a little more accurate and not say things like "the graphics are ok" when really they are spectacular. because the CG style, vs the real word physics and the stimulation is great.

 

and your credibility is what? based on a few papers from one site?

please start providing more sources, more explanations, and more detail (as i've laid out above)

to prove otherwise...

there's no point in this being one sided one way or the other.....

i gave all my evidence....proof, descriptions, etc.....for my point of view,,,,,............(ie, what has pixar done lately thats so great?).

now i'd like the same from you , if you have the time or inclination...

later

-1

I'll start by giving you my arguement, cause maybe thats not clear. I am not saying that the other movies are bad. I am saying that some things in ratatullie were revolutionary. And unfortunately I cannot provide you with internet sources for that opinion, because I got them from my roommate, who I beleive may have a greater insight on the issue then some film critic website, a timeline that includes nothing of the CGI developments after the the 80s and includes things like steve jobs buy pixar(not exactly CG development related), and a wikipedia timeline that excludes things like episode 2 with the first use of all blue screen. Infact there are alot of things missing from the 2000s in the wiki website.

that was quite the post, I appreciate the time and effort put into it. I wont go throught quote by quote but I'll hit the major issues here.

Firstly, my impressions come from what I see as being really interesting I have an arts(visual graphics i.e. sketching, painting), biology and engineering background so I have alot of appreciation for some of the thought that goes on behind creating the effects, and making them life like. My opinions on ratatullie come from my roommate who like i said is doing masters work in the feild.

Now I am not saying that Pixar is god, however anything that is published in a paper is new PERIOD, that I can tell you for a fact, as I am doing research right now and have some appreciation for publishing papers(even though I am in a different field the same standards are applied). The link you provided was a list of revolutionary things done from a cinimatic point of veiw. Some of the things from what I gather in Ratatullie were things like the physics and rendering of choping vegtables, and as I mentioned before there was the object impact deformation. Things like this aren't going to wow the audience because they are small things that are expected where if i didn't point them out to you, you wouldnt notice right away cause they're very subtile. Be that as it may it does not change the fact that they are things that have not been done before, and are still in some sense revolutionary.

When your dealing with papers its not quite the same as reading a discription of a product. Abstracts are not sales pitches, they are meant to explain the real relevence and outline of what is in the paper. They are peer reviewed so you don't just get a company spouting out grabage just to make themselves look good. I am not sure what more you want from me. Its not about the quantity of sources but the quality. I just happened to send you a link with all the papers on it. Would you like links for all the seperate papers?

I will make this concession. The stuff done in ratatuille, isn't as insanely revolutionary as say. Making a dinosaur, but you have to realise that the days of those kinds of steps are gone. All future revolutionary advances will be small things that improve the physics, feel, and realism of the effects. Most of these won't be specifically noticed by people unless they are directly pointed out, but these same people will still have the feeling that the graphics are good and better then something they have seen before. I guess the last step is making something so real that one cannot tell that its CG, but something like that will come not in one leap and bound as say having a CG space battle may have been, but it will come from many smaller, yet major protocols developed for movies like ratatullie.

I think we can just agree to disagree here because I don't see how this is going to develop further. I have stated what I thought, given you academic sources, as opposed to internet blogs, and I don't really have much more to add as I personally am not an expert in the field. Talk to my about cell Biology and we can go day and night there :P

oh and I just want to add as well Pixar as far as I know is the only major Animation studio, with an entire division set aside for research. Disney, dreamworks etc do not nessarily have this. Pixar and disney are one in the same now so that eg might not count.

shimy,

thanks for the response,

i'll be the first (ok maybe it takes awhile) person, to step down when i'm shown up or wrong.

you do make a lot of good points, and i do like a good discussion/debate.......and in fact, being

called to explain myself, when i'm not being clear is fine......i do like your reasoning....(although relying on

another person, as one of your sources, is not always ideal, but hey, this is a public internet forum)........

i'll throw out a few more bones to pick at shortly once i have some time....

thanks for the response..

later

-1

lordjedi said:

negative1 said:

 

3) the cockroach was pretty much symbolic of the REAL COMPANION for the whole movie, who actually belonged with  trash, and junk, and refuse....and who does wall-e  have as a friend?,   yeah, a cute'n'cuddly cockroach...............i'm sure they'll be plush versions for the kids (gag).....

 

Awesome!  That'll go along with my plush headcrab perfectly (which my son also loves)!

!!! Plush headcrab!!! I was here reading through this rediculous argument and wondering why the hell I was wasting my time, then I read the words "plush headcrab", and it suddenly all became worthwhile. That is the coolest thing ever! I am getting one to keep my plush tribble company.

You have a plush tribble?!  Like you, I've been reading through this thread for several days, and now I also come to something that fascinates me!

back to the point about what is revolutionary...........

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

in the end, 2d space will max out, if it hasn't already yet..................

i'm waiting for TRUE 3d computer graphics, we're just not there yet..

also holographic imaging would be nice............................................

so where's the holdeck when you need it?

that really is going to be the new frontier in cg.............

all this messing around in 2d space is very limiting,

and frankly it is getting old.........................i want to see

the real advances....................

yes, i'm sure that 99% of everyone on this board will hate

a 3d star wars remake.......................but i think it would

be really cool.......................................if only it would be

able to be done in some reasonable fashion, that hasn't

been done yet..............

i went and interviewed at a seismic processing company that

takes 2d graphs, and 3d data, and creates a whole room around

it, so you can 'visualize' the data in 3d.............its still very early,

and kind of clunky................but just imagine if  it could be applied

to more complex animation , objects, and effects..............

i know VR was a buzzword a long time ago, and failed miserably,

and we've seen it in movies, like the 13th floor, and the matrix

(with its virtual worlds).....................................am i waiting for that?

no, because we'll never see it in our lifetime..................but someday

with the advent of high definition, some graphics processing, and

possibly some cool optic tricks, we'll have some idea ......but how

will it end up?

to me, that is the real revolution.....................and not just more

boring 2d processes....................................................

later

-1

Gaffer Tape said:

You have a plush tribble?!  Like you, I've been reading through this thread for several days, and now I also come to something that fascinates me!

Yeah, picked it up when I was in Las Vegas a while back. I was able to talk my wife into going on the Star Trek Experience with me (hey, how about that, I am back on topic! Talking about a silly Gimmicky 3D show/ride), it was incredibly lame, I loved it. One of the cheapest and most worthwhile things in the giftshop were the plush tribbles, so I got one. The other thing that had me tempted where the six packs of Romulan Ale (beer with blue dye), but I decided to be contend with just the tribble.

In 2-3 business days my lovely little headcrab along with a Black Mesa coffee mug will be on their way to my mail box.

Now back to your regularly scheduled... discussion.

ChainsawAsh said:

I really don't like the idea of 3D replacing 2D films.  I've yet to see a 3D anything that was more than a stupid gimmick.  And virtual reality?  Really?

 

These things don't come overnight.  There's no such thing as "revolutionary," the way you want to see it - everything that advances anything is "evolutionary," and yes, that includes the "revolutionary" concept of Toy Story being the first feature-length 3D-animated film.  It wasn't revolutionary at all, it just took things Pixar had been doing for years and made it an hour and a half long.  Why did it suceed?  The story was good, too.

 

If you're sick of "more boring 2d processes" when they're just coming into their own in the past two decades is like being sick of sound films after 1940.  "Okay, sound is boring, now what can we do?"  Let it mature before you consider it "boring."  There were hand-drawn animated movies for seventy years before anything close to a computer-animated movie was around, and you already expect the same drastic step away from computer-animated movies after less than twenty?  Really?

 

WALL-E actually made me forget I wasn't watching a live-action movie a few times, and *that* is something I consider revolutionary.  If that's not enough of an advance for you, fine, but these fantasies of "real advances" in 3D coming about anytime soon, and especially of anything coming of virtual reality in the next 20 years, are all ludicrous.

Now when you can strap me into something that will actually make me believe I'm having sex with Heather Graham, then we can talk.

 i agree totally that 3d is nowhere near where it should be, but like you said, you have to start somewhere, and sometime,

and it has started, like i said.........................have you ever seen demos in 3d? i know the recent 'journey to the center of the earth' wasn't supposed to be that

great, but maybe i'll check it out........................................and of course you know that all the toy story movies are going 3d, with the first and 2nd ones coming out,

and then toy story 3 in 3d................................

what makes you think cg movies aren't 'mature', like i said before, there's a glut of them, and since the basics are available to almost any studio,

what distinguishes them except budget, name acting stars, and maybe better effects....................................we need to keep pushing the limits..

pixar did it once, they can do it again.................................wall-e did not 'push' anything , visually, or storywise...................(at least to me)............

there was not 1 second of wall-e that did not feel artificial, look artificial , or processed (yes, even the digitized videos of live actors)....................

i don't think they were pushing for realism at all..................

anyways, there's no point in staying in the past, or we'd still be watching silent , black and white films....................unfortunately the steps

to get to the next next next level are , as you say, still light years away..........................................  but i've seen some pretty amazing

steps taken in the last 30 years...................................did you even think we get to the point where we are now, at this stage in time?

i hoping there WILL be some MAJOR breakthroughs coming.............................maybe somewhere there is hope and optimism about it....

so don't deny the future, embrace it....

later

-1

Dude...............................seriously......................................what is.......................................up with all the.....................................elongated ellipses.......................................all the time............................?

Just...........................curious............................

C3PX said:

Dude...............................seriously......................................what is.......................................up with all the.....................................elongated ellipses.......................................all the time............................?

Just...........................curious............................

   i dont know...................................................mabye it is way of helping me..................................

to get my thoughts together??????????????????????????????

do you prefer____________________________ or -------------------------------------------------------

(by the way, i used to be a computer programmer)....

so i had to use  a lot of symbols when i type..

ie :   #here's a comment

/* heres another comment */

------- here's a separator-----------------------------------------------------------------------

here some details inside a box

-------------

get the idea?

__________

later

-1

-1, come on, WALL-E is fine for what it is; is better than fine compared to most of what is being produced now (based on what I've heard). Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't believe your biggest complaint is really lack of big technical advances. I believe your beef more lies with the idea that the best stuff out there just doesn't quite have the great magic of works from decades past. More than advances, don't you really just want your socks to be blown off from some great inspiration (even if not via a huge leap forward in technology), and much of what's out there just doesn't do that for you? Well, that's what I want anyway, more umph

-1 mentioned TRON as a film that he still holds in high regard. What?! That old thing, with CG that an N64 could practically blow out of the water?! Well, yes! :) There are some scenes in that movie that just "nail it," know what I mean? Namely the lightcycles and tanks scenes; scenes that you make clips of and watch over and over because they're just so damned cool! The filming angles, the motions of the cycles (and tanks), the editing... When Empire Strikes Back came out, the whole SDs/TIEs chase asteroid field scene :O It was like you were swirling around in your chair in the theater! One scene in a somewhat recent film that also did that for me was the "Gandolf rides to/into Minas Tirith" scene in ROTK. Very impressive stuff!

It seems that so much in the movies these days is in the realm of rehash/watered-down homages (or extreme but hollow shock value). So -1, I offer that something in the larger sense is lost and that picking on Pixar and WALL-E isn't exactly fair, although I can see the temptation as they are "at the top" of the animated CG field right now. I know that it is kind of the unwritten job of the one on top to blow us away, but unless they have implicitly stepped forward to make that claim...

To the others, surely you can see a frustration in some with what is supposedly the best that is out there. Great things in the past are ignored or blown-off (largely because they are not watched in a theater in 35mm film IMO). I'm not the best judge for WALL-E as I've seen only about 1/2 hour of it (two 15 min. segments at a movie theater), but those chunks didn't really draw me; I was not blown away and ready and eager to return to see the entire film. Does that make WALL-E a bad film to me? No. But for someone really wanting to be taken on a fantastic ride, does it offer the full goods? For me anyway, perhaps not (unless I caught two "unlucky" sections of the movie), but officially I have no opinion on the film as a whole. :)

Regarding the Pixar papers provided on the link, I kind of agree with -1 that for the most part they aren't anything too jaw dropping. A number of them are simply clever ways/shortcuts to reduce how long it takes to render scenes, which is nice to the production team but is literally a 0% difference on screen in the before and after sense. (and AOTC had pretty good CG cloth flow physics, before Ratatouille...)

There's my few cents. -1, I've obviously perhaps put some words in your mouth here so correct me if I'm off the mark. :)

No matter what i like Wall-E better than that clone wars movie being promoted by Luca$hfilms and Pukas.

skyjedi2005 said:

No matter what i like Wall-E better than that clone wars movie being promoted by Luca$hfilms and Pukas.

great, now you're a psychic? amazing you can't like something that isn't even out yet...

i'll be there opening day (or midnight screening).......................can't wait to see it..

...

later

-1

You're joking about going to see this opening night and the $4,000 stills coffin thing right? I find it hard to believe you really eat all this stuff up hook line and sinker. I think you are just trying to impress on us what a devout fan you are.

C3PX said:

You're joking about going to see this opening night and the $4,000 stills coffin thing right? I find it hard to believe you really eat all this stuff up hook line and sinker. I think you are just trying to impress on us what a devout fan you are.

no,

i'm not joking....why would i do that?

to impress anyone? no...because that would be pointless..

i could care less if anyone thinks otherwise....

this board has opened my eyes to all the star wars versions out there (8mm, mono, vhs , HD rips etc),

ALL for free..........along with all the other cool stuff.........scripts to convert the laserdisc rips,

image enhancing algorithms................i've started mapping out the original star wars FRAME-BY-FRAME

(see the technical thread), i've watched the first 27000 frames a few times now...

i'm a long lost star wars fan, that is finally finding out about all this stuff NOW....i finally have a great job that

lets me buy ANYTHING i want, including the 35mm version of ESB (if you check the fan restoration thread), i almost

got the 16mm version of star wars too,...... i'm old enough and financially stable enough to get any/every version

of star wars that is out there........is there something wrong with that?

i thought people around here actually liked 'star wars'.......i could be wrong though..

obviously it seems like  i am outnumbered by the super hardcore fans here that have

watched the movies hundreds of times, and have been collecting, reading, writing,

editting, and everything else star wars related..................................i've seen the original

trilogy less than 10 times in the last 2 decades............i'm hungry for more.. i'm probably

one of the most casual fans on this board...................

star wars influenced a 10 year old child, over 3 decades ago,

and now i find myself at a point in my life, where i want some way to find that feeling again...

why shouldn't i be excited???????????

later

-1

WXM said:

 

Regarding the Pixar papers provided on the link, I kind of agree with -1 that for the most part they aren't anything too jaw dropping. A number of them are simply clever ways/shortcuts to reduce how long it takes to render scenes, which is nice to the production team but is literally a 0% difference on screen in the before and after sense. (and AOTC had pretty good CG cloth flow physics, before Ratatouille...)

 

It may not make a difference in the before and after sense, but if it saves rendering time, that means it also saves money.  If it saves money, that means you can do something even more complex in the next feature and hopefully something that looks even better.  The point is that technological improvements don't usually come in leaps and bounds.  They usually come in small steps.  After enough small steps, you've improved things dramatically.  The audience may not notice it, but the majority of audiences probably also can't tell a film that's projected digitally vs one that is on 35mm film.  And I do get tired of the argument that people "don't know how great a film is because they haven't seen it in a theatre on 35mm".  If a movie is that good, it won't matter whether I watch it on DVD on my 50" tv or on a big screen being projected in a theatre.

negative1 said:

star wars influenced a 10 year old child, over 3 decades ago,

and now i find myself at a point in my life, where i want some way to find that feeling again...

why shouldn't i be excited???????????

 

later

-1

Maybe because the Star Wars that you and I grew up with isn't the same Star Wars anymore.  I don't know, just a thought.  If you're still trying to "find that feeling", then you may be waiting a very long time.

negative1 said:

i thought people around here actually liked 'star wars'.......i could be wrong though..

obviously it seems like  i am outnumbered by the super hardcore fans here that have

watched the movies hundreds of times, and have been collecting, reading, writing,

editting, and everything else star wars related..................................i've seen the original

trilogy less than 10 times in the last 2 decades............i'm hungry for more.. i'm probably

one of the most casual fans on this board...................

 

star wars influenced a 10 year old child, over 3 decades ago,

and now i find myself at a point in my life, where i want some way to find that feeling again...

why shouldn't i be excited???????????

 

later

-1

Whoa, I wasn't trying to pick on you. I guess I just found it hard to believe that you were really so eager to dish out the cash for the stills books. Probably should have realized that 4 grand is not all that much money for people who have better jobs than myself. Didn't mean to offend, I was just curious if you were really serious or not.

As for being one of the most casual fans on the board, you seem quite a bit more hardcore than myself. I wouldn't consider myself a hardcore fan at all. When I was a kid I had my walls plastered with SW posters, three pairs of SW sheets that cycled on my bed, and SW toys often litered my floor. I went through a period where I read some of the books, but got tired of them quickly. Through my teenage years I'd play just about every SW game I could find, back then they were awesome. When the prequels came out I was hyped up, but then after seeing TPM then later AOTC, I gave it up as a lost cause. Nowadays I have very little to do with SW other than these boards. I have a set of LD transfers on my DVD shelf, Star Wars novelization and Splinter of the Minds Eye on my bookshelf, and an unbeaten copy of Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy burried somewhere in my desk drawer.

I'd still consider myself an SW fan, but nothing like I was when I was a kid. Since I spend most of my time in Off topic, half of the time I forget this place is a SW board.

So, don't get me wrong. I am not saying you should not be excited. Probably why you find yourself seeming to like Star Wars more than the rest of us, while still considering yourself a casual fan, is because many of us never took a break from being fans and have been... not sure what word to use, "burntout" is probably too strong of a word, but something along those lines. You on the other hand seem to have spent most of your life not being an SW fan, despite being fond of it as a kid, and have just recently rediscovered your love for the series. It makes sense you would be more excited about it than the rest of us.

Okay, back to the topic.

lordjedi said:

negative1 said:

star wars influenced a 10 year old child, over 3 decades ago,

and now i find myself at a point in my life, where i want some way to find that feeling again...

why shouldn't i be excited???????????

 

later

-1

 

Maybe because the Star Wars that you and I grew up with isn't the same Star Wars anymore.  I don't know, just a thought.  If you're still trying to "find that feeling", then you may be waiting a very long time.

lordjedi,

             its ok......i've started to find that feeling already................thanks to this board...

             honestly, and i'm not joking here.....

             despite the conflicts (see earlier in the thread), disputes, arguments, and namecalling, (i have thick skin),

             i can't even begin to tell you how excited, relieved, and amazed by this board, and the people on it.........

            every question i could think of, is instantly answered............help is given, when i haven't asked..

            copies of rare / non-existant / bootlegs sent out for free................................ resources that i couldn't have imagined

            all combined in one place.....yeah, i've been on the internet before as a spectator.....i only got my own personal

            connection a few months ago, and for the first time, i finally have found people that share a passion together...

             i have no kids, i'm not married, i've never had a significant other, i don't have pets, nothing...........i dont' even have any

             friends that i know of to share anything 'star wars' related to..........................all i've done is work, and maybe enjoy some

            other hobbies...........................

            i can honestly tell you that a few weeks ago, watching the 8mm transfers of star wars and empire had me overjoyed beyond

            belief, i didn't even know they existed, and now after asking, i can watch it in my own home...................later on i got a copy of the bootleg

           widescreen version of 'star war's, and shortly after the mono mix............so what? you're all tired of it, and everyones seen them decades

           ago.......................................no, to me they ARE SPECIAL, yeah, we have fancy high definition verions, and laserdisc/dvd rips (which have their

            own place)...........................but these put me back to a place in time, when simple things were exciting..............

            i know maybe i shouldn't be so excited, but its hard for me not to be........................i can't help it, i've been at the movie theaters for EVERY SINGLE
            film when it was out, the OT, some re-releases, and the SE, and finally all of the PT......i'm NOT going to miss out now  either............

           i wish i could be more cynical, and sarcastic, and depressed (i can be that way for a lot of other things though!-see wall-e comments)..................

          ...................................but not with Star wars.

           later

           -1

negative1 said:

 

            i know maybe i shouldn't be so excited, but its hard for me not to be........................i can't help it, i've been at the movie theaters for EVERY SINGLE
            film when it was out, the OT, some re-releases, and the SE, and finally all of the PT......i'm NOT going to miss out now  either............

 

 

Hey man, whatever floats your boat.  No need to be cynical just for our sake.

Apparently Wall-E is generating enough oscar buzz to be a contender for best animated film of 2008 for the 2009 oscars.

According to entertainment weekly but I don't always take those guys word for things.

They lost a lot a credibility after Giving Indiana Jones IV 4 out of 5 stars.

They gave dark knight the same rating blaphemy, LOL.

Also they made bad jokes about Gay guy pedophile or something to that extent, about Heath's Joker performance.

That took a total lack of class, especially since the poor guy is dead.

Plus they had to talk of the oscar potential while bashing just like fanboys on a harry knowles website.

Then again the academy is a bunch of idiots i say, because they Gave the best animated feature award to wallace and gromit in 2006 instead of Hayao Miyazaki's howl's moving castle.

And it is claymation not even animation, morons.

I mean in the sense that it is not drawn like an animation cel or digital shot would be.

I guess that is splitting hairs, but i played with clay when i was a kid and i don't find it to be all that artistic.

If it was not clay it would obviously be labeled stop motion animation.

I.E. it is animated a single frame at a time.