Jump to content

Pixar and Dreamworks


ChrisAfonso
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

They have Hans Zimmer!!! His gang of composers would kick the poo out of Giacchino. :lol:

They all get together and hit him with their synthesized orchestras? I think he'll be shaking in his boots.

(I'm not a zimmer hater, fyi ;))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bet Lucas still kicks himself for selling that part of Lucasfilm off.

Steve Jobs tried numerous times to get it sold as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good one!

I am an old school animation fan, so I tend to find most computer animation pretty forgettable. For me, it lacks a certain organic quality that is achievable with traditional methods.

For me, the exception are the Toy Story movies, which I think fit the medium well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DreamWorks > Pixar

sceptical-chris.gif

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

That's great!

No, Koray, that's his reaction to your statement--and a valid one, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't say I've seen nearly as many Dreamworks 3D flicks as Pixar ones, but from what I've seen...yeah. Pixar (usually) has a spark to it that Dreamworks doesn't always find. Not to mention the animation itself, which invariably sets a new gold standard for stylized 3D animation, whereas Dreamworks animation tends to be "merely" very good. (I have noticed the annoyingly repetitive facial expressions, although on the whole, I sometimes prefer Dreamworks' approach to animating people.)

I did very much like the first Shrek, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure about that...but it's definitely the best of their lot. Far better than Cars, that's for damn sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like some of the Dreamworks animations, but they do seem to be trying too hard sometimes. One thing is they're far too influenced by pop culture, which is a turn off for me. Either way, they don't really compare to Pixar at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dreamworks tries to be too commercial - the songs and general attitude in Shrek for example, and has a reliance on star power. I haven't seen many of them, but Shrek got old by the second movie for me and Bee Movie was quite good.

Pixar doesn't have either of those problems, and must be the only studio that markets itself by name, not by director or actor. The near photorealism in parts of Wall-E is simply staggering too, in addition to a great story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can believe, at the time, that I actually paid money to go see Shark's Tale in the theatre thinking it would be better than going to see Team America......... :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Quint nailed it. DreamWorks try and coast by on pop culture references and big star voices, whereas Pixar are light years ahead. KUNG FU PANDA is the only DW film I've liked so far, but that's like JAWS THE REVENGE compared to WALL-E.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Shrek films have a lot of pop culture references, but that's it really. Antz doesn't have any, neither does The Prince Of Egypt, The Road To El Dorado, Over The Hedge, etc. Shrek and Shark Tale are the only ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty sure MADAGASCAR's full of them. I imagine others are too, I haven't really paid that much attention.

Also annoying: the need for the characters to sing ridiculous pop culture songs that are an embarassment onto themselves. The end of SHREK 2 is like movie suicide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I forgot about Madagascar. Let me think. It has a couple, nothing as blatant as Shrek though. If you think about it, there aren't any in their other films. However, what do you consider pop culture? In terms of songs and stuff of that sort, Shrek and Shark Tale are really the only ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, what do you consider pop culture?

Anything famous. Films, books, events, songs, people, genres. For example, the penguin in Madagascar doing Captain Kirk or the lion doing Planet of the Apes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also annoying: the need for the characters to sing ridiculous pop culture songs that are an embarassment onto themselves. The end of SHREK 2 is like movie suicide.

Indeed. And the third ending wasn't much better for me - the fairy godmother and prince both annoy the hell out of me. I liked the first movie a lot - it had pop culture references but was still a decent movie. Now with four movies they're just desperately milking it.

And to be fair, I enjoyed both Madagascar films - good voice acting, some genuinely funny writing, and the inevitable pop culture references seemed less 'in your face'. In fact, if they came up with a decent story with the same writers, I'd probably watch a third one (edit: they are, 2012).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also annoying: the need for the characters to sing ridiculous pop culture songs that are an embarassment onto themselves. The end of SHREK 2 is like movie suicide.

Madagascar suffered from that as well, with the break-dancing grandma and everything. I hate when crap like that is used to market a movie, it's so very obnoxious and transparent. The commercials for the DVD release of that Adam Sandler kids movie Bedtime Stories do the same thing with this (once again) break-dancing cartoon character, only this time its a guinea pig.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't consider film references pop culture.

But that's the very definition of popular culture. Those references wouldn't be in the film if they weren't somehow ingrained in the collective memory of society.

I saw this 'Monsters vs. Aliens' 3-D flick. While i'm certainly 20 years too old for it, i can certainly say that the wafer-thin story, one-joke characters and morale lessons so lame that even the most pious and god-fearing bible belt citizens might raise an eyebrow in derision don't add any shiny medals to the Dreamworks mantle.

Some of the 3-D effects were neat, but alas, i nearly had to throw up through all the razzle dazzle, so even that feature didn't resonate with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the only people that are going to understand "Stella!!!" and other references to classic films are the older generation. Kids aren't going to understand it and are gonna laugh cause it's a cat talking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So why are they in a kids movie?

This is how it usually pans out.

Dreamworks: attracts adults through occasionally risque jokes, big celebrity names, snappy talking animal humour and pop culture references which, like you say, kids will mostly never get.

Pixar: attracts adults through simple yet meticulously crafted stories which can appeal to all generations without being seen as going for the lowest common denominator (you can exclude CARS from that, though).

I'll concede Pixar has celebrity voices, although rarely if ever uses them as a marketing ploy (like people would go see a film because it had a character voiced by Billy Crystal or Albert Brooks anyway), and occasionally uses pop culture references (THE SHINING and Hitchcock in FINDING NEMO; POLTERGEIST in A BUG'S LIFE), but these are usually usually the exception as opposed to the rule.

Bottom line: if your movie is good enough, you will be able to entertain adults on the strength of the story and characters alone, without the need for movie parodies or obnoxious, sometimes clumsily racially-stereotyped, animals. See TOY STORY, MONSTERS. INC, THE INCREDIBLES, WALL-E, THE IRON GIANT, PINOCCHIO, SNOW WHITE, THE LION KING, KUNG FU PANDA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how they use celebrities as a marketing ploy. The trailers don't go BEN STILLER!!!!! and CHRIS ROCK!!!!!! in a MUST SEE MOVIE!!!! You can say any movie uses its celebrities as a marketing ploy. There are people that see movies based on who stars in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how they use celebrities as a marketing ploy. The trailers don't go BEN STILLER!!!!! and CHRIS ROCK!!!!!! in a MUST SEE MOVIE!!!! You can say any movie uses its celebrities as a marketing ploy. There are people that see movies based on who stars in it.

Oh come on. The MADAGASCAR trailer has the voiceover man saying 'BEN STILLER! CHRIS ROCK! DAVID SCHWIMMER! JADA PINKETT-SMITH!' That doesn't say 'come and see the movie for its wonderful story!' that says 'HEY IDIOTS, CELEBRITIES AS TALKING ANIMALS!'

And once again, which kid is going to say 'mommy, I want to see that movie because it stars Jada Pinkett-Smith!'? This is saying 'adults, look who's in our movie so you won't get bored', which again, is - true, a tried and tested Hollywood marketing standby - but also lacks the confidence to let the film stand on its own two feet for what it is, which again is true for a lot of movies. But usually not the great ones. And this again illustrates the difference between Dreamworks and Pixar. To be fair, Pixar doesn't have to advertise its names because it already has such an inbuilt audience that DW doesn't have. But using WALL-E as an example, if it were a DW picture, the trailer would say 'AND SIGOURNEY WEAVER' followed by a clip of the Axiom's computer talking. And it'd also probably have two big celebs as the voices of Wall-E and Eve. And at least one person in the film would go 'the force is strong with this one.'

They're two diametrically opposed mantras, and from where I'm standing, as with everything else, Pixar's is way superior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. And the third ending wasn't much better for me - the fairy godmother and prince both annoy the hell out of me. I liked the first movie a lot - it had pop culture references but was still a decent movie. Now with four movies they're just desperately milking it.

I thought Shrek 2 was quite good as a movie, whereas the first one was a loose collection of mildly funny and one very funny jokes that never amounted to much of a movie. I haven't seen the 3rd yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Monsters vs Aliens was ok . I was it in IMAX 3D and it was fairly impressive to look at

i haven't seen any other other talking animals Dreamworks films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only good Dreamworks films I've liked were Shrek and Wallace and Gromit. Granted, I haven't seen many. But the only Pixar film I've disliked is Ratatouille. Granted, I haven't seen Cars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how they use celebrities as a marketing ploy. The trailers don't go BEN STILLER!!!!! and CHRIS ROCK!!!!!! in a MUST SEE MOVIE!!!! You can say any movie uses its celebrities as a marketing ploy. There are people that see movies based on who stars in it.

Oh come on. The MADAGASCAR trailer has the voiceover man saying 'BEN STILLER! CHRIS ROCK! DAVID SCHWIMMER! JADA PINKETT-SMITH!' That doesn't say 'come and see the movie for its wonderful story!' that says 'HEY IDIOTS, CELEBRITIES AS TALKING ANIMALS!'

And once again, which kid is going to say 'mommy, I want to see that movie because it stars Jada Pinkett-Smith!'? This is saying 'adults, look who's in our movie so you won't get bored', which again, is - true, a tried and tested Hollywood marketing standby - but also lacks the confidence to let the film stand on its own two feet for what it is, which again is true for a lot of movies. But usually not the great ones. And this again illustrates the difference between Dreamworks and Pixar. To be fair, Pixar doesn't have to advertise its names because it already has such an inbuilt audience that DW doesn't have. But using WALL-E as an example, if it were a DW picture, the trailer would say 'AND SIGOURNEY WEAVER' followed by a clip of the Axiom's computer talking. And it'd also probably have two big celebs as the voices of Wall-E and Eve. And at least one person in the film would go 'the force is strong with this one.'

They're two diametrically opposed mantras, and from where I'm standing, as with everything else, Pixar's is way superior.

Pixar's trailers always start off by listing all of their previous films. How is that not the same principle? "From the creators of Finding Nemo, Monsters Inc. and Toy Story...."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only good Dreamworks films I've liked were Shrek and Wallace and Gromit. Granted, I haven't seen many. But the only Pixar film I've disliked is Ratatouille. Granted, I haven't seen Cars.

You consider Wallace and Gromit to be Dreamworks pictures?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wallace & Gromit is DreamWorks, so is Chicken Run.

To elaborate on my last post. Every effing trailer has some type of marketing ploy. Probably 99% of trailers list the actors in the trailer. I'm not saying DWA is better than Pixar, because that is not measurable, but Charlie is using all these stupid points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last Wallace and Gromit movie (Curse of the Ware Rabbit) was distributed by Dreamworks, but they are not an original Dreamworks property. They're British all the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.