The L.A. Times asks:
Oscars 2012: Is Pixar's animation winning streak over?
... [J]udging from a recent interview [John Lasseter] gave to the New York Times, in which he called “Cars 2” a “great movie,” he's in denial about just how badly Pixar stumbled with its last film. ...
[T]he reviews for “Cars 2” were abysmal, with the film earning a lowly 38% fresh rating at Rotten Tomatoes. ... It didn’t stop lots of people from seeing the film, but it is bad news for Pixar’s chances of winning the Oscar for animated feature, a category Pixar has won four times in a row and six out of the last eight. ...
I haven't seen Cars 2, so I'm hardly in a position to judge. Maybe the feature is brilliant, despite the lackluster reviews. Maybe the critics on Rotten Tomatoes are way off base.
But I did see the Oscar winner Toy Story 3 last year, also most of its competitors. And while I liked TS3 a great deal, I thought How to Train Your Dragon was better. Considerably better. But Pixar's brand counts for a lot, and when the ballots were counted, the Emeryville studio walked away with the little gold man.
Should the Oscar have gone to some other deserving party? Was justice done? Put twenty film critics in a room and have them argue the topic, there would likely be no consensus. And in this corporatist age, the Oscars are a commercial enterprise anyway, one more ceremony offering shiny statues in an era crowded with Golden Globes and "People's Choice" Awards. So maybe in the end, it doesn't matter.
But if the L.A. Times is to be believed (and why should it?), Cars 2 will have a hard time even getting a nomination this time around. Me, I think the nomination is in the bag. The Times also believes that John Lasseter is in denial about his latest directorial effort, but come on already. John is just being a good, professional filmmaker.
Very few directors worth their salt ever say: "Yeah, that last picture of mine sucked." It would incur the wrath of the conglomerate that paid them big money to make the thing, and isn't what most directors believe about their latest creations anyway. (Outside of Mr. Spielberg bemoaning 1941, I can't recall a major director confessing to turning out a turkey. Nobody but nobody does it close to release time.)
Lastly, the Times seems to think that Mr. Lasseter can't be an effective overseer of animated features if he's so wrong-headed about his own work. I would submit that one less-than-great feature isn't indicative of anything, except that John Lasseter is human, and capable of making a not-great film. Based on what I know of projects moving down the pipeline under his watch at Walt Disney Animation Studios, John remains an effective top-kick who is greenlighting solid, entertaining pictures. Money making pictures.
What more, really, could any fine conglomerate -- especially the Walt Disney Company -- want?
Posts
21 comments:
Being hard on other peoples work is easy, and you're usually right when you point something out. But being hard on our own work is hard, especially when you're surrounded by yes-men who are afraid to tell you when you're wrong
My interactions with JL have always left me with sincere admiration for just how good he is at everything. But calling his own film a lemon when it's a lemon is his kryptonite.
I think Disney and Pixar will be okay.
This won't be the first Oscar they've lost and I assume it won't be the last.
Though I suspect no one's allowed to mention those losses out loud in JL's presence...
Cars 2 was not as abysmal as all of the critics made it out to be, nor a "great" movie as John says it is. The film lacked the charm and heart of the original Cars (even with the cliche story), swapping in instead over-the-top action and too much Mater. I found the film to be mildly entertaining as an action flick, but I don't think it is Best Animated Picture worthy.
I do think this is the beginning of (not the end) but of the Pixar-Is-Not-God-Era. If next year's "Brave" features a female protagonist anything strong-willed, all the little boys (and I mean all boys, ages 5-60) will go "yuck! girls! I'm not seeing this!" And thus, the film will be lambasted, whether it is good or not (think: "Princess and the Frog"). And if the Monsters Inc 2 is as pointless as the initial summary suggests, then Pixar has a rough road ahead of them. At least for a few years.
"And thus, the film will be lambasted, whether it is good or not (think: "Princess and the Frog)"
you're jumping the gun. PATF was NOT a good movie, I can only say that after I saw it, but I do think Brave will not be judged a priori. Besides, I cant be the only one looking forward to 'Monsters Inc 2', am i?!?
d
yes you are el diablo... success in this industry comes and goes, this is nothing new.
Lasseter is at WDAS a lot these days. Lots of creative things coming out of the mouse house. I think the success of Tangled got the execs attention, and gave the artists a shot in the arm to use it as a springboard to new, exciting films. Lasseter is encouraging a lot of exploration and the stuff coming out of Disney in the years to come will surprise people I think.
Pixar, on the other hand, seems to be coasting.
If this is what you considered failure, count me in.
I've always wanted my own train, private driver and vineyard.
He's a real man of the people ain't he. Just don't ask him for a decent salary - he wouldn't want to cut out any of the necessities...
Disney pays WAY better than Pixar, for what it's worth. Thank the union.
Funny thing about this movie... Saw the ratings, never went to the theater. Marketing seemed to not have reached my kids so I just ignored it. I'd actually forgotten about it until my wife picked up the dvd the other day. I haven't seen my kids laugh that hard in a while. My wife thought it was great!? I thought it was good not great, but nowhere near as bad as the critic painted it. It's had a couple of happy repeat viewings already. So you have to ask yourself who is right here? I'll go with JL. My kids love the first cars also.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Lasseter is at WDAS a lot these days. Lots of creative things coming out of the mouse house. I think the success of Tangled got the execs attention, and gave the artists a shot in the arm to use it as a springboard to new, exciting films. Lasseter is encouraging a lot of exploration and the stuff coming out of Disney in the years to come will surprise people
Well, I read that Tangled was a financial disappointment.
'Well, I read that Tangled was a financial disappointment.'
It was also a dissapointment as a film going experience...
Wow, talk about revisionist history. Tangled cost 260mil to make, but then grossed 590mil worldwide. Its also the #1 selling DVD (still) in 2011 (extra 100 million there)
It also made a killing in merchandising, as has been discussed on this blog ad-nauseum.
It also earned an A+ cinemascore rating and an 89% on Rotten Tomatoes. Millions of people loved the film, and set the standard for human animation in the industry
If it was a disappointing film-going experience for you, thats individual and subjective. But for us Disney Animation employees, it was transformative and special and one of the most fulfilling projects of our lives. And the execs see WDAS as a serious creative force, and it feels great. WDAS finally has some respect.
Poo-poo it all you want though, if it makes you feel better.
Oh sure, a movie that made 590 million dollars worldwide and that was acclaimed by critics and audiences around the world and sold 6.2 million DVD copies with 95.3 million dollars in home market revenue is a total disappointment.
Stupid Trolls.
Not a film disappointment but the numbers are the numbers. Keep in mind from the 590M gross, Disney gets a little less than half of that (maybe 270? or production break even) but that is without the advertising costs, which are typically 50% of the budget. So good thing it made 93M in DVD sales. It's a really good film that appears to have gotten burdened with heavy production costs.
El Diablo didn't like Tangled??!
Oh no!! That certainly outweighs the A+ it received from CinemaScore, the excellent word-of-mouth it generated, the hundreds of millions it made, and the many, many complimentary comments I've personally heard from a wide range of people.
But now that anonymous 'El Diablo' has pronounced his verdict, the movie is now officially terrible.
The bottom line is that audiences expect way more today after seeing almost a decade of 3D animated family movies, and the horse race between Pixar and Dreamworks is starting to falter. There are many more movies out there every year, production timelines are generally decreasing to keep costs down, and frankly, there is less risk taking going on in this market with so much solid profit from the genre coming in. Less original ideas, in every avenue, not just story. Production pipelines are becoming stale and predictable. Dreamworks achieved a real high mark with Dragon, while Puss feels like you're being served leftovers. Same with Pixar. John L. has peaked, so it's high time they all make room for new blood to steer the ship. And that will be extremely difficult for them to do. The honeymoon is over with 3D family movies, and the genre will have to find a new wind to float it through the changes. The most exciting family film being previewed in the theater, IMO, was Hugo. It seemed magical compared to 3D animation trailers. I think most feature animation directors would look at that and see their own future being in live action, unless their own medium offers some new challenges.
Wow! I didn't know Martin Scorsese posted on this blog. How exciting!
Sorry Martin, but your basic premise is wrong. Sure not every CG film is a Grand Slam, but a large number of them are still Home Runs including a stinker like Cars 2. The audience still loves CG for better or worse. There are just so many of them now the average goes up that some are going to bomb - kind of like Live-Action...and probably like Hugo will - sorry Martin.
Why is no one talking about Winnie the Pooh as a contendor for the Oscar? It has a 90% on Rotten Tomatoes, a better score than both Dreamworks offerings. It was also a good overall film even if many didn't go out to the theater to see it in July.
Post a Comment