Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Guest

Toy Story 3

304 posts in this topic

bowen wrote:

: An improvement over the previous trailers. I am less worried.

I agree that it's an improvement. But note: it emphasizes wacky! wacky! action! rather than the plot details that were key to the previous trailers. For those who think Pixar movies of late have tended to start on good notes and then got lost in wacky! wacky! action! sequences, this shift in advertising is not necessarily THAT much of an improvement.

Then again, this is a sequel to Toy Story, after all. It needs to be judged by the precedents set in those 1990s movies, not by the higher aspirations of Pixar's more recent output.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still worried. The trailer was an improvement, but only slightly. Maybe the full-length trailer will do more to assuage my concerns.

Edited by Ryan H.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note who appears at 0:49.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if these characters are still "attached" to their body parts after they have been dismembered, how does that affect the depiction of the hybrid characters in Sid's bedroom in the first movie? (Or does this remote connection only apply to members of the Potato Head family? But wait a minute, aren't Potato Heads DESIGNED to be dismembered and passed around? Can an eye or an arm be said to belong to one Potato Head and not another?)

I also cannot help but wonder if this movie will clarify whether Andy's family (or the daycare, for that matter) is AWARE of the fact that Woody and Jessie are vintage '50s collectibles (as per the retconning in the second movie).

And, a la the movie version of Where the Wild Things Are, I cannot help but wonder if Toy Story 3 will finally explain why we never see Andy and Molly's father. (Although, hmmm, according to Wikipedia, there are indications outside the films that Andy and Molly's father is DEAD. Considering Molly was still a baby in the first movie, that's... interesting. Could add a whole new subtext to the seemingly happy birthday party at the beginning of the first film. Or explain why Andy is so desperate to cling to toys like Woody, who is presumably a hand-me-down from his dad.)

Edited by Peter T Chattaway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if these characters are still "attached" to their body parts after they have been dismembered, how does that affect the depiction of the hybrid characters in Sid's bedroom in the first movie? (Or does this remote connection only apply to members of the Potato Head family? But wait a minute, aren't Potato Heads DESIGNED to be dismembered and passed around? Can an eye or an arm be said to belong to one Potato Head and not another?)

You're over-thinking a movie about talking toys here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bowen wrote:

: You're over-thinking a movie about talking toys here.

I refer you back to Tolkien's essay on the difference between creating belief in a sub-created world and suspending disbelief because the spell is broken.

And since I spend a lot of my time with Potato Heads and other toys these days, yeah, I've got plenty of time to think about this stuff. Just imagine how much time people must have to think about this stuff when they're being PAID to do so!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bowen wrote:

: You're over-thinking a movie about talking toys here.

I refer you back to Tolkien's essay on the difference between creating belief in a sub-created world and suspending disbelief because the spell is broken.

There is no way to get someone to suspend disbelief in talking toys who is determined to dig deep enough. You can either choose to enjoy the story or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Although, hmmm, according to Wikipedia, there are indications outside the films that Andy and Molly's father is DEAD. Considering Molly was still a baby in the first movie, that's... interesting. Could add a whole new subtext to the seemingly happy birthday party at the beginning of the first film. Or explain why Andy is so desperate to cling to toys like Woody, who is presumably a hand-me-down from his dad.)

Indications outside the films? Are you talking about the Wikipedia entry itself, which states as a matter of fact that Andy's dad "got killed and died"? That sounds like typical Wikipedia BS to me.

Also, why are we to presume that Woody is a hand-me-down from Andy's dad?

Not being argumentative here, just genuinely curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bowen wrote:

: There is no way to get someone to suspend disbelief in talking toys who is determined to dig deep enough.

Perhaps not, but since you're not referring to me (when have I ever expressed any difficulty believing in talking toys?), that has nothing to do with what I said.

: You can either choose to enjoy the story or not.

Really? That sounds a little like saying you can choose to fall under the spell or not. Maybe Tolkien would have agreed, maybe not. But it sounds to me like the condescending-to-suspend-disbelief that he described is more of an active choice than the being-under-a-spell-that-has-not-yet-been-broken that is the ideal state of anyone on the receiving end of an act of storytelling.

morgan1098 wrote:

: Indications outside the films? Are you talking about the Wikipedia entry itself, which states as a matter of fact that Andy's dad "got killed and died"? That sounds like typical Wikipedia BS to me.

Yeah, I don't credit that line at all. But the entry also refers to some sort of "Ultimate Guides to the Films" that apparently indicate Andy's mom is a widow. I don't know what these "Ultimate Guides" are or how canonical they are, though. Assuming they even exist. (If, however, Andy's dad had recently died or left the family, it would certainly explain why Andy's mom was planning on moving the family at the beginning of the first film: they all needed a fresh start. And if there HAD recently been a divorce in the family, it might explain why the toys are so much more acrimonious to each other in the first film than they are in the sequel(s). Too many bad vibes in the air.)

: Also, why are we to presume that Woody is a hand-me-down from Andy's dad?

Well, Woody is old, for one thing. As per Toy Story 2, he's a 1950s product that was apparently discontinued after the launch of Sputnik and the rise of space-themed toys towards the end of that decade. Andy's mom also calls Woody "an old family toy" when Al (from Al's Toy Barn) tries to buy him during the yard sale at the beginning of that movie. (Later on, Stinky Pete mockingly calls Woody a "hand-me-down cowboy doll", and it's possible he's saying this based on something that Woody told him, but I don't believe the film ever spells that out.)

Of course, if Woody IS a 40-year-old hand-me-down in the first two films (and thus a 50-year-old hand-me-down in the new film), then Andy would be his second owner, at least. And that, in turn, makes it interesting that Woody would feel such an intense bond with Andy. He's switched owners and watched one of his former owners grow apart from him before, so why couldn't it happen again?

Or do the toys somehow get their memories erased when they switch owners? (If they do, then we'd have to explain why Jessie presumably still remembers her previous owner after she permanently switches her allegiance to Andy and/or Molly.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Collider and /Film both have fairly extensive lists -- amply illustrated, of course -- of the Pixar-themed "Easter eggs" in the most recent Toy Story 3 trailer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The international trailer has a few slight differences from the North American trailer:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I missed this when it was mentioned earlier, but I loved the Totoro cameo in the trailer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This clip is ultra, ultra, ULTRA brief, but apparently it comes from Disney's Swedish website and this is all they had:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Toy Story 3 screened at ShowWest, and Twitter's getting reactions.

Slashfilm: Toy Story 3 was great, last 30 minutes were pure brillance.

Elsewhere:

@elguapo1 Toy Story 3 was fantastic. People were crying at the end.

@BenHeckenkamp: Toy Story 3. Wow. Simply beautiful. Amazing.

@firstshowing: Toy Story 3 was wonderful, so much fun and heartwarming, too! Totoro is in it a few times as well. Pixar at their best as always.

@screencrave Just saw Toy Story 3. How is it ALWAYS so good?

@EDouglasWW: Just saw Toy Story 3 at Showest... Brilliant job

@Da7e Looks like Toy Story 3 just ended it's screening at Showest and KILLED in the best possible way.

@colliderfrosty: Toy story 3 continues pixars streak of brilliance. Last 20 or 30 minutes wrecked me.

Yeah, sure. I've seen the trailer. I'm sure it's a huge letdown.

Edited by Overstreet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, obviously, anyone who says "Pixar at their best as always" has pretty much drunk the Kool-Aid and doesn't need to be taken seriously. But of course, that's just one Tweet out of many (and this is presumably not a complete selection of Tweets).

It will be interesting to see what happens when actual reviews start coming out. We all know how ecstatic first reactions often fade when the people who write them are given enough time to reflect on what they've seen. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For "a complete selection of Tweets", just search for "Toy Story 3" on Twitter. So far, I haven't seen a negative tweet to mix things up. FWIW. One person damned it with "pretty good."

Nice to see folks highlighting the last 20 minutes, for a change.

Edited by Overstreet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Overstreet wrote:

: So far, I haven't seen a negative tweet to mix things up.

Well, of course not. Thoughtful considerations of the film probably can't be compressed to 140 words, and anyone who would write such a thing might very well need some time to construct a defensible argument, especially in light of all the predictable glee-clubbing. There's a heck of a lot of good will for the Toy Story franchise going into this movie, so I don't expect anyone to go into the movie wanting to hate it, and I expect anyone who has qualms with the movie might want to take some time to find the proper "perspective" on it.

: Nice to see folks highlighting the last 20 minutes, for a change.

Heh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. Many of the film bloggers I follow relish tweeting that initial "ugh" after a movie. Haven't seen that yet. FWIW.

Time will tell. I'm sure somebody here who isn't as excited about Toy Story 3 will feel compelled to show us the very first vaguely negative thing on the film that appears, mere seconds after it's been posted.

Me, I've a hard time thinking of filmmakers who have earned my trust and never really let me down. So I make no apologies for being excited about an upcoming Pixar film. Some of their films are better than others. I've been vocal about my criticisms, and I keep anticipating a blow-out. But I've loved them all anyway. And I've had no Kool-Aid whatsoever. As the years go by, I continue to learn from their storytelling style, and their work holds up better than any other animation studio I know ... with only Studio Ghibli worth mentioning in the same conversation.

I would never say that a few hurried Tweets are conclusive, but they're certainly a good sign to me.

Edited by Overstreet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Overstreet wrote:

: I would never say that a few hurried Tweets are conclusive, but they're certainly a good sign to me.

And they might be to me, too, if I had a clue who any of those people are. But certainly "Pixar at their best as always" is my cue to ignore the person who wrote THAT, at least.

I wonder what the tweets after The Phantom Menace would have been, if Twitter had existed back then. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0