tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7883884226922484684.post5361073322962480646..comments2014-03-27T19:06:36.782-06:00Comments on Courtmark Media: Toy Story 3Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13247121645625832136noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7883884226922484684.post-72084185794194667712010-06-29T19:10:11.571-06:002010-06-29T19:10:11.571-06:00Can't wait to see it now (even though I HATE m...Can't wait to see it now (even though I HATE movies that make me cry)! BTW - that spider pic is really creepy!shaunandninahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03570304299461166945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7883884226922484684.post-13566703705118848742010-06-29T00:02:48.432-06:002010-06-29T00:02:48.432-06:00As always, a solid review. And I have to agree wit...As always, a solid review. And I have to agree with everything you said. Sadly, I really can't take issue with any part of your review, so how am I supposed to contribute a meaningful comment? Even if I can't, I have to say that I was surprised by the emotion that Pixar was able to pull out of the audience throughout the movie. As a general rule, if I find myself caught up in some of the emotion, it must be legit, because I tend to think I'm pretty good at catching the cliche, formulaic methods that too many films use to stir the audience's emotional pot. Toy Story 3 surprised me with how well it pulled it off. Even if parts were a bit cliche, it was so smooth I probably would have accepted had Pixar invited me back to her apartment...ok, let's face it, Pixar is sexy enough I'd accept anyway, but I think you get the idea. This movie stands out with the other Toy Story films, or with Wall-E, or The Incredibles as an almost black-and-white contrast with some of Pixar's flops (in my opinion of movie quality, not box office success) such as Cars, or A Bug's Life. I was asking myself at the end of the movie what the difference was, and I can only say that it is entirely character-driven. Now, Toy Story 3 has a bit of a shortcut because Pixar had already so masterfully endeared us to its characters in the previous films, but that's what makes sequels so difficult--you have to take the audience to a different, often deeper level with them in order for it to work. Pixar did it again. As I mentioned, Cars was a prime example of a movie that just couldn't do it for me. I like cars, but you couldn't get me to care about that damn red car because the plot was all too predictable (as was most of the humor). As I said, Pixar didn't rely on the formulaic, predictable story twists in Toy Story 3. We had a hint of something with Buzz and Jessie, but it was never central to the storyline--it was merely a pinch of something extra to think about, which allowed for some decent humor. Likewise, we were never dealing with a romantic interest with Woody, because we all know how that storyline would unfold. So Pixar said "forget it, let's do something more creative." Thank you, Pixar. So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that Pixar succeeded in staying away from what I would view as Disney's typical milking of successful characters to create a mediocre sequel, and they found a way to stay true to the roots of Toy Story and its characters (which is why we all wanted to see this movie in the first place) and still broadened the scope of their development and the story. That's not an easy thing to do, especially working under Disney, who has a nasty reputation for producing sequels to every good movie they create and making them suck as much as Beverly Hills Chihuahua (also due for a sequel, I hear). Kudos to Pixar for not screwing up some of the most lovable animated characters we've come to know.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16796679436416030782noreply@blogger.com