Ain't It Cool News (
Animation and Anime

A new Teaser Goes Up For Pixar's UP!

Hey folks, Harry here... Aren't you curious as hell about where this film is going? In some ways it feels like the most Miyazaki of all PIXAR films from what we've seen thus far, but the narration's insistence that he'll be exploring a lost world... What's UP? Personally, I can't wait to find out!

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:12 p.m. CST

    Up what?

    by MattsSwellHouse

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:12 p.m. CST

    I love Pixar

    by Murraypalooza

    that kids facial reaction to 'no!' is classic.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:12 p.m. CST

    I meant what's up?

    by MattsSwellHouse

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:17 p.m. CST

    Looks good to me.

    by CoursinLarry

    And I'll see any Pixar movie in Digital 3-D. Those balloons are gonna be a joy to watch.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:23 p.m. CST


    by MrD

    About time we got a kids movie about old people. And no, that's not sarcasm.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:24 p.m. CST

    What's up with the DVD column Harry?

    by half vader

    None this week, big fella?

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:24 p.m. CST

    Seriously Pixar, enough...

    by waggy

    You have consistently raised the bar too high and made producing truly great animated films appear way too easy. It is a slap in the face to everyone else making movies right now. This trailer gives me no confidence that you have any intention of ending that trend, and it saddens me that every non-Pixar movie will continue to seem crappy in comparison for the forseeable future

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:24 p.m. CST

    Thank Xenu for Pixar

    by Hamtaro Hentai

    Originality isn't dead in Hollywood. (although I WOULD like to get an 'Incredibles' sequel someday.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:25 p.m. CST

    I love the explanation of Up...

    by half vader

    as a "coming of old-age" story...

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:28 p.m. CST

    Pixar teasers

    by ChildOfMen

    Pixar seems to do a pretty good job with these teasers, in terms of only giving you a taste of the basic setup - thinking back to how they did the first teasers for the Incredibles or Wall-E or Finding Nemo, they left a lot of what the movie would actually be ABOUT to the imagination. So although on one hand, my instinct with this is to say "ok, so some old guy goes floating up in his house and a kid is along with him", I figure it's safe to say it will be a lot more.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:28 p.m. CST

    Man, I am so curious about this. But...

    by henrydalton

    ...Did they REALLY need that big Pixar montage at the start? As if ANYONE doesn't know who they are? I guess it let them show as little footage from the actual film in the trailer as possible... Fucking teases.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:30 p.m. CST

    Danny Deckchair anyone?

    by Scathing

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:42 p.m. CST


    by m_reporter

    Loved every bit of that trailer.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:48 p.m. CST

    This is the one studio I trust.

    by Larry of Arabia

    Each and every movie has been quality. You can rank them, debate their merits, but they are batting 1000. Nobody else, not even Eastwood, can claim that right now. Until they prove me wrong, sign me up for whatever comes out of the studio. The more experimental, the better.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:53 p.m. CST

    Looks good


    Imagine the poor newbie animator who had to study the texture, movement and lighting of balloons for this. Bet he gets flashbacks at a birthday party.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:55 p.m. CST

    That looks great!

    by Alkeoholic77

    I can't wait to see how this goes!

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:57 p.m. CST

    What's UP? would make a good ad campaign

    by zooch

    for this movie.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:58 p.m. CST


    by codymr

    Well said. I can't agree with you more... I have noting to add really, just seconding your opinion.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 4:58 p.m. CST

    Barely any missteps...

    by vanchimera

    The only thing Pixar have done that didn't turn me into slobbering jelly were Cars and Boundin', and both were better than 99% of the other cg flicks out there. They've never let me down, God bless those brilliant motherfuckers.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 5 p.m. CST


    by bornofdust

    Amazing. I love that it's directed by the guy who made Lifted, that was one of the best shorts I've ever seen.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 5 p.m. CST

    Every studio would KILL for their resume

    by performingmonkey

    I love every single Pixar movie with a passion. Even the worst (Cars? Bug's Life?) is still brilliant in many ways.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 5:11 p.m. CST

    is that kid from the Wall-E future?

    by BadMrWonka


  • Nov. 7, 2008, 5:12 p.m. CST

    Freaking balloons made me giggle

    by bah

    Damn you Pixar

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 5:31 p.m. CST

    My God

    by nukethefridge

    Wall E is a masterpiece. Film of the year, no question.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 5:35 p.m. CST

    Pixar always gets you...

    by Octaveaeon

    with the smallest of details. This time with the grumpy old man having to think about letting the kid in. It's ever so subtle but somehow, and regardless of what happens, you know you'll enjoy going on the journey with him. To everybody else in the movie business, take note: IT'S THE CHARACTERS STUPID!

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 5:44 p.m. CST

    Too revisionist on the Russ Meyer original

    by siouxfire

    Where's the friggen exclamation point?!

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 5:51 p.m. CST

    UP what?

    by the milf lover

    UP YOURS, every non-Pixar movie!

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 6:03 p.m. CST

    I don't need to know anything!

    by robotdevil

    It's evolved to that point... really... just tell me it's a (non-Cars) Pixar movie and I'm there. I don't need to know the title, or what it's about.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 6:10 p.m. CST

    Great trailer - too bad about the narration

    by Bot-Bot

    Pixar made better trailers before they merged with Disney. That trailer needed no narration, I mean, how many times do we have to hear the words "this summer..." or "from the studio that brought you..."

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 6:20 p.m. CST

    Looks good

    by jimmy_009

    Not too impressed with how they keep patting themselves on the back at the start of new teasers, but what can you do. They speak the truth.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 6:29 p.m. CST

    Am I alone ...

    by DennisMM

    in having tired of "3D" animation? It's not 3D; it's freakish and disturbing at times; and it sits uncomfortably (to me) between the "reality" of live action and the wonder of good flat animation. Give me classic Disney multiplane any day. And get out of my yard!

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 6:36 p.m. CST

    Digital 3D?

    by bobdaninja

    I thought they were making Toy Story 3 their first 3D film. When did that change? Not that I'm mad at all. Love 3D. I'll just need a designated driver to take me home since I can't see straight for a couple hours after the 3D films. Worth it, though.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 6:42 p.m. CST

    I love how everyone gushes over Pixar projects...

    by The Merk

    ...until about a week or two after they've come out, then people seem to act like they they were raped or something. That said, This looks great.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 6:42 p.m. CST

    huh looks like an old fashioned style story

    by Charlie_Allnut

    I like that Pixar doesn't take the easy way out w/ cheap fart jokes and such. They actually try to tell a quality story.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 6:44 p.m. CST

    Nice. Seriously.

    by quadrupletree

    Looks great. Can't wait to see this.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 6:59 p.m. CST


    by Anna Valerious

    I'm betting in about 8 years, he'll be the infamous 'canteen boy'...

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 7:11 p.m. CST

    WALL-E is my favorite now

    by GeorgieBoy

    I doubt anything Pixar does will be able to top in in my mind.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 7:35 p.m. CST

    The Crimson Permanent Assurance

    by Duncan Irons

    Trailer reminded me of Terry Gilliam's The Crimson Permanent Assurance from The Meaning Of Life... Old guys and flying buildings, you know...

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 8:06 p.m. CST

    Pixar is so overrated but they do decent movies

    by Rupee88

    They don't get nearly as annoying as Dreamworks animation or the other studios.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 8:14 p.m. CST

    Why are Pixar colors so ... colorful?

    by animadictio

    Pretty balloons

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 8:36 p.m. CST

    if you ask me

    by palooka_boy

    The "lost world" is a metaphor for pederasty.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 8:43 p.m. CST

    don't fret waggy & friends

    by darth rod

    after this one that looks charming, pixar is going to plunge to the magical world of unnecessary sequels (the marriage with the evil rat seems to have tainted them) the next two are toy story 3 and the wonderful cars 2.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 8:43 p.m. CST

    Pixar are magicians

    by batzilla

    How do they do it? Over and over again?! They truly are magic. NOBODY can touch them! Their attention to detail is astounding to me and the characters facial expressions say it all. The most incredibly talented bunch of animators alive are at Pixar.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 8:52 p.m. CST


    by Alientoast

    If they're gonna do a sequel, at least do Incredibles 2!

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 8:54 p.m. CST

    The main character looks like Spencer Tracy.

    by FuckMichaelBay

    And this looks like another winner from PIXAR.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 9:32 p.m. CST

    Guess I'll be the first to say it.

    by cookepuss

    Fuck Pixar.<p> <p> Yeah, visually, their stuff is the best of the best. Creatively, their stories are slowly and steadily sliding into the shitter.<p> <p> - Monsters, Inc. -- Unbelievably funny and original story<p> <p> - Finding Nemo -- Funny at times, but totally formulaic in every other way. Also a bit of a snoozer.<p> <p> - The Incredibles - Great visuals. Great voice acting. Funny. Some interesting observations about comics (eg. monologuing). Awesome movie, but relies a bit too heavily on tired plot devices.<p> <p> - Cars -- Great rendering. Spotty animation. Uneven voice acting. An "original" story that is, nearly beat for beat, a total rip-off of Doc Hollywood.<p> <p> - Ratatouille -- Great voice acting. Great visuals. Absurd story with some contrived conflicts. Can't say I care about the characters or their plights much.<p> <p> - WallE -- Incredible visuals. Heavy handed story telling. A nearly dialog-less 1st hour makes this a hard sell for most audiences. When people do speak.... Welcome to Cliche Land. Forced "romance" since only kids will find depth to this love story. Anybody over 10 years old... Implausible, forced, and a bit boring. I actually went with a couple of people who fell asleep. One who didn't pretty much hated it. Me? I found it a bit meh.<p> <p> Pixar's got unparalleled visual skills. As a professional CG animator myself, I'll give credit where credit is due. Unfortunately, their writing is formulaic. They need to acquire more outside writing talent. Their stuff is starting to stagnate. And for Lasseter to stand at the Oscars and claim that Cars was an original story inspired by his family trips.... Pfff!!! I'm sure that he was on a trip alright, of the non-prescription variety.<p> <p> Note to Pixar lovers: There's a world beyond Pixar. They may not have Pixar level visuals, though some do. They may not have Pixar caliber voice talent. However, there are guys out there telling stories that are more original and appeal to more adult audiences.<p> <p> So, yeah. Fuck Pixar.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 9:36 p.m. CST


    by cookepuss

    I'm not trying to incite riot or anything like that. I'm just burnt out on Pixar. It seems like everybody loves them unconditionally, as if they're not flawed. I can't be the only one tired of "The Pixar Way" of CG movies, right? <p> <p> Pixar stuff's great for kids and families, but I want CG with more bite I want something that isn't necessarily G or PG. (No. Beowulf doesn't count. Screw performance cap too. It's an insult to animators and everything that Tex Avery, Chuck Jones, or even Disney himself stood for.)

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 10:04 p.m. CST

    your not the only one santa

    by ennui

    Pixar has a lot of good things going for it, animation and production values most of all. I have 2 boys now 8 and 5 years old. They like Monsters Inc OK, Nemo is a bore, Incredibles imo is one of the 10 best movies made in the last 5 years, Cars was an ultra bore and Ratatouie should of ended at the first ending 90 minutes in and spared us the brutally boring 45 minutes that followed. We have not bothered with Wall E yet because word of mouth from people with kids was so poor. Though I may pick up the blue ray this weekend. Monster House was the best animated movie since the Incredibles, and UP looks like more showy preachy boredom with great visuals

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 10:12 p.m. CST

    i think i already love this

    by StrokerX

    sorry...but i do...oh and today's my birthday :)

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 10:25 p.m. CST

    god here we go again

    by robamenta

    with everyone gushing just cause its pixar...dont be such brain washed idiots...its a film studio that makes some good and a lot of mediocre stuff, no worse no better than all the cgi stuff that out these you all can start to tell me what a jerk i am. let the flaming commence

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 10:54 p.m. CST

    Embed technology sucks

    by JumpinJehosaphat

    It's a herky-jerky mess and painful to sit through. Post download options, please.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 11:05 p.m. CST

    I thought Crimson Permanent too, Duncan...

    by JustinSane

    ...that, and that the title is the same as a Russ Meyer movie.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 11:09 p.m. CST

    Does this have anything to do with that Shania Twain album?

    by Curious Jorge

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 11:27 p.m. CST

    Nothing Special

    by grievenom

    I don't understand what everyone is so impressed by or amazed with. It looks run of the mill to me. Visuals don't look any better than the Monsters vs. Aliens trailer. Nothing about the premise is that interesting to me. A total MEH for me.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 11:37 p.m. CST

    Fuck pathos right in the ear....

    by Mick The Knife

    If we want to talk about cliched and pretentious, let's talk about pathos. I get sick of every 'relevant' movie coming down the pike trying to mindfuck with my head, then claim that they're somehow worthy of true art while they smoke their afterglow cigarillo. Pathos has its place, not its fucking pedestal...that is especially true of Pixar, Miyazaki, the best of Disney, and every damn fine movie out there. Hate 'Happily ever after'? Go watch "Rocket Attack USA". And Stay Off My Porch!!! Punk kids...

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 11:46 p.m. CST

    Elitists, oi !

    by Astrosquall

    I really get the feeling the people who hate on Pixar do it to be 'non-conformist' or something. They're either ridiculously nitpicky, or paint everything as a 'bore' or a 'snoozer'. Personally, Ratatouille I say is far and away my favourite film. If you can identify with the themes, it'll completely suck you in and leave you sobbing like a goddam baby. Man, with stuff like Madagascar and the unashamedly derivative Shrek movies out there it's a waste of energy hating on Pixar.

  • Nov. 7, 2008, 11:58 p.m. CST

    Hey everybody! Look at me! Look at me! I don't like stuff!

    by rbatty024

    Pixar isn't perfect, but it is still the best animation studio in the U.S. (sadly enough the only people giving Pixar a run are the DC Comics DVDs). Incredibles, Ratatouille, Toy Story 1 & 2, and Monster's Inc. are all great films, regardless of the fact they're animated. Nemo is a bit overrated, bust still entertaining and fun from start to finish. This looks like another imaginative winner. What do you want, another Madagascar 3?

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 12:14 a.m. CST

    Wall-E is the best movie I've seen in ten years, maybe more.

    by mefrog

    I've said it. I stand by it.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 12:46 a.m. CST

    Wasn't it a widower going to a rainforest?

    by PirateEmery

    With a kid that's trying to get a merit badge for helping the elderly?<p> If I remember correctly, that's exactly what's up.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 1:53 a.m. CST

    Pixar's stories are weak?

    by barneyshouldbeputdown

    Maybe if you're employed by Dreamworks or Imagi...

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 2:20 a.m. CST

    No 15-minute celebrity voices! YAY!


    Monsters Inc., Wall-E, and Toy Story are the only movies from Pixar that I've given a chance and I loved them. I HATE "celebrity voices" (Incredibles, Finding Nemo, Cars, etc.). This looks very promising.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 2:33 a.m. CST

    By that I mean...


    ...15 minutes of fame celebrities and those who should never be voice actors. It's a completely different art form form acting which most cartoon voice actors never perfected. Holly Hunter, Jason Lee, Justin Timberlake, Ellen, Larry the Cable Guy, Brad Garrett, etc...

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 2:37 a.m. CST



    Owen Wilson, Bonnie Hunt, Patton Oswalt, Janeane Garofalo, Brian Dennehy, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, uh... you get the point.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 3:01 a.m. CST

    the only studio truly doing original stuff

    by bacci40

    and the one that understands how to make a movie that appeals to all ages, by appealing to our inner child...i love these guys

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 3:08 a.m. CST are way too jaded

    by bacci40

    and mostly wrong in your assertions...for example, the incredibles was the movie ff tried to be, but failed miserably had you complained that it borrowed much from watchmen, without a tip of the cap, and that pissed you off...ok...but "tired plot devices" you are out of your frackin head...i have never been dissapointed by a pixar movie...i would like them to do some 2d in the future....i really miss the old style animated films

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 3:13 a.m. CST

    I don't see how this is original

    by caltsoudas

    Yeah, it looks fun. But Baum's Wizard of Oz + Roald Dahl's The Twits = a house being lifted into the air to a faraway land with balloons.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 3:34 a.m. CST

    CGI humans....

    by Doc_Hudson

    From Pixar are starting to look the same. I agree,....they are stagnating. In fact,....when I saw Wall*E,...I thought the use of REAL VIDEO was LAME-O. So I think the "haters" have a validity in their critiques. Thunderbird puppets are still Thunderbird puppets,.....even in different outfits.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 4:47 a.m. CST


    by Colonel_Blimp

    "As a professional CG animator myself, I'll give credit where credit is due. Unfortunately, their writing is formulaic." <P> Well, as a professional writer myself, I think their writing is brilliant. There's more to screenwriting than adhering to/breaking a formula.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 5:34 a.m. CST

    I'll tell you what's up...

    by Johnno

    My bandwidth charges... because my limit has been brought down from where I am. Digital Distribution is the future my ass! Now what the hell is going on here? Jeez, Pixar is making family friendly movies which usually necessitate happy endings. If you walked into any of these movies expecting them to kill Lassie at the end I don't know what you were thinking... But it would be cool to see Pixar and American 3D/2D studios make some more mature stuff. Oh well, there's always Japan.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 6:14 a.m. CST

    It already looks 10 times better than all the other CG flicks.

    by Mr Nicholas

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 7:11 a.m. CST

    What makes Pixar truly great

    by theycallmemrglass

    Are their bold concepts and major risk take. Cars was the most ridiculous and was the first pixar film I stayed away from in cinemas until recently I bought on DVD on the cheap. It was fucking awesome, i couldnt believe I am loving this film and kicking myself for losing faith in them momentarily. But it is Pixar. They can turn anything into heart and soul. A desk lamp, a toy, a rat, a car, a fish, any fucking thing and they can even make you wanna have sex with a sheep herder. Pixar is God, they were the creator. I followed their progress since the 80s when they churned out jaw dropping 5 minute cgi animated films at the rate of 1 every 2-3 years. Thats how long it took them to render at the time. Competitors dont even come close bar a couple of exceptions from Dreamworks, Monster House and Ants. Only those two films came close to something radical as Pixar. The only thing is Pixar is still adamantly universal in appeal where as Dreamworks Ants was the only film to date to target predominantly older audiences. Wall-E was an attempt at that but I think Pixar somehow missed that opportunity and made Wall-E too universally safe in the second half.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 7:16 a.m. CST

    "Professional CG animator" =

    by D_T

    "I once rendered some scrolling text for a local used car lot..."

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 9:41 a.m. CST

    U-stu, you're joking

    by bah

    I don't recall one Pixar movie that advertised who was doing the voices, except possibly Toy Story. I always have to check the cast list afterward and am surprised at who I was listening to. Pixar gets the *right* people, not the popular people. That's why they don't fill them with big names.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 10:01 a.m. CST

    Mr. Fredrickson looks to be based on Joe Pa.

    by vitruvius

    At least a greyer version of Mr. Paterno.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 10:25 a.m. CST

    I'm ready for Pixar to make a movie with photo-

    by CreasyBear

    realistic people to match the eye-popping realism of all their inanimate objects. A sci-fi or action movie not necessarily safe for five year olds. I know their hearts are in it for stories safe and simple enough for little kids, but how amazing would a grand epic movie be with their attention to detail? And no, I haven't seen Final Fantasy, because it looks like a piece of shit. The hypothetical movie I'm talking about is on par with the quality of the little-kid-friendly movies Pixar has made. (Save your breath to those of you eager to explain how deep and intricate the adult messages are in Wall-E, Incredibles, etc. I'm talking about a Pixar-quality animated movie that's too rough for kids, lunchbox-merchandise dollars be damned).

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 12:12 p.m. CST

    Wall-E should nominated for BP

    by zooch

    It's one of the best films of the year, period. The Academy probably won't consider it because they are out of touch.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 1:31 p.m. CST

    Can I just say..

    by Lemming

    remember in the 80's when it was ok to do movies about an old guy and a kid? Thank God those days are back and we've got over the 'EVERYONE IS A PEADOPHILE!!!11' crap.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 1:33 p.m. CST

    Im with CreasyBear

    by ChocolateJesusMan

    Pixar needs to make a film with Photo-Realistic people..hopefully "Gigantor" Or AstroBoy Someday

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 1:52 p.m. CST

    This.....actually looks promising. I'm surprised!

    by Organs

    I'm not at all a fan of the 3D CGI Disney/Pixar stuff I tend to think of as family-exploitation films. This looks promising because it's not about an anthropomorphic rat, car, toy, bug, ant, snail, squid, fish, stapler, or home pregnancy test. What's more, it's about a very old man--an unlikely main character. <br> <br> I still have my reservations because when a film comes from a studio more interested in selling merchandise and tickling pleasure centers of kids' brains, I tend to not be sold on the film. This might be somewhat good, though. And if I ever see it, I might be pleasantly surprised.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 2:28 p.m. CST

    Wow, what a breath of fresh air.

    by Roketopunch

    I agree with organs. I have been saying this for years. Why are all of the fucking CGI animated films about animals. Really. 2 years ago we had Barnyard, The Wild, Madagascar, Over The Hedge. Enough already, finally something new and it's probably going to be good!

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 2:51 p.m. CST


    by viola123

    I love this teaser. It's so good. Mr. Frederickson is too cute. I can't wait to find out more too. :)

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 4:41 p.m. CST

    Yeah, wonderful :)

    by Col. Tigh-Fighter

    GOD, I love me some Pixar!

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 4:57 p.m. CST

    Is this a remake of Russ Meyer's "UP"

    by cookylamoo

    With a real cat as Kitten Navidad?

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 5:06 p.m. CST

    "As a professional animator myself..."

    by Droid

    I know jack shit about storytelling! With the exception of Cars (weak, only by there insurmountable standards), EVERY Pixar film has been GENIUS. And the reason for that has nothing to do with animation. They are storytellers. They create real characters the audience can relate to who go on recognisable journeys. They have an arc. If Wall-e were not animated, it would have been instantly hailed as the best science fiction film of all time. As for "celebrity voices", Pixar cast the right actor for the role. Could you imagine Mike or Sulley voiced by anyone else? Buzz or Woody? Marlin? Bob Parr? Remy? To the (very few) Pixar haters. Fuck you and go buy your ticket for Madagascar. Tossers.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 6:17 p.m. CST


    by jimmy_009

    Are you -really- freaked out and disturbed by 3D animation? If so then seek mental help. I hate it when 'traditional animation is the only animation' jagoffs say how 'disturbing' and 'stiff' 3D animation is, when it clearly isn't anymore.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 7:45 p.m. CST

    Looks great

    by Greenleaf1

    I was laughing pretty hard at the final moment with the kid. Those balloon shots look amazing.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 7:59 p.m. CST

    God almighty Roketopunch (and organs)

    by half vader

    Have you also been saying for years that you hate how tons of 2d animated movies and shows are about animals? I reckon the ration is roughly the same. It's not like 2d isn't overrun with mice, you twit. Actually think for a second of how many of the most famous 2d cartoon characters are animals. Right.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 8:11 p.m. CST

    and Organs

    by half vader

    interesting that you say family, but interpret it as kids anyway. The thing about Pixar is that when they say family film, it's NOT a euphemism for kids. They mean adults too. If you bothered to pay attention, the jokes work for both, and sometimes even work differently for adults to the way they work for kids, at the same time. <p> You also after HOW many years still confuse Pixar with Disney. Disney is the marketing behemoth. Sure they've just merged, but you absolutely cannot accuse Pixar of being merchandise-driven. The first film to be made as part of the Disney companies was ironically one of their least commercial, being without dialogue for much of it! And the second, Up, is about an old guy. They don't even like to make live-action (italics) movies about old guys these days! And finally in case the irony escaped you, Toy Story wasn't made to sell toys, the film is actually the exact OPPOSITE/other way around! The toys made IT's story possible! And it's about as far from an 80s 2d animated show/glorified toy ad as you can get.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 8:19 p.m. CST

    hey , rsanta

    by Malebolgia

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 8:21 p.m. CST

    hey , rsanta

    by Malebolgia

    why don't you post that PIECE OF SHIT you've been working on, I'd like to see what's not "boring"?

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 9:26 p.m. CST

    If you are going to make photorealistic people

    by Larry of Arabia

    why not just make a movie with real people? I'm not against photorealism, I'm just questioning it as an artistic choice in most cases. People make something animated for a reason, and photorealism isn't usually part of it.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 9:56 p.m. CST

    Photorealism = Dead actors back on the job...

    by BurnHollywood

    Just a couple of decades, you'll be able to see what Charlie Chaplin and Lucille Ball (or whomever you choose) looked like playing the leads in CASABLANCA. <p> Shit, they wouldn't have to even be actors...I want to see George W. Bush as FORREST GUMP...<p> Endless porn movie possibilities, too.

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 10:54 p.m. CST

    Whoa.....this looks like fucking shit.


    What the hell is the target demographic? Why would kids want their parents to take them to see a movie about an annoying old man?

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 11:36 p.m. CST

    UP! had me at the balloons!...

    by DS9Sisko

    ..and the chubby cub scout at the end. LOL

  • Nov. 8, 2008, 11:55 p.m. CST

    Old people have been done before...

    by Johnno

    Case in point 'Howl's Moving Castle' by Hayao Miyazaki. Pixar worships him and this is probably their attempt at it. But if Pixar wants to show me they've really got balls I want to see them provide their answer to 'Princess Mononoke'!<br><br>As for photorealism and questioning it for artistic purposes, it has plenty of artistic purposes! TO say they should've just gone live action is like calling up Alex Ross and asking him why he didn't just use photographs in his comic panels instead of wasting his time painting realistically! Making photoreal stuff whether it's painting, airbrushing, or 3D is skill and very artistic! SO I see no problem with anyone trying to make a photoreal movie completely from CG. Besides, with CG the possibilities are endless. For example go study the action scenes and camera work in a film like 'FF7: Advent Children' and tell me how it can be done exactly like that in live action. It's impossible. A live action movie would use CG and CG doubles for that stuff anyway! You won't believe how much CG is actually used in live action these days and you won't ever notice! Sometimes entire scenes are 100% CGI. Anyway I bet we'll be discussing this a great deal once Avatar is fucking our eyeballs out in 2009...

  • Nov. 9, 2008, 1:25 a.m. CST


    by geek molester

    Finally, a mistep from Pixar! Will you fan boys stop fellating them now?

  • Nov. 9, 2008, 8:30 a.m. CST

    Looking good

    by Jaws Wayne

    The Pixar worshipping really goes a bit too far, but this certainly looks like a very nice movie so far. Is the old dude gonna battle monsters ? I'm all for old dude VS monsters movies, so bring it on. And the guy that said (and hasn't even seen !) Holly Hunter wasn't a good choice for voicing Mrs. Parr/Elastigirl/Mrs. Incredible is clearly off his rockers. That movie has easily the best voicework with visuals matching from any CGI/Animated film I know. Come on Mr. Bird, start working on another adventure about the Supers oke ?

  • Nov. 9, 2008, 8:33 a.m. CST

    Remake - The Iron Giant

    by Jaws Wayne

    Just came up with the idea of Pixar doing a 3-D CGI remake of Brad Bird's The Iron Giant. Now, how fuckin' cool would that be...

  • Nov. 9, 2008, 9:45 a.m. CST

    Reminds me of "The 21 Balloons" book

    by RogueWarrior65

    Ah, memories of fifth grade. Somebody ought to make that into a film. But I digress. Up looks great as all Pixar films do. But I can see a lot of Darwin-award nominees trying this out for themselves. Then again, the herd must be thinned somehow. The WSJ had an interesting comment about Dreamworks animation versus Pixar. With Pixar, it's all about the story. With Dreamworks it's more about a collection of funny lines.

  • Nov. 9, 2008, 11:42 a.m. CST

    No audience for old people? Cocoon did big bucks

    by Col. Tigh-Fighter

    The grumpy old man in Home Alone who ends up being a hero. <p> We love us some grumpy old people finding a new lease of life :)

  • Nov. 9, 2008, 2:32 p.m. CST is hilarious

    by YND

    He hates how Pixar movies use celebrity voices... except in the cases where he's actually SEEN the movies. Those he loved. (What, Stu? Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Billy Crystal and John Goodman don't count as celebrities?) He also includes Oscar-winning (4-time Oscar nominee) Holly Hunter on his list of "15-minute celebrities". I mean, you don't have to like the woman, but calling her a flash in the pan seems pretty inaccurate.<p>For my money, Pixar's never made a bad film and even their weakest (CARS, imho) is completely watchable and doesn't pander to its audience. WALL*E is the only truly great movie I've seen so far this year (and I've seen a lot). I'll keep showing up for their stuff on opening day until they give me a reason not to. (Probably 2 or 3 reasons not to -- they've earned the right to whiff one at this point.)

  • Nov. 9, 2008, 6:26 p.m. CST

    good stuff

    by stupidmop

    Yeah I was laughing pretty hard at the end with the kid...looks good

  • Nov. 10, 2008, 2:40 a.m. CST

    This will not be Pixar's first flop.

    by SingingHatchet

    CARS 2 will be. You know it to be true. But who will do Paul Newman's voice now? I vote Peter Cullen.

  • Nov. 10, 2008, 2:41 a.m. CST


    by SingingHatchet

    On the Peter Cullen bit. How about Liam Nieson for Doc Hudson? Oh, and D@MN you Michael Bay and JJ Abrams, TINO and STINO makers gotta eat!

  • Nov. 10, 2008, 12:12 p.m. CST

    Has a very National Film Board of Canada feel to it.

    by Royston Lodge

    And that's a very good thing.

  • Nov. 10, 2008, 1:05 p.m. CST

    cars sucked. rat movie sucked...wall-e.. dissapointed me

    by FleshMachine

    i felt cars was a bad idea (living cars? weak) the rat movie made no sense (the puppeting device was SOO contrived) and wall-e well i really wanted to love wall-e..but i barely laughed at all...(why would EVE have weapons and shoot at anything that moves if shes searching for life?? made no sense...and the fat people on the ship...weak.) it had a charm but it never lived up to pixars previous films...toy story 1-2, bugs life, monsters, nemo, incredibles...all make me laugh every time...they still have a certain magic..pixar has become derivitive of itself...this might be promising tho.

  • Nov. 10, 2008, 4:01 p.m. CST

    You can't knock the PIXAR!


    When there's utterly unwatchable tosh out there mascarading as eciting kids movies like Journey to the Centre of the Earth, Speedracer and IGor!

  • Nov. 10, 2008, 11:31 p.m. CST

    Pixar casts who's right for the part, not for star power

    by rhcp2sweet

    Because if that were the case, than why would they cast Patton Oswalt as the lead in Ratatouille? He's nowhere near a household name and has never carried a movie before. FUCKING DUMBASSES

  • Nov. 20, 2008, 6:09 p.m. CST

    This looks awesome! Old Man Heroes!

    by Animation

    This looks amazing. I couldn't get into Cars but this one looks very cool. I love the look, and I like the idea about a grumpy old man as the main hero of the story. ROCK ON! Lewis