The Pixar Perspective: #14 - Monsters University (2013)

The last in an ongoing series looking back at the feature films of Pixar Animation Studios

And so, we come to the end of the Pixar Perspective with prequel Monsters University. Set some years before the events of 2001/2002’s Monsters’ Inc., it follows more or less the same methods that other studios use for their prequels - how the protagonists came to be. We have Mike and Sulley (Billy Crystal and John Goodman) starting off as enemies and becoming the close friends we see in the original. However, unlike most prequels, it works. It may rely a bit too much on little cameos and lines to relate to Monsters, Inc., but it has a story which breaks usual convention. Most films tell their audience that they have the capacity to doing anything as long as they believe in themselves, but here it shows that that isn’t always the case. Mike believes that he can become a Scarer and is the hardest worker in class, but he isn’t suitable to be a scarer. But the skills that he’s learnt comes to great use as he teaches others how to be the greatest scarer - clear to see in Monsters, Inc.. It’s a great moral.

Mike and Sulley are still a lovable duo here, with Wazowski taking over as lead with great gravitas. He may come off as obnoxious during the early stages, but that doesn’t stop his great characterisation winning audience hearts. Sulley is also a good watch, with his slacker style and character growth allowing some great moments. The duologue between him and Mike by the lake in the third act is an incredibly emotional scene which wouldn’t work outside of this material. The only other returning character - at least within the story - is Randall (Steve Buscemi). Here, they give an incentive for his maniacal doings in Monsters, Inc. and he too is fun to watch. However, it does seems like they added him to rival fraternity Roar Omega Roar for the sakes of this incentive, which does detract from his appearance here.

Mike and Sulley’s fellow fraternity members of Oozma Kappa are played mainly for humour - especially in the first stages of their appearance - but they are a great band of brothers. You have mature student Don (Joel Murray), college wacko Art (Charlie Day), debative duo Terri and Terry (Sean Hayes and Dave Foley, who was previously Flik in A Bug’s Life), and incentive-less Squishy (Peter Sohn); each member given a chance to shine throughout the film with either hilarious or brilliant results. As for Dean Hardscrabble (Helen Mirren), she is a rather menacing teacher who sadly is removed more a majority of the film; appearing in a handful of lessons and Scare Game events. But she holds the floor when she does appear, and her stern design allows much to enjoy from her. 

The animation is stunning, and clearly far away from Pixar’s origins with Toy Story. Outside of the monsters, the surroundings are incredibly lifelike, and shots of buildings and greenery brings wonder as to how the studio managed to make something look so real. Even the humans are an improvement. The girls may follow the same in terms of face structure, but that structure is miles ahead of that of Andy’s in Toy Story or Merida’s in Brave. The monsters do have a bit more originality to them, with new designs in comparison to the first film, but too follow the format of “give them a different colour”. However, they have deaged Wazowski and Sullivan successfully.

Monsters University is an improvement over Monsters, Inc., with even more likable characters, some great humour, a story which thrives in standing out from the crowd amidst its usual format, and the best animation by Pixar to date. It has an excellent third act filled with emotion following the action-packed second act and the set-up first, and a conclusion filled with tension and scares. It does waver with some characters, but it doesn’t stop being one of Pixar’s best films. 9/10

The Pixar Perspective: #13 - Brave (2012)

An ongoing series looking back at the feature films of Pixar Animation Studios

In the Pixar roster, Brave stands out by being the only one to date to have a female protagonist at its helm. Add the fact that it's their first princess for the Disney line and it was originally run by Pixar's first female director (Brenda Chapman, who left during the project due to creative disagreements), and you get a film which some of the audience were unhappy with. Its surprise Best Animated Feature win at the Oscars angered those who wanted Disney's Wreck It Ralph to win, and many were shocked when the film won. But with all these difficulties and lukewarm receptions aside, is Brave a good film, and a better film than Pixar's previous critical failure Cars 2?

Princess Merida (Kelly MacDonald) is a partially likable lead, making a great start for hopefully a long run of female protagonists. There is one scene in which she is annoying - during Elinor's (Emma Thompson) first stages of transformation, she is incredibly uncaring for her mother and constantly asks the same question over and over - but thankfully that passes by quickly and she gets distracted by Bear-Mum. Outside of that moment, she's a good watch with some superb archery skills. Elinor is also a good character, with the dynamic between mother and daughter being a brilliant story unused by both Pixar and the Disney Princess line (unless you count Mother Gothel in Tangled, but she's not a real mother). She's humourous in the first stages of Bear-Mum, and it brings forth an ending filled with emotion. Father Fergus (Billy Connolly) is hilarious, with his care for his family being a great viewing. He is very briefly a villain in the story, but once real villain Mor'du reappears, he rejoins the side of the angels. As for the mainly mute triplets, they provide some slapstick comedy  and a great chase scene, but are absent in the second act of the film. Other characters provide some humour, but not much as the contemporary family of Dunbroch. Mor'du is likely going to scare younger viewers, and he isn't the strongest enemy in Pixar's roster, but does provide some good action sequences. As for Julie Walters' witch, she is sadly underused as her presence would add more to the film.

The story, as previously mentioned, is a good one. Not the most original, as it falls for the likes of fate and curses - pretty much a staple in Disney's filmography - but a good one nevertheless. Add the parent-child dynamic, and it is enjoyable. Perhaps if there was more depth and a larger role for some characters, the story would be better. It's humour is hit and miss, but too is strong. At times, it relies on jokes about breasts and nudity, which seems rather out of character for the studio as they usually use a higher class of humour. 

The visuals are stunning, which medieval Scotland never looking so beautiful. Merida's hair is complex and luscious and the Wisps - whilst underused - are lovely little things. However, these visuals are hidden within the designs of the humans, which are a bit lacklustre. When compared to the great lands and the Archery scenes, it does pull you out of the film - especially with a main who looks like a child's doll.

Brave is a good film, with a nice story which does dip in the middle, some strong animation amongst some rather dull human designs, and humour which is a mix of good and bad. The film does get a lot of bad word of mouth despite its good quality and the break from sequels, and it does have some faults, but it's an improvement over the last Pixar film. 7/10. 

Next Time: It's my job to make great students greater, not make mediocre student less mediocre

The Pixar Perspective: #12 - Cars 2 (2011)

An ongoing series looking back at the feature films of Pixar Animation Studios

Despite many considering the first Cars film back in 2006 a speedbump for Pixar, and the strong response the films prior and following the misstep, director John Lasseter raced ahead with an unwanted sequel which focuses on global locations and new characters as opposed to story - something Disney would repeat with 2014's Muppets Most Wanted. Here, Mater (Larry the Cable Guy) takes over as main protagonist whilst Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) is going about on worldwide races, tangled up in an espionage thriller with two British spies (Michael Caine and Emily Mortimer).

Mater is not a good protagonist. His humour is just as dry as his previous appearance, and is more idiotic than ever. They do give this aspect a story within itself with his epiphany, but it quickly diminishes to make way for an action-packed finale, thus leaving the development of his character mute. McQueen is an improvement over his previous appearance, but is still as annoyingly cocky as previously, as seen when in the presence of racing rival Francesco - who is just as annoying. The original Radiator Springs gang is mainly left out, with love interest Sally (Bonnie Hunt) staying behind and Doc Hudson being laid to rest following Paul Newman's death. Those that do come along for the ride are given little to do, whether it's introduce a location or give exposition. 

As for the new crew, you have spies Finn McMissile and Holley Shiftwell. Caine is as brilliant as ever, and it's clear he's giving his all for the film, and Mortimer gives much conviction - even if she's reduced to a love interest. The characters themselves are enjoyable, but they do fall for the usual "mistaken identity" aspect which many animated films fail to use well - Cars 2 is no exception. As for the villains, they're incredibly one-note. Axelrod (Eddie Izzard) is yet another British bad guy, so a predictable mystery in that respect, whereas his henchmen are just henchmen, nothing more. McQueen's fellow racers are just as one-note, with only Francesco having any screentime due to their rivalry. Others just have a line and then get disposed of.

The story is a mix of the first one - lots of racing - and of many different films from other studios as well as Pixar themselves - mistaken identity (You can find a whole lost of them here). It does have a smart idea with its references to the energy crisis and global warming, but it is very much pushed into the film. It incorporates the worldwide audience by taking the characters across the world to various countries - mainly Europe - but too feels tacked on. 

As ever, the animation is sublime, from the bright lights of Japan to the lush lands of France. The car designs are a lot more creative this time round, ranging in variety rather than having the same car over and over again in the crowd. It does quickly die down, especially with the 'evil' lemons, as you start to notice the same designs over and over again.

Cars 2 is a minor improvement on the first film as it's a lot less dull in terms of story. But the story it has is overdone and has worked on minor cases (recent example: The LEGO Movie). Characters are still hit and miss, especially from the returning protagonist side, but the animation is just as good as before. As a film on its own, it's good. As a Pixar film, it's another dud for them. 5/10.

Next Time: If you had the chance to change your fate, would you?

Trailer Talk: X-Men, Hoffman, Gone, Rover

A Most Wanted Man
One of the last films in the late Philip Seymour Hoffman's filmography, A Most Wanted Man looks genuinely interesting as spy films go. It does pry on the usual racial and religious stereotype by making Muslims the antagonist terrorists, which is something which I personally hoped would stop following Iron Man 3's clever twist, but there are some strong performances by the likes of Hoffman and Dafoe, so it might be good to keep an eye out for this film.

The Homesman
This western starring Tommy Lee Jones looks eerily similar to True Grit, with an old man and younger woman duo going on a mission and coming across some mishaps. The film screams for an Oscar, but it has a premise which is intriguing. The plot does seem like a simple travelling story with the likes of Indians and rapists in the midst, but perhaps future trailers will give more to latch on to.

God's Pocket
Another Hoffman trailer hit this week, but this time seems to be lacking in comparison. It has a simplistic murder mystery going on with some hints to comedy - but nothing which encourages the audience to be amused - but does seem that the actors are giving it their all. The trailer might not give the film itself justice, as it has little appeal.

Gone Girl
The trailer for the highly-anticipated David Fincher adaption is shorter than the rest of the trailers on this list, and for good reason. It easily builds up the mystery of the film, with a simple opening for what the film's basic premise is alongside dozens of miniscule cuts to how the film evolves. The last shot does seem a bit like a spoiler - I'm not sure, I haven't read the book - but it does look aesthetically pleasing thanks to Fincher's direction.

Walk of Shame
Yet another raunchy comedy. Nothing humorous, nothing appealing, very much a simple premise. Next!

If I Stay
Chloe Grace Moretz stars in a rather interesting film. It starts off with the usual teen film with love and a passion, the basic stuff. But by the time the car crashes, it starts to pick up as it revolves around not only the love for Jamie Blackley but the love for her family. Not the most original premise, but an interesting one nevertheless.

X-Men: Days of Future Past
Finally! Following some rather lacklustre teasers across the past few months, X-Men: Days of Future Past is at last looking past the idea of time travel and all these mutants banding together, with a trailer which not only focuses on the story but the action it has on store. It looks like a grand spectacle from both the 70s scenes and the dystopian Earth of the now. Add that it is the final trailer for the film (supposedly), it ends that side of the marketing with a bang.

The Rover
This looks like a clean slate for Robert Pattinson, as here he and Guy Pearce look like they're in an interesting film. The trailer doesn't give much of an idea about the film's plot - seemingly a search for Pattinson's brother - but the duo do look like they have a great on-screen rapport. Clearly something to look out for.

Jersey Boys
Based on the Broadway musical, Jersey Boys does look like it has been given a merciful replication onto the big screen by Clint Eastwood, as it does look appealing. It does follow the usual "before they were...they had to..." that many films follow, but that doesn't stop the great musical numbers and good performances taking a shine. The fourth wall breaks may be a bit too much, but helps explain the plot throughout the trailer. Something to keep an eye on.

Third Person
I'm not sure how to see this trailer. On one hand, it has an interesting premise revolving around three couples in three different areas. On the other, you have what is technically three different B-grade films. Each story seems like they have been done before in some way or form, and are only special here because they intertwine. Future trailers may help, but I somewhat doubt it.

The Pixar Perspective: #11 - Toy Story 3 (2010)

An ongoing series looking back at the feature films of Pixar Animation Studios

After 11 years, Pixar returned to the franchise that started it all - Toy Story - and received high acclaim. Not only was it the highest grossing animated film of all time (beaten recently by Disney's Frozen), but earned a Best Picture nomination much like Pixar's previous success Up. As a follow-up to the 1995 original and the 1999 sequel, it builds upon the elements brought up in Toy Story 2 about Andy (John Morris) growing up and moving away. Add the great timing for the film's release, it makes up a great premise. But with these factors in mind, is it a suitable conclusion to the trilogy?

A number of the original toys return for the third film, with those unavailable sold or given away within the past decade. Woody (Tom Hanks) and Buzz (Tim Allen) still have the great friendship, with Hanks and Allen successfully rekindling their chemistry 11 years on; whereas Jessie (Joan Cusack) is expanded on with a new romantic entanglement with Buzz along with an expansion on her fear of abandonment from her first appearance; even the secondary characters from the first two are given morr spotlight. The only character out of the returning bunch which is underused is Bullseye, but understandable as it's hard to use a mainly mute character. However, he is given a sweet moment in which he follows Woody out before being stopped.

As for the new characters, they're equally charming. The villainous Lotso (Ned Beatty) is incredibly menacing, which a great backstory to boot; Ken (Michael Keaton) is extremely amusing despite the possible joking about possibly being homosexual; Bonnie's toys are very likable, easily setting up the future adventures in Bonnie's room via the Toy Story Toons; however, some toys at Sunnyside are nothing more than henchmen. They do gave some great moments, especially Big Baby, but nothing which makes them stand out from the large cast. 

The story itself is very much a prison break film mixed with references with the previous films. It ranges from the imagination of a child (brim with references with the opening to the first Toy Story) to the darkness of the daycare centre and the dump with absolute ease, and with such amusing highlights like Spanish Buzz and emotional scenes like Andy's goodbye, it brings a highly enjoyable story.

The animation is clearly an improvement on the first two, with such advancements in the past 11 years allowing a lot more for the film. It's clear just how much it's changed, and it makes the film look better than ever. It's bright, it's foreboding, it's everything the film needs to be and then some.

Toy Story 3 does lack in characterisation for its new recruits, but it has an incredibly strong story with an emotional kick within its conclusion. It's a grand tour of the trilogy's strong points. Whilst not as strong as the 1995 predecessor, it is a worthy continuation and return to the franchise that could. 9/10.

Next Time: Whoever finds a friend finds a treasure

The Pixar Perspective: #10 - Up (2009)

An ongoing series looking back at the feature films of Pixar Animation Studios

The first Pixar film not only to be released in 3D but also to be nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards - the second animated film to do so and one of three so far - Up has a lot to live up to. But with the huge audience love for the film, in particular the opening 10 minutes, and Certified Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes (at 98%), it's clear that it is a film great. And when you watch the film, it's obvious that the positive remarks are correct.

The characters are extremely likable, with Carl Fredricksen (Edward Asher) easily winning as the best of the multiple protagonists. Asher brings a natural grumpiness that many elderly men have and creates a lovable grump in what could have been an unlikable star. Add Russell (Jordan Nagai), Pixar's first Japanese American, with his humourous charisma and lack of racial stereotype allowing an unannoying child star. Pixar also put a spin on the talking animal malarky that many studios have been following for decades by allowing dogs such as Dug (Bob Peterson) to speak via collar translator. An ingenious idea which brings the lovable Dug to life with his unintentionally smart wittiness. The mainly mute Kevin is also highly humourous, and villain Charles Muntz (Christopher Plummer) - whilst surprisingly staying alive what may be an age over 100 - is incredibly menacing, gaining the send off he truly deserved.

The story is just as imaginative and original as ever. Only with animation can such an idea revolving around a floating house work, and Pixar managed to do so with perfection. It underlies the life of love gone by with such beauty, whilst continuing the main plot revolving around Kevin and Muntz. Add some strong humour, and it creates a memorable tale.

The story once again focuses on human characters, but here is clear that it isn't trying to replicate an actual person. Carl is square in design, from head to physique, but it doesn't pull you out of the film. You see this square kid grow up into the senile old man he is for a majority of the film, and it in turn grows on the viewer. The vibrant colours make the film appealing to the younger viewers whilst character designs are for the older.

Up is an emotional rollercoaster with excellent characters, an original and superb story, and an animation style which, whilst not innovative, is strong and succeeds in bringing the story forward. 10/10

Next Time: So long...partner

The Pixar Perspective: #9 - WALL-E (2008)

An ongoing series looking back at the feature films of Pixar Animation Studios

After a brief break just to renew interest in the lookback - as well as a small bit of socialising - The Pixar Perspective returns for the last six films in Pixar's roster, starting with the 2008 hit WALL-E. The last of the ideas made following Toy Story (alongside A Bug's Life, Finding Nemo and Monsters, Inc.), WALL-E is the story of a lovable rubbish-dispensing robot who seeks companionship with a futuristic scanning robot. Add some obese humans and an environmental message, and you get a rather enjoyable film. Whilst not as appealing to younger audiences than previous Pixar calibre (it appealed to me only in who made the film rather than its story when I saw it on initial release), it won the adoration of critics. But is it as good as top critics like Roger Ebert say it is?

First of all, you have the highly enjoyable romantic couple WALL-E and EVE. The titular character (voiced by Ben Burtt) is incredibly likable; he's the lovable loser who you root for throughout the film, and you feel emotional towards him in the third act when he's severely injured by AUTO. His relationship with EVE (Elissa Knight) is a beautiful one which many can relate to, with the feeling of a first kiss, the adoration you have for someone, etc. It's all very sweet. EVE herself is also a great character, developing from a cold character to the devoted carer of her disabled partner. Other characters, such as Captain B. McCrea (Jeff Garlin), are also enjoyable and great to watch.

The story itself is very much a romantic one, taking centre stage amongst the Buy 'N' Large posters and environmentalism. Unlike most romantic films or eco messages (Happy Feet being a notable one), WALL-E doesn't push it down your throat, easily blending the two together into a nice story. Add some slapstick comedy and silent greatness such as the space dance, it makes a great film.

The animation is beautiful, with space and trash never looking so luscious. The robots do look animated, but with a sense of realism within them. However, the usage of actual people to represent the past really pulls you out of the film and shows how unreal the animated humans look in comparison. They do play on that with the slow transition between human and animated, but it's brief.

WALL-E is back to the high ranks of Toy Story 2 and The Incredibles, with a great plot, some highly lovable characters and animation to die for. Outside the real humans and the slight overindulgence of eco-friendly storytelling, it makes a near-perfect film. 9/10

Next Time: I have just met you, and I love you!