C|NET: "Disney, Pixar Hope For Incredibles Success"

[Kent Pribbernow]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://news.com.com/Disney%2C+Pixar+hope+for+Incredibles+success/2100-1025_3-5440384.html?tag=nefd.top' target='_blank'>http://news.com.com/Disney%2C+Pixar+hope+for+Incredibles+success/2100-1025_3-5440384.html?tag=nefd.top</a><br /><br /></div><i>"In the most competitive year for computer animation movies to date, Walt Disney is hoping to top its rivals with the opening of the much-anticipated "The Incredibles" on Friday. The action comedy, the second-to-last joint project under a contract between Disney and Steve Jobs' Pixar Animation Studios, is projected to pass $600 million in worldwide box-office sales."</i><br /><br />The Incredibles looks like a well conceived film, but my gut tells me it's not going to live up to the hype. Disney is desperate for a hit, and Pixar just wants something to keep its stock soaring. We'll see if either happens, but <i>The Incredibles</i> look more like <i>The Hypemachine</i> to me. Perhaps the most significant impact of this movie is that it serves as further proof that traditional animation is dead. CG is where it's at...and where it's going. Even the old guard at Disney is finally waking up to this fact. <br /><br /><img src="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/family_650x267.jpg" />

[Jason Dunn]

I went and saw this last night - it was great! Very funny movie - not "Shrek 2 funny" (which had me laughing so hard I cried) - but still very funny nonetheless. Lots of subtle humour though. The theater was full of kids and I was the only one laughing at some parts. :lol:

[Suhit Gupta]

Yeah, I hear good things about it. I was planning on watching it tonight.

Suhit

[[Hindencm]]

I work at a movie theatre and It's selling out like crazy. I haven't seen it myself though

[Kent Pribbernow]

Hmm. Perhaps I was wrong then. I'm not really into "kid movies", so The Incredibles isn't on my must see list. I never watched Toy Story or A Bug's Life, but Monsters Inc. and Shrek were both very good movies which I enjoyed.

[Gary Sheynkman]

I'll write a full DMT review for it after I see it this weekend :lol:

[Felix Torres]

I caught the DLP version yesterday afternoon and it is every bit as good as advertised. Maybe better. Both story and animation are flawless and the music is tres cool. And it is delighfully long! :D

If you're at all familiar with the classic Bond flicks you'll love the subtle nods to the early Connery movies. To say nothing of the homage to Bugs Bunny. :twisted:

I hear Kevin Smith called it the best superhero movie ever and I can't say I disagree; it is a movie for adults that kids can watch and enjoy, but it *is* for adults; it has meaningfull things to say about life, family, relationships, career, and the american educational system that kids won't notice but a discerning adult (or somebody who reads the reviews :wink: ) will catch. The choice of powers for the characters are inspired (especially the way things work out with the baby) and used extremely effectively.

That said, the movie is just plain fun.
Most enjoyable movie this year (Shreck was great but there was a wee bit too much donkey and not enough Puss for my taste) plus the best CGI hair and water yet. Ditto for the ice and fire.
Definitely advances the DM SOA. ;-)
(Just making sure we stay on-topic here.) 8)

[Jason Dunn]

Yeah, the CGI was amazing - very convincing. There's a scene where the characters are wet and their hair looks SO real it's creepy. 8O

[Kent Pribbernow]

(Shreck was great but there was a wee bit too much donkey and not enough Puss for my taste)

That is wrong on so many levels. :lol:

[rlobrecht]

My four year old son and I went to see it yesterday. Its very good. The landscapes, water, ships, the giant robot, etc. are all fantastic. Its also very funny. My son liked it so much we sat through it three times. Our local 30 screen cinema had it on six screens. There was a line of at least 100 people waiting for seats to the 7:00 pm show. The ones during the day were all full. Pixar has a hit here. I haven't seen Shrek 2 yet (I was out of the country when my wife to our son.) We did buy the DVD, and I will probably watch it today. But to comapre to the first Shrek, I would say The Incredibles is better. They definitely have enough for the kids and adults to enjoy. The Bond throwbacks were good. I also liked the "speeder-bike" feeling sceen on the island with Dash.

We also watched a sneak preview of The Polar Express. The animation in that is so good its creepy. There are parts where I'm not sure if its CG or live action (its all CG, but its that good, even the people.)

[Jason Dunn]

We also watched a sneak preview of The Polar Express. The animation in that is so good its creepy. There are parts where I'm not sure if its CG or live action (its all CG, but its that good, even the people.)

I've heard that movie cost 1 million dollars per minute for the CGI. 8O The movements in particular are so real because they had the actors (Tom Hanks, etc.) wear movement tracking suits and actually DO the movie, rather than just being voices.

[rlobrecht]

I've heard that movie cost 1 million dollars per minute for the CGI.

That's some serious cash.

[Suhit Gupta]

I've heard that movie cost 1 million dollars per minute for the CGI.
That's some serious cash.
No kidding. I did not realize that it was that big budget a film. I do remember seeing previews for this movie since May.

Suhit

[Felix Torres]

Numbers, numbers, time for numbers:

Incredibles is rumored to have cost $150 million.
US Three day total in early november, $70.7 million
Last opening weekend for a Pixar flick; $70.3 million for FINDING NEMO.
Biggest opening for animated movie: Shreck 2 at $100 million, but I think it was a five day opening.

Methinks Incredibles may actually live up to the title financially, as well as artistically and technologically.

[JR]

Me and the Mrs. saw it this afternoon. It was great! Funny, good action, better than either of us expected.

[JR]

The movements in particular are so real because they had the actors (Tom Hanks, etc.) wear movement tracking suits and actually DO the movie, rather than just being voices.

I read that Tom Hanks (who plays 5 characters) had over 100 motion-capture sensors, just on his face!

[Jason Dunn]

I read that Tom Hanks (who plays 5 characters) had over 100 motion-capture sensors, just on his face!

Wow...so the CGI is based on the facial expressions of the actor? That's very cool...!

[Suhit Gupta]

100-million?! 8O That is a lot of sensor data. Where did you find this data because I am really curious to read more about it.

Suhit

[ctmagnus]

100-million?! 8O That is a lot of sensor data. Where did you find this data because I am really curious to read more about it.

Suhit

That's 100 motion sensors ;)