PDA

View Full Version : Robots



Exhaust Port
03-13-2005, 12:19 AM
So anyone seen Robots yet? I made it to the theater today without much previous knowledge of the movie. All I knew was that Robin Williams was in it and had seen a few clips here and there.

I enjoyed the movie as did the sea of kids who were filling the theater. Robin Williams wasn't overbearing which was a relief and the other characters had their fun moments as well. The visuals were amazing and weren't done to a point to be distracting.

Even though I enjoyed it I don't think I'll be buying it on DVD when it comes out. The movie was good but it wasn't "repeat watching" good. Unlike Toy Story or A Bug's Life the movie experience wasn't that engrossing. I guess the reason is that even though the other characters were good they weren't memorable. The secondary characters in Toy Story were great but those in Robots just blended into the scenery for a good part of the movie. There are 6-7 or so robots in the group and other than the Robin Williams and the 1 female robot the rest are forgettable. Too bad.

The biggest highlight for me was the ROTS trailer which I hadn't seen yet. I was shocked at the excitment of the kids watching the movie. One young kid starting jumping up and down and pointing when Darth Vader made a brief appearance. I'm really getting excited about that movie. :D

General_Grievous
03-13-2005, 02:15 PM
I was going to see "Robots", but then two things came up:

1. I had heard that the movie wasn't that great.

2. I discovered that the ROTS trailer would be shown on Fox, so I didn't even bother with going to see "Robots".

Slicker
03-19-2005, 09:33 PM
I went and saw Robots tonight on a whim and enjoyed it thoroughly. The animation was top notch the story was good and I thought there was alot of humor in it. And on top of that I had totally forgotten about the ROTS trailer until I saw the Lucasfilm logo appear on screen.

This movie doesn't rank up there with Toy Story, Monsters Inc. and many of the Pixar movies but it holds it's own against any other computer animated movie out there. I'd like to see it again.

stillakid
03-20-2005, 10:18 AM
Blah. The overriding problem with a lot of these animated marvels is that they have become overwhelmingly self-aware. In the old days, they told a story and the animators would have a little fun by dropping in little "odes to pop culture" in the deep background. You know, little fun surprises for the audience to find upon repeated viewings. ROBOTS takes all of that and builds an entire movie around dropping in as many pop references and "in jokes" as possible. The story is excrutiatingly thin and not very inspired at all. The other 85 minutes is nothing but "Hey look at how cute our pop culture references are" moments punctuated by forgettable characters. While walking out of the theater, we couldn't even remember the name of the chief inventor, the guy who goes into hiding then emerges to help save everybody. I still can't remember his name even though it's all over the script. Yawn!

Slicker
03-20-2005, 11:02 AM
It's Mr. Big Weld.:p

I realize that with your line of work you tend to look deep into movies but I'm just a surface watcher so I really enjoyed the flick. I'm sure if I looked deep into movies I wouldn't approve of many of the ones that I like.

Exhaust Port
03-20-2005, 11:16 AM
I agree Stilla that CG movies are really running away with the use of pop culture references. At first they were very subtle with a distant image in the background and have evolved into upfront gags. I'm all for a few here and there but Robots really seemed to push it. I could have done without the Britney Gears joke.

Now I did enjoy the HAL 2000 tribute.... When Copperbottom was riding Mr. Big Weld and was tinkering with his "brain" to fix him as they escaped from Mr. Big Weld Industries MBW was changing voices as CB worked on him. MBW sang a line or 2 ala HAL 2000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey when Dave was deactivating him. I like more subtle references like that. (like naming the resturant Harrihausen's in Monsters Inc.) :)

2-1B
03-20-2005, 11:48 AM
I saw it last week and enjoyed it. For the most part, I think these cartoon movies are goofy in the first place and this was one of the better ones, IMO.

How could you forget BigWeld, it was Mel Brooks for crying out loud ! :D

stillakid
03-20-2005, 04:49 PM
It's Mr. Big Weld.:p

I realize that with your line of work you tend to look deep into movies but I'm just a surface watcher so I really enjoyed the flick. I'm sure if I looked deep into movies I wouldn't approve of many of the ones that I like.

I didn't really have to look that deep into ROBOTS to be annoyed by it. Actually, it was the superficial stuff that was the problem...for that matter, it was the superficial stuff that was the problem being that that's all there was to this movie.

Rocketboy
03-20-2005, 07:48 PM
Then again, it is a kid's movie.
It shouldn't be that deep.

stillakid
03-21-2005, 12:02 AM
Then again, it is a kid's movie.
It shouldn't be that deep.


In my opinion, that's a stupid rational for making a superficial movie. Kid's aren't that stupid. Anybody that thinks so doesn't have kids themselves. A GOOD movie is a great story well told that reaches across generations. Arguably, everybody loved the classic Looney Toons...kids because it was funny action...adults because of the "in jokes." There was something there for everyone. ROBOTS seems to take the low road and caters to the sound-bite generation who voted for Karl Rove politics. It's simple with little substance. A romping good time, but no meat.

Rocketboy
03-21-2005, 01:44 PM
In my opinion, that's a stupid rational for making a superficial movie. Kid's aren't that stupid. Anybody that thinks so doesn't have kids themselves. A GOOD movie is a great story well told that reaches across generations. Arguably, everybody loved the classic Looney Toons...kids because it was funny action...adults because of the "in jokes." There was something there for everyone. ROBOTS seems to take the low road and caters to the sound-bite generation who voted for Karl Rove politics. It's simple with little substance. A romping good time, but no meat.A movie can be good without being very deep. Kids movies like The Incredibles and Shrek have are good stories with a superficial moral (be true to yourself, never judge a book by it's cover, blah, blah, blah). Kids don't see anything other than a fun movie. They see Shrek and Buzz Lightyear and Mr. Incredible and Nemo doing amazing things and have a blast watching it. Ever seen a child talk about the deeper meaning of a movie?
Hell, even Star Wars (ANH) isn't that deep. It's a fun adventure tale of good vs evil.

And no, I don't have kids, but yes, kids are stupid.

stillakid
03-21-2005, 07:04 PM
And no, I don't have kids, but yes, kids are stupid.
And there you have it. You claim to know kids, but have none. Your opinion is based on nothing but unsubstantiated predjudice.

A move can seem superficial, but actually have a lot going on just under the surface. ANH is a great example of this. Sure, kids get a kick out of the "stuff," but if it was an inherently dumb or boring story, they'd summarily ignore it. If Star Wars was as superficial as you claim, it wouldn't have spawned a generation of wanna-be filmmakers and toy collectors like we have currently. Just wouldn't happen. So no, your statement is quite false.

bobafrett
03-21-2005, 08:48 PM
In my opinion, that's a stupid rational for making a superficial movie. Kid's aren't that stupid. Anybody that thinks so doesn't have kids themselves. A GOOD movie is a great story well told that reaches across generations. Arguably, everybody loved the classic Looney Toons...kids because it was funny action...adults because of the "in jokes." There was something there for everyone. ROBOTS seems to take the low road and caters to the sound-bite generation who voted for Karl Rove politics. It's simple with little substance. A romping good time, but no meat.

I agree with you there Stilla, my 14 year old son blows me away with all the stuff he knows. He's getting smarter than his old man. I just don't tell him that though, don't need to have him trying to outsmart me at "everything". :p

As for the movie, I went and watched it last night. Great film, rates up there with Shrek, Finding Nemo and Toy Story. I was totally blown away by all the detail. It looked almost three demensional. Great story, laughed my butt off, oh and the ROTS trailer looked great on the big screen!

Rocketboy
03-21-2005, 10:07 PM
And there you have it. You claim to know kids, but have none. Your opinion is based on nothing but unsubstantiated predjudice.And I don't have an X-Box, but I sure as heck know I'll never buy one, because from what I've played, I think they suck. Maybe I should have said "In my experiences with kids, yes, they are dumb." There are smart kids out there, but they seem to be few and far between.
(And by kids, I mean 10 and under)


A move can seem superficial, but actually have a lot going on just under the surface. ANH is a great example of this. Sure, kids get a kick out of the "stuff," but if it was an inherently dumb or boring story, they'd summarily ignore it. I never said Star Wars was dumb or boring. I said it wasn't deep, beause on it's own it is only a tale of good vs evil. As part of the larger saga, and viewed as part of a larger story, it becomes a fairly deep.


If Star Wars was as superficial as you claim, it wouldn't have spawned a generation of wanna-be filmmakers and toy collectors like we have currently. Just wouldn't happen. So no, your statement is quite false.It spawned these filmakers because it stirred their imaginations, because it was fun and flashy, with great visuals.

stillakid
03-22-2005, 01:03 AM
And I don't have an X-Box, but I sure as heck know I'll never buy one, because from what I've played, I think they suck. Maybe I should have said "In my experiences with kids, yes, they are dumb." There are smart kids out there, but they seem to be few and far between.
(And by kids, I mean 10 and under)
So you're actually making a sweeping generalization based on the...what? 10, 20, 300, 1000 kids you personally know? More kids? Less kids? What's the number we're talking here?



I never said Star Wars was dumb or boring. I said it wasn't deep, beause on it's own it is only a tale of good vs evil. As part of the larger saga, and viewed as part of a larger story, it becomes a fairly deep.
Oh I see. Star Wars isn't deep but the saga is so the rest of the episodes must be the deep ones? No? How can a superficial movie combined with 5 other superficial movies create a giant "deep" saga? I don't get it. Please elaborate.


It spawned these filmakers because it stirred their imaginations, because it was fun and flashy, with great visuals.
Oh really? Is that why you packed up your car and moved out to Los Angeles to pursue a filmmaking career? I mean, I assume you have done this because you speak as if you know from personal experience. You must also have gone to every party in town to speak with all the members of your generation who did this to find out that they too, like you, got their inspiration from the superficial aspects of Star Wars so they too could create superficial meaningless epics that could inspire another generation. Wow, I had you figured all wrong...and me too! I coulda sworn that I moved to LA because of the depth I found in Star Wars. Thanks for setting me straight!


:rolleyes:

Imperial Monarche
03-22-2005, 10:41 AM
And I don't have an X-Box, but I sure as heck know I'll never buy one, because from what I've played, I think they suck. Maybe I should have said "In my experiences with kids, yes, they are dumb." There are smart kids out there, but they seem to be few and far between.
(And by kids, I mean 10 and under)

I take great offense by your claim, not only as an X-Box owner...but as a father. I'll let you know right now that children are genius'. My daughter is only 11 months old, but she's walking (since 9 months), pretending to talk on the phone, has a limited amount of coherent vocabulary and eats from the table. Children are more intelligent before they turn 18 than they will be in their entire life. Sure, they may not be able to comprehend that vast psychology of the world, but look at the stuff they have to learn in a few years and retain for the rest of their lives, especially babies. I think you have grossly underestimated our little counterparts. Sure, there are dumb kids but they are few and far between.

As for the X-Box comment, out of the three main game systems out there, X-Box blows them all away, even Gamecube comes second to me. You are probably one of those Crapstation 2 people that prefer blockier graphics and slow loading time. X-Box pretty much has all the same games as all other systems, but are the best versions.


I never said Star Wars was dumb or boring. I said it wasn't deep, beause on it's own it is only a tale of good vs evil. As part of the larger saga, and viewed as part of a larger story, it becomes a fairly deep.

So, Luke going into the cave in ESB to face basically himself, his own evils, is not deep. I think you need to listen to the commentary in the movie. First of all, Luke goes into the cave armed, which Yoda warns against, but Luke, being the kid that he is, thinks he knows better than the wise old master, takes his weapon anyway. The cave's purpose is to be a teaching tool, so Luke created the hostile environment by bringing the weapon and he had to learn from that. It is forshadowing in many ways what will happen in the end of the movie. First, he sees his face in Vader's, which shows the father/son connection. Then, Luke rushes in there with his weapon and he goes into a hostile environment, like he does when he goes to Cloud City. Finally, when he rushes into the cave, he faces his worst fear which is Vader. When he rushes to Cloud City unprepared, he actually faces his worst fear. I could go on and on, but you see how deep the movies are, individually, because that situation alone doesn't relate to any other part of the saga but ESB. The rest of the saga (stillakid would probably only agree with me that the OT is deep, not the PT too) is full of deep parts.

CaptainSolo1138
03-22-2005, 01:17 PM
As for the X-Box comment, out of the three main game systems out there, X-Box blows them all away, even Gamecube comes second to me. You are probably one of those Crapstation 2 people that prefer blockier graphics and slow loading time. X-Box pretty much has all the same games as all other systems, but are the best versions.
Oh, I see. Since YOU have an opinion Rocketboy isn't entitled to one :rolleyes:




So, Luke going into the cave in ESB to face basically himself, his own evils, is not deep. I think you need to listen to the commentary in the movie. First of all, Luke goes into the cave armed, which Yoda warns against, but Luke, being the kid that he is, thinks he knows better than the wise old master, takes his weapon anyway. The cave's purpose is to be a teaching tool, so Luke created the hostile environment by bringing the weapon and he had to learn from that. It is forshadowing in many ways what will happen in the end of the movie. First, he sees his face in Vader's, which shows the father/son connection. Then, Luke rushes in there with his weapon and he goes into a hostile environment, like he does when he goes to Cloud City. Finally, when he rushes into the cave, he faces his worst fear which is Vader. When he rushes to Cloud City unprepared, he actually faces his worst fear. I could go on and on, but you see how deep the movies are, individually, because that situation alone doesn't relate to any other part of the saga but ESB. The rest of the saga (stillakid would probably only agree with me that the OT is deep, not the PT too) is full of deep parts.
Wow, I thought he only mentioned ANH. :rolleyes:

Slicker
03-22-2005, 01:21 PM
Note to self: Never make a 2 sentenct post saying that I like a movie. It's obvious that my opinion only incites a riot.:rolleyes:

Rocketboy
03-22-2005, 01:56 PM
So you're actually making a sweeping generalization based on the...what? 10, 20, 300, 1000 kids you personally know? More kids? Less kids? What's the number we're talking here? So you can say kids are smart based on the kid(s) you have? Or do you have 10 ,20, 300, 1000 kids? Same thing, different opinion.


Oh I see. Star Wars isn't deep but the saga is so the rest of the episodes must be the deep ones? No? How can a superficial movie combined with 5 other superficial movies create a giant "deep" saga? I don't get it. Please elaborate.A New Hope isn't about the Father and Son Skywalker family. It's about a farm boy (and friends) that saves the princess from the bad guys. There are only very minor hints as to what was to come. It became much more than that when the Empire came around.


Oh really? Is that why you packed up your car and moved out to Los Angeles to pursue a filmmaking career? I mean, I assume you have done this because you speak as if you know from personal experience. You must also have gone to every party in town to speak with all the members of your generation who did this to find out that they too, like you, got their inspiration from the superficial aspects of Star Wars so they too could create superficial meaningless epics that could inspire another generation. Wow, I had you figured all wrong...and me too! I coulda sworn that I moved to LA because of the depth I found in Star Wars. Thanks for setting me straight! That's exactly right. Glad I could set you straight on that. :rolleyes:
It was from all the interviews that I've seen/read over the years where the person being interviewed said the same reasons SW influenced them that I said. Never once have I see a filmmaker say that the Star Wars influenced them because it was such a deep story.


I take great offense by your claim, not only as an X-Box owner...but as a father. I'll let you know right now that children are genius'. My daughter is only 11 months old, but she's walking (since 9 months), pretending to talk on the phone, has a limited amount of coherent vocabulary and eats from the table. Children are more intelligent before they turn 18 than they will be in their entire life. Sure, they may not be able to comprehend that vast psychology of the world, but look at the stuff they have to learn in a few years and retain for the rest of their lives, especially babies. I think you have grossly underestimated our little counterparts. Sure, there are dumb kids but they are few and far between.I never said anything about your kids. I don't doubt your claim that they are smart, but every animal out there learns the basics of what they need in life before they reach maturity.


As for the X-Box comment, out of the three main game systems out there, X-Box blows them all away, even Gamecube comes second to me. You are probably one of those Crapstation 2 people that prefer blockier graphics and slow loading time. X-Box pretty much has all the same games as all other systems, but are the best versions.Yeah, I love the PS2. The games I've played are far better (IMO) than any game I've played on X-Box. Graphics and little bit of load time really don't make the game, IMO.


So, Luke going into the cave in ESB to face basically himself, his own evils, is not deep. I was talikng about A New Hope, not Empire.

El Chuxter
03-22-2005, 02:27 PM
Man, this looks like a fun debate. And here I was only looking for opinions on Robots, of which there don't appear to be many. :D

I have to agree with whoever originally said that animated movies are getting too self-aware. It was amusing in Shrek, tired in Shrek 2, and to the point of ridiculousness now. Are these movies that are so brimming with pop-culture references going to be watchable even a decade from now, much less fifty or sixty years down the road?

"Now, grandkids, y'all wanna watch Shrek 2 or Snow White on this here movie-thingamjigger doodad?"
"Snow White! I have no idea what the scnownik*they're talking 'bout in Shrek!"
*--Or other futuristic slang word.

If you get an opportunity, watch a bunch of old Looney Toons cartoons, and I do mean "a bunch." There are some that are timeless. There are some with maybe a quick reference to buying war bonds, which doesn't detract from the episode. Then there are a ton of "Bugs Bunny hanging out at some restaurant with a bunch of Hollywood stars cracking all sorts of 60-year old pop culture references." These latter ones are almost unwatchable now. We recognize maybe Cary Grant Humphrey Bogart and that's it. We don't get the jokes. They're just five or six minutes of practically worthless high-quality animation. ;)

Look at The Incredibles or Clone Wars as to how to do animation right. The Incredibles has a couple of inside jokes (like the Disney animators at the end) and some jabs at superhero conventions. No more. Bob's boss doesn't run around saying "Inconceivable!" all the time just because he did it in The Princess Bride. And in Clone Wars, there are three references, all of which are so subtle that most viewers didn't/won't catch them (Mace's Coke commercial, Jedi Padawan Sha'Gai, and the Nelvans), and none of these hard the pacing of the show.

Even the really obvious references can be funny without messing up the show. We're going into live action here, but since I brought up The Princess Bride, a prime example of this is "You've just fallen for one of history's two greatest blunders! The first is never get involved in a land war in Asia. . . ." There's absolutely no way Fezzini could know anything about land wars in Asia (or more than just a few second-hand accounts), but it's funny. Heavy-handed, but funny. Same goes with Toad (Ray Park) grabbing a staff and striking a brief Darth Maul pose in the first X-Men. Used sparingly, these can be hilarious. But they can't be the "meat" of the movie.

I think I'll wait for video to see Robots. And I'll just watch The Incredibles and Clone Wars again a few times instead.

I'm not even going to address the "deep" debate at this point. Suffice to say that a movie, book, show, whatever, doesn't have to be at the Ezra Pound level of difficulty to be "deep." Star Wars (meaning "A New Hope" by itself) has more depth than most other movies I can think of.

Imperial Monarche
03-22-2005, 02:30 PM
I never said anything about your kids. I don't doubt your claim that they are smart, but every animal out there learns the basics of what they need in life before they reach maturity.

Well, first of all, you are saying that children are dumb. Put aside my child's accomplishments, you still aren't looking at the overall definition of what a dumb person is. You are mistaking ignorance with stupidity. A dumb person is someone that should have intelligence, but does not use that intelligence. Ignorance means that person does not have the intelligence to use period. You are basically saying that because a child doesn't recognize the deepness of a movie, they are dumb. Because they like movies because they have flashy scenes and not recognize the meaning behind the movie, they are dumb. Think about it, though, I did say before that children are genius', but not able to comprehend the vastness of the universe. If they don't have the knowledge of the meanings behind things, how are they suppose to recognize the deepness. It's not stupidity, it's ignorance. To make a claim that children are dumb because they don't see movies the way you or most adults do, well, that's just...dumb.

Rocketboy
03-22-2005, 09:55 PM
Ah nevermind, this isn't really worth it.

stillakid
03-23-2005, 09:15 AM
So you can say kids are smart based on the kid(s) you have? Or do you have 10 ,20, 300, 1000 kids? Same thing, different opinion.
Yeah, I happen to know quite a few in addition to having my own. You sidestepped the question, so I'll assume you're assertion is based on fleeting experience and nothing of depth.


A New Hope isn't about the Father and Son Skywalker family. It's about a farm boy (and friends) that saves the princess from the bad guys. There are only very minor hints as to what was to come. It became much more than that when the Empire came around.
If that's all you saw in ANH, you didn't really watch the movie. Of course, "meaning" can be subjective, but practically everyone who has ever seen and written about ANH has talked more about the underlying themes more than the superficial stuff on screen.


That's exactly right. Glad I could set you straight on that. :rolleyes:
It was from all the interviews that I've seen/read over the years where the person being interviewed said the same reasons SW influenced them that I said. Never once have I see a filmmaker say that the Star Wars influenced them because it was such a deep story.
How many interviews? With which people? I want names and references back to those interviews so I can look all of them up. From that list, we'll draw up a chart together and come up with a percentage of filmmakers whose motivations support your assertion. I'll be waiting patiently for that list. :)


Ah nevermind, this isn't really worth it.
Uh huh. Backed into another corner impossible to retreat from. :ermm:

Walking away...walking away....

Rocketboy
03-23-2005, 11:02 AM
Yeah, I happen to know quite a few in addition to having my own. You sidestepped the question, so I'll assume you're assertion is based on fleeting experience and nothing of depth.


If that's all you saw in ANH, you didn't really watch the movie. Of course, "meaning" can be subjective, but practically everyone who has ever seen and written about ANH has talked more about the underlying themes more than the superficial stuff on screen.


How many interviews? With which people? I want names and references back to those interviews so I can look all of them up. From that list, we'll draw up a chart together and come up with a percentage of filmmakers whose motivations support your assertion. I'll be waiting patiently for that list. :)


Uh huh. Backed into another corner impossible to retreat from. :ermm:

Walking away...walking away....Yet again, you assume things about me without knowing. That is the main reason why I am done with this pointless debate that would keep going back and forth and back and forth.
I have better things to do than argue with someone like you.

And since I "don't do my homework" (as you put it) - you can go look these people up.

stillakid
03-23-2005, 11:33 AM
Hey, I thought that this discussion wasn't "worth it," but you came back! :) That's fantastic! Welcome. :classic:

Right, I don't know you. All I or anyone else can do is base responses on what you say in a post. And your posts indicated some assertions which we felt required clarification and/or correction. If you'd like to provide additional support for you assertions, we are listening. However if you'd rather just walk away, that's your choice to take too. :)

So, why was ROBOTS the best movie of the year again?

Exhaust Port
03-23-2005, 02:38 PM
So, why was ROBOTS the best movie of the year again?

It had fart jokes.

2-1B
03-24-2005, 12:30 AM
My favorite Robot was Diesel, the one voiced by James Earl Jones and then later James Brown.

"Get up offa that thang!" :D

General_Grievous
03-29-2005, 12:05 PM
I saw this too. I thought it was okay, but I've seen much better, like The Incredibles (could be one of my favorite animated movies) and Shrek 2 (which I'm kind of sick of right now). But Robots was much better than the crappiest animated movie ever, Shark Tale. Talk about too many pop culture references...Shark Tale had nothing but that! It traded its plot for pointless and unfunny references to stuff like Jerry Maguire and A Few Good Men. It was so lame. I wanted to get my money back after that crapfest.

Robots was like The Godfather compared to Shark Tale.