• Pixar - What Makes a Story Relatable
    47 replies, posted
[video=youtube;xTM-AdrIpaE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTM-AdrIpaE[/video]
I wish this video was an hour long. I could listen to that all day.
Goddamn, this guy just keeps churning out quality content.
Part of what I like about Pixar is that, unlike other typical 3D animated movies, the choice of characters/set-up actually tie into the story. As the video lightly touched upon, movies from Dreamworks like Kung Fu Panda, Shark Tale, etc just randomly shoe-horn in animals/aliens/fish/whatever even though they don't really fit the story (with a few exceptions like Shrek, How to Train Your Dragon, etc) whereas (not all, but the strong majority of) Pixar movies actually have a reason for using unique characters/set ups like Toys, Fish, etc. Pixar seems to be the most consistent in actually putting in effort into their atmosphere/characters/etc. With the exception of Monsters University and Cars 2, most other Pixar movies actually have a reason for using unique characters/environments.
I swear every time I see the Incredibles mentioned somewhere I have to watch it again.
John Lasseter is the driving force behind this idea. [video=youtube;WUZmE3uxe8c]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUZmE3uxe8c[/video] Back when they were just making tech studies Lasseter pushed for storytelling, that's how Luxo Jr., Tin Toy and Knick Knack all ended being both a showcase of technology in a growing field and its own short film.
[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;50287583]With the exception of Monsters University and Cars 2, most other Pixar movies actually have a reason for using unique characters/environments.[/QUOTE] Pixar had no reason to use monsters in [i]Monsters University[/i]?
[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;50287583]Part of what I like about Pixar is that, unlike other typical 3D animated movies, the choice of characters/set-up actually tie into the story. As the video lightly touched upon, movies from Dreamworks like Kung Fu Panda, Shark Tale, etc just randomly shoe-horn in animals/aliens/fish/whatever even though they don't really fit the story (with a few exceptions like Shrek, How to Train Your Dragon, etc) whereas (not all, but the strong majority of) Pixar movies actually have a reason for using unique characters/set ups like Toys, Fish, etc. Pixar seems to be the most consistent in actually putting in effort into their atmosphere/characters/etc. With the exception of Monsters University and Cars 2, most other Pixar movies actually have a reason for using unique characters/environments.[/QUOTE] i've never seen so many asterisks in one post
[QUOTE=TreasoN.avi;50287895]Pixar had no reason to use monsters in [i]Monsters University[/i]?[/QUOTE] To me, that just kind of seemed like a generic story that didn't really need to involve Monsters in particular that much. The premise felt kind of forced, in the same way that spies didn't really need to be included in Cars 2. MU certainly wasn't bad, but even so, I still felt it lacked the same creativity that some of the earlier Pixar movies had.
[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;50287995]To me, that just kind of seemed like a generic story that didn't really need to involve Monsters in particular that much. The premise felt kind of forced, in the same way that spies didn't really need to be included in Cars 2. MU certainly wasn't bad, but even so, I still felt it lacked the same creativity that some of the earlier Pixar movies had.[/QUOTE] I feel like Dreamworks and Pixar both understand the need for strong relatable stories, and are both susceptible to the woes of sequelitis. I was very impressed with HTTYD 2 moving its conflicts and themes with the passage of time; the characters age the same amount as the audience in the unseen real-time interim, with a target audience being the same now matured people rather than the same age group. With a third in development I'm still awfully sceptical that the series could still live up to hopes. I don't know if Comcast buying Dreamworks will impact this. I really hope not.
I still can't find the beat that he uses at the end of his videos someone in the comments suggested it was from an OFWGKTA song but I'm starting to think it might just be original
I don't think this video was fair to Beauty and the Beast. It focused on interesting societal dynamics and character developments a lot more than the bully Gaston, a villain who fulfilled his role of representing a fickle public nature of persecution.
As an aspiring animator. I look up to a lot of the storytelling ideas pixar has put in place when i work on my things. I've made strides. but i'm only starting. This guy is really good. I got hooked on the adult swim video.
I know this isn't quite as kinetic as the OP vid's presentation, but I found this talk recently and it's pretty neat if you want the more technical talk on how to aid storytelling from a pixar artist [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1R1z9ipFnM[/media]
[QUOTE=TreasoN.avi;50287895]Pixar had no reason to use monsters in [i]Monsters University[/i]?[/QUOTE] Title alone isn't really enough of a justification IMO. "Shark Tale" was an example of that in itself. How that movie progressed wasn't really tied to the characters or setting. The underwater theme was just a superficial coat of paint. Whereas Toy Story's plot about toys fearing about their owner growing up and not needing them anymore was pretty specific to that setting and cast. A lot of both the humor and drama banked on toys being durable enough to survive dismemberment for example It would be very difficult or maybe even impossible to give Toy Story a "Shark Tale"-style coat of paint since its narrative is tightly tailored to its characters and setting.
Holy shit the editing and production in this guys videos is stellar.
He's now promising to put out a video every two weeks with a goal he hit on patreon. I have no idea how he's going to do that, unless he works in a team and not by himself.
So why does Cars exist? To help me appreciate cars? I don't remember the movie enough to figure that out, every other Pixar movie makes sense with that rule though.
[QUOTE=ClauAmericano;50289537]So why does Cars exist? To help me appreciate cars? I don't remember the movie enough to figure that out, every other Pixar movie makes sense with that rule though.[/QUOTE] It was about appreciating the journey and not the destination, I believe. Cars 1 gets a bad rep, but I actually liked it, and I'm not even into racing or anything. [editline]9th May 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=richard9311;50289500]He's now promising to put out a video every two weeks with a goal he hit on patreon. I have no idea how he's going to do that, unless he works in a team and not by himself.[/QUOTE] I'm normally not the type of person to be into Patreon, but if I were to take it up, this would be one of the few accounts/people I would not mind donating too. Their content seems pretty high quality, although I think a three-four week deadline would be more realistic if this is indeed only one guy making these.
This is pretty neat. I don't know a whole lot about writing right now, but I get the urge to learn sometimes because I'm pretty shit at expressing how I feel to other people and I feel like I'd rather do it through storytelling in some form. Preferably through something like comics, games, film... anything that has some visual element to it. Not to knock things like novel writing or poetry as art forms, but a problem I have is I always feel like I can never say enough through just words alone. Another problem I have is that I have lots of big aspirations but zero energy to pursue them with.
[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;50289593]It was about appreciating the journey and not the destination, I believe. Cars 1 gets a bad rep, but I actually liked it, and I'm not even into racing or anything.[/QUOTE] There's also the idea of pride based on wealth, popularity, etc. being extremely shallow and often misinformed. This video was very well done. Instant subscription.
The video essay genre sure is booming right now
[QUOTE=Rummy.SM;50288155]As an aspiring animator. I look up to a lot of the storytelling ideas pixar has put in place when i work on my things. I've made strides. but i'm only starting. This guy is really good. I got hooked on the adult swim video.[/QUOTE] To be fair though this kind of storytelling has been around since Brothers Grimm (and probably even before them, I just can't think of any examples off the top of my head). There are plenty of essays that analyze the subtle traits of fairytales and that influence the subconscious of the child through narrative. What pixar did is it picked up these techniques and principles and incorporated them in their own films (as opposed to adaptations).
[QUOTE=usaokay;50290062]I had some issues with Up.[/QUOTE] Dude what, Up is arguably one of their best movies.
[QUOTE=usaokay;50290062]Pixar hasn't really hit its stride with me since Wall-E. Haven't gotten around to seeing Good Dinosaur and Brave yet, but I had some issues with Up and Inside Out.[/QUOTE] I dunno, I thought Up and Inside Out were pretty great. Prior to seeing Inside Out, I thought the premise seemed kinda tacky, but I changed my mind and thought the film was fantastic when I watched it.
kaptainkristian makes such high quality videos. How does he not have more subs.
[QUOTE=Oizen;50290101]kaptainkristian makes such high quality videos. How does he not have more subs.[/QUOTE] The first video game out 1.5 months ago and that is when I assume the channel started. Almost 43k subscribers in 1.5 months is actually a very high increase, especially for a new channel like this one.
I was pleased with Inside Out. One thing I want to say, though, is while you can tell they put in their usual amount of creative energy in realizing the concept and setting, there was something about it that felt a little grating after a while, and I'm not quite sure what it is. Maybe it's that it got just a little too tongue-in-cheek. There's a lot of clever stuff in Pixar movies that plays off of the uniqueness of the world they've envisioned and how it's either different or similar to ours, but it all had a tendency to feel a little more... [I]natural?[/I] ...in how it was presented, I guess? But there was something about Inside Out where it felt like it was always tugging at your shirt, going "[I]Hey, look, isn't this psychology metaphor really clever?[/I]" Something I can't entirely pinpoint right now. Did anyone else feel this way? Just a nitpick, I guess.
[QUOTE=usaokay;50290156]I think it was the second half of the film that made me disinterested. The humor was great and I love almost every character, but I dislike the Old Blimp Guy's plot and I didn't like the tonal shift into a tense action scene. Don't get me wrong. I still think it's a fantastic film, but it didn't struck to me as well as how much I found Ratatouille or Toy Story 2 to be stellar. It could be the whole message wasn't some sort of allegory or the film felt a bit cliche. Or maybe it's that I got older. I'd say when they used up all of their ideas from the napkin, most of their later films have become a hit or miss with me.[/QUOTE] To the contrary, I think Old Blimp Guy played a vital role in the film. Old Balloon Guy spent (years? months?) depressed over the death of his wife, who he thought he had failed by never bringing her to the childhood vacation of her dreams by which they met each other. His story was one of character development he could only realize through both the slow paced dialogues with Boy Scout Kid and [I]also[/I] the harsh realization that the adventurer he looked up to (Old Blimp Guy) wasn't all he was cracked up to be, and by extension neither was living life for adventure and the past instead of family and the future. It was that realization brought by the antagonism presented by Old Blimp Guy that shifted Old Balloon Guy's attitude towards Boy Scout Kid, cemented by the hidden note left by his wife.
[QUOTE=Katska;50290482]I was pleased with Inside Out. One thing I want to say, though, is while you can tell they put in their usual amount of creative energy in realizing the concept and setting, there was something about it that felt a little grating after a while, and I'm not quite sure what it is. Maybe it's that it got just a little too tongue-in-cheek. There's a lot of clever stuff in Pixar movies that plays off of the uniqueness of the world they've envisioned and how it's either different or similar to ours, but it all had a tendency to feel a little more... [I]natural?[/I] ...in how it was presented, I guess? But there was something about Inside Out where it felt like it was always tugging at your shirt, going "[I]Hey, look, isn't this psychology metaphor really clever?[/I]" Something I can't entirely pinpoint right now. Did anyone else feel this way? Just a nitpick, I guess.[/QUOTE] I think with the nature of psychology you're kind of inclined to over analyze, and the way people talked about the movie (prior to me watching at least) it was as if the movie created a perfect representation of the human mind. In reality though, it was more of a fun way to show different concepts. Not saying I don't agree with you, I did feel the same but upon reflection I feel like it really wasn't that heavy handed unless you made it out to be.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.