Join for FREE | Take the Tour Lost Password?
Shop deviantART for the
holidays and save BIG!
Click here! :holly:
[x]

deviantART

:flirty:
 

My Quick Defense about Pixar

Sat Jun 6, 2009, 12:56 AM
  • Mood: Bemused
  • Listening to: 99 Red Balloons -Nena
  • Reading: Fantastic Four -John Byrne
  • Watching: Deadliest Catch
  • Playing: Mental Excersize
Didn't think there wee talented artists out there gunning for Pixar, but the internet surprises me once again.

In a journal posted by :iconthefoundingfields:
[link]

in which he attacked Pixar for "sucking" because they are under Disney's contractual thumb to do no R rated features. Well, I responded and in fear that it would be deleted and not heard I'm posting it here openly as my opinion and a topic of discussion.


My Response:

**I understand your view on the "whip of Disney" issue. Not that it's my view too but I understand it. However, I don't feel video games were the best example to illustrate your point. I could understand Ghost In The Shell, Apple Seed, Cowboy Beebop as valid points towards breaking free of the booster seat theater.

Video games being used to compare against a feature length film is moot because the genre itself is subject to a repetitive formula regardless of it's new edgy interface, graphics, plot and style. Prince of Persia is Tomb Raider with different interaction. Shadow Of The Colossus is any FF only without the grinding and hours of musically scored introspective dialogs. Don't get me wrong I love action adventure so much I loved ICO.

Games are interaction while movies are observation. Through both we can be entertained, humiliated, outraged and brought home again all in one sitting. It shouldn't have to use vulgarity and parental ratings to be new and edgy. Let Helen Par shout out "Their are children aboard! Repeat, there are children aboard this ship!" and anyone who has a pulse and younger siblings is immediately thrown into that real life and death situation. No swear words and no one had to die. Even that movie shows the deaths of multiple heroes, but no gore. The reason being is we don't need the excessive gore or swear words to get the point.

F this and 5h17 in your face and all of New York blows up and babies' flesh peeling off from the blast as ink pens from a news stand impale teenagers' faces and throats at 200 mile an hour speeds. There creative, never done before, rated R and in my mind its rendered beautifully. No need Pixar, no need for Japan-animation, no graphic novel and best of all no plot. Just pointless gore and violence. But the R rating doesn't make it better. It's like finger painting in that it's just another style of story telling. Some use more gore in their story telling and others use it to elaborate the realism and others use it to get under your skin.

Just because Pixar doesn't use as much "rated R" as you want doesn't mean they suck. It's their style.
Leonardo Di Vinci didn't paint pornography as much as I would have hoped, but it doesn't mean he sucks. He painted his style.

By the way, great choice of games. :)
***


Lead-Base

Devious Comments

love 0 0 joy 0 0 wow 0 0 mad 0 0 sad 0 0 fear 0 0 neutral 0 0
:iconjessiesheram:
I completely agree. Most of the stuff Pixar produces is of high quality and I know adults with no children who've bought things like The Incredibles because of the quality of the storytelling.

While I understand some people wanting to see more gore and explicit sex in films it shouldn't be forced in at the expense of the story. Does anyone else remember the eighties action films which had to have a softcore sex scene in them at some point, even if they had to force it in with a crowbar?

--
Click Here, You Know You Want Too---> [link]
:iconspaghetti016:
Well spoken Nic. I'm going to post this in my journal to spread the word around a bit too.

--
I would do way more cartoon characters than I would Heath Ledgers.

-Neil-
--
:iconspaghetti016:
Also, what you said about him:

"Didn't think there were talented artists out there gunning for Pixar, but the internet surprises me once again."

Quite incorrect. All this guy does is troll the internet for large breasted women, followed by drawing them directly from the photos he does find, and then proceeds to steal the styles of J. Scott Campbell and the deceased Michael Turner (EX: [link]). And I'm fairly certain if he actually tried, he might be able to get some decent paintings without boobs in them. He obviously has an obsession with large breasted women. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but there are certainly other things in the world to draw.

--
I would do way more cartoon characters than I would Heath Ledgers.

-Neil-
--
:iconlead-base:
Couldn't have said it better myself. Just to be clear: there isn't anything wrong with large breasted art...but there certainly is more things out there to draw.

--
"It is not a man's destiny to question his destiny."
:iconlead-base:
Thanks, Matt. I know you have the audience too.

--
"It is not a man's destiny to question his destiny."
:iconlead-base:
Yup, dang near every one....I'm pretty sure Never Ending Story had one in it at the preliminary stage. lol

--
"It is not a man's destiny to question his destiny."
:iconspaghetti016:
No there's nothing wrong with it, unless it becomes an obsession like I think it is with that dude.

--
I would do way more cartoon characters than I would Heath Ledgers.

-Neil-
--
:iconwilliamsavage:
"there isn't anything wrong with large breasted art"

Uh, worbly man-boobs?

Well worded response, also nice example from The Incredibles.

--
I kill dreams and poison relationships. I am toxic, and I'm ok with that.
:iconlead-base:
thanks. Yes, worbly man bewbs are a big artistic no no. lol

--
"It is not a man's destiny to question his destiny."

Site Map