
The Pixar Theory - nreece
http://jonnegroni.com/2013/07/11/the-pixar-theory/
======
pattisapu
Maybe such a thought-provoking Weltanschauung could be constructed across the
Looney Tunes cartoons. The language of the environment Negroni picks up on
here doesn't seem vastly different from the traditions of running/recurring
gags in those toons. Animation of any dimension is labor intensive, and
reusing pieces comes pretty naturally. So it's no surprise that, intentionally
or not, these pieces can create metanarratives.

It's interesting to compare the dynamic between humans and animals. Humans,
like Elmer Fudd or Yosemite Sam, are hunters or otherwise violent antagonists
(of course there are animal hunters like Wiley E. Coyote), while the animals,
like Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck, are the hunted, ever evading not only the
hunters, but also, in the process able to elude constraints of space, time,
technology, and gender (although not the omniscient brush of the animator, in
those episodes where they tear down the "fourth wall").

Buy-n-Large is an interesting contrast to Acme. In Looney Tunes, if you need
anything, from a hammer to a nuclear bomb, there's only one company you can
get it from, Acme. Unlike Buy-n-Large's insidiously ubiquitous perfection,
however, everything Acme makes is junk (consistent with Pre-Chicago School
antitrust economics I suppose). It literally falls apart if it doesn't blow up
in your face. But Acme did excel at documentation. Impressively huge
blueprints and manuals always come in the box.

------
protomyth
And here I thought the wackiest theory about Pixar films was the suggestion
that Cars is actually the sequel to Terminator taking place 1,000 years after
Skynet won.

