

The Curse of the Pixar Universe - samclemens
http://www.newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/the-curse-of-the-pixar-universe

======
BrandonSmith
I bet he's a real hoot at parties...

"Hi, Richard."

"Hello, how are things?"

"Great! I'm pretty happy that..."

"Oh, you're not actually happy. You've been indoctrinated to think you need to
obtain an artificial mental state labeled 'happiness' by others. What you are
really experiencing is resentment for others success and you are projecting
your mediocrity as positive achievements."

I found Inside Out wildly entertaining. As did my children and parents.
Pixar's storytelling and record of engaging multiple generations is unmatched.
They are altogether tragic, dramatic, funny, personal, and universal.

I find nothing wrong with simplifying the rules of a film's universe and
requiring filmgoers to suspend disbelief in order to tell a story. Why?
Because good films are a catalyst for discussion. As a result, whereas the
author is critical of the film itself as damaging for being simplistic,
rather, it can be the very context to launch the necessary discussions with
children to navigate their myriad of emotions.

Ironically, Pixar's very own Anton Ego of Ratatouille critiques the critics...
"In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little, yet enjoy a
position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment.
We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the
bitter truth we critics must face, is that in the grand scheme of things, the
average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism
designating it so."

~~~
icebraining
_Ironically, Pixar 's very own Anton Ego of Ratatouille critiques the critics_

Ironic? While I enjoyed Ratatouille, that dialogue just seemed self-serving to
me.

~~~
joezydeco
Pixar kind of had a chip on their shoulder during that era, they seemed
especially mad at Hollywood and the critics. There's a dig at the end of
_Ratatouille_ pointed at _Happy Feet_ , which won the Oscar for Best Animated
Feature over _Cars_ :

[https://reddit.com/r/movies/comments/35ezkp/til_after_cars_l...](https://reddit.com/r/movies/comments/35ezkp/til_after_cars_lost_out_on_the_oscar_for_best/)

------
bitwize
Inside Out was inspired by the psychological concept of basic emotions, which
boil down to joy, sadness, fear, anger, disgust, and surprise. They just
conflated fear and surprise into one character.

What I think is interesting is that these emotional characters have different
aspects and complexities of their own. Pay close attention to the scenes where
we see Riley's parents' emotions. For her mom, Sadness is in control; for her
dad, Anger is the leader. Yet they are not predominantly sad or angry people.
In the movie universe, Sadness is responsible for compassion and Anger for our
sense of right and wrong. If Riley's emotions seem underdeveloped in regard to
these complexities, it's because... well, she's a kid.

------
wrsh07
Maybe the critic is too cerebral for me [mentioning Malick etc], but I think I
missed the point.

~~~
PirateDave
I got the same feeling; I'm not sure what movie the reviewer thought he was
going into, but it feels like he was expecting a David Lynch film or something
similar, not a simple kid's movie.

~~~
anigbrowl
I think it's especially important to analyze kids' movies because of their
significant ideological impact. You cant ell effective kids; stories without
dumbing things down. I found it a very interesting analysis.

~~~
icebraining
_You can 't tell effective kids' stories without dumbing things down._

Isn't that exactly what he disagrees with, though? I think he's looking for a
director that _can_ tell a kids' story, and show the shape of the inner mind,
without having to dumb things down.

It's a tall order - he says it would require a director of genius - but I
think his point is that if a director needs to dumb things down to make a film
for kids, (s)he's better off not doing it at all.

~~~
rufus_t
I believe "You cant ell" was meant to be "You can tell", not "You can't tell",
and that you agree with each other.

~~~
anigbrowl
Yes, I didn't have time to proofread and missed the mistake. Sorry for the
confusion!

------
tux1968
This charming film is appealing and enjoyable to all ages while gently
reminding us to attend to our emotions -- just as the main character learns
that sadness has its place.

All dramatic performances are simplifications, from scenery to the focus of
the content. Usefully simple that is; like any map for instance, which would
be unwieldy (at best) if at full scale and containing every detail. Clarity is
found by stripping out superfluous details.

To my ear, the author of the article had to really stretch to find a way to
complain about this flick.

~~~
briandear
The author sounds like a pretentious douche. The author has obviously never
made or written a feature length film designed to entertain an audience. I bet
the author spends Saturday mornings watching Wim Wenders films lamenting why
Tom Waits doesn't release a new album already.

Blah.

Pixar writing once again hits it out of the park, creating a unique film that
helps kids (and adults) think about how emotions affect us. Self-important
gluten-free PBR drinkers notwithstanding.

------
masterponomo
This is almost as bad as the same reviewer's brutal takedown of Steamboat
Willie.

~~~
JackMorgan
Ah, I needed that

------
nemo
If only there were 800 characters representing all of Riley's emotions and the
parents were meaner the movie would have been much better...

------
jandrese
I got about halfway through the second paragraph before backing out of the
article slowly with my hands up.

------
vernie
Maybe Brody will enjoy Michael Haneke's upcoming foray into children's films:
Funny Games Too

------
carlosdp
Isn't the New Yorker satirical? One of their headlines is "Scalia Arrested for
trying to Burn Down Supreme Court"...

~~~
lfowles
Note the URL for that headline:
[http://www.newyorker.com/***humor***/borowitz-
report/scalia-...](http://www.newyorker.com/***humor***/borowitz-
report/scalia-arrested-trying-to-burn-down-supreme-court?intcid=mod-most-
popular)

Although it is saying something that the top 3 most popular stories are from
the humor section.

~~~
undershirt
how does that url work with asterisks?

~~~
icebraining
It seems the routing engine just ignores everything between the first and the
last slashes.

[http://www.newyorker.com/IRRELEVANT-CRAP/scalia-arrested-
try...](http://www.newyorker.com/IRRELEVANT-CRAP/scalia-arrested-trying-to-
burn-down-supreme-court?intcid=mod-most-popular)

~~~
kbenson
That doesn't seem like a very good feature for a reputable news site.

[http://www.newyorker.com/breaking-news/scalia-arrested-
tryin...](http://www.newyorker.com/breaking-news/scalia-arrested-trying-to-
burn-down-supreme-court)

