CGI Movies

[Reply #120 on:]

My list if anyone cares:

1. Toy Story
2. A Bug's Life
3. Wall-E
4. Ratatouille
5. The Incredibles
6. Finding Nemo (same)
7. Toy Story 2 (same)
8. Monsters Inc.
9. Cars

[Reply #121 on:]

Lol - I was just thinking of rating the titles included in the poll when I posted here yesterday. So a belated 'snap' (of sorts) from me.

Here's my list using a hundred-point 'must' system:


100 - WALL-E

  97 - Cars

  95 - The Incredibles
  95 - Finding Nemo
  95 - Monsters Inc.
  95 - A Bug's Life

  92 - Ratatouille

  90 - Toy Story

  85 - Toy Story 2


(The actual order of the gaggle at 95 varies according to my mood and how long it's been since I've seen them.)

All of my top six have held the title of "My favourite CGI movie ever!" at some time or other.

Is WALL-E available on the internet in a tolerably watchable form? It doesn't come out on DVD here till mid-January!   

[Reply #122 on:]

Toy Stories at the bottom? Still, I don't think I could make a list like that, it would depend on the mood I'm in what I'd like most.

Hobbitboy: I only have Wall-E in cam quality, won't watch it like that.. sorry, no help here.

[Reply #123 on:]

Wall-E is on as a DVDRip now...

[Reply #124 on:]

If only somebody could edit this poll so everybody could vote WALL-E.

I found a cam quality to try to fill the void between July and now, but I couldn't watch it like that. WALL-E deserves better.

[Reply #125 on:]

I like happy feet, I love penguins!

[Reply #126 on:]

Am I wrong or is Happy Feet not a pixar/disney movie?.. wait yes, it is, it was Surf's Up that wasn't.

[Reply #127 on:]

Happy Feet was made by the Australian studio Animal Logic for Warner Brothers... at least that is what Wiki claims

[Reply #128 on:]

Shrek is nothing but shallow, unfunny pop culture references, and it should die. Antz should have a few votes up there. Good movie.
Also, the best animated movies are usually hand-drawn, rather than CGI, at least  that's my preference. Check out Titan A.E. Great sci fi.

[Reply #129 on:]

Surfs Up > Happy Feet.

[Reply #130 on:]

I believe Titan A.E. can be seen on Hulu for free.  I must make the time to see it myself.

[Reply #131 on:]

Surfs Up > Happy Feet.

Nah, I liked Happy Feet better, its probably the closest thing to a musical I actually like. Surfs up did have its moments though, as comedies do.

[Reply #132 on:]

Happy Feet was made by the Australian studio Animal Logic for Warner Brothers... at least that is what Wiki claims

Good to have that straightened out.

And Titan A.E. is awesome.

[Reply #133 on:]

   Bolt was almost as bad as Cloverfield.

I only saw Bolt yesterday but I enjoyed it.

But I have one question. Early on in the movie a big point is made of being able to see a boom-mic in a take of the TV show that Bolt unknowingly stars in. As I recall, the reasoning was that if the audience can see it then Bolt can (potentially) see it also, and detecting anything 'artificial' about the TV world he inhabits could destroy his belief in the reality of that world and subsequently, himself, and the loss of that belief would mean a loss of sincerity and 'realism' in his 'acting', etc.

But if the momentary presence of a boom-mic in the frame (i.e. in front of the camera) could be 'seen' by Bolt as he's being filmed (i.e. also in fron of the camera) then why can't he also 'see' the mic when it's in it's usual position (still in front of the camera, just a few inches above it)? Why isn't he liable to see the camera itself or any of the attendant crew at any point during the shot?

From memory, the action being filmed is a reasnably long-distance shot. Why are they using a boom-mic at all? Surely a directional mic would much better sound-wise, not to mention easier to control and conceal? [Edit]Actually it is a fairly close shot. Seemingly only a few feet away, on an open road, at eye-level with the dog. So, nowhere for the camera, mic, boom, or anything else to hide.[/Edit] Isn't the point of a boom to get the microphone as close to the sound as possible without being see by the camera? How could one ever be appropriate if the main point is to keep the subject unaware of it's presence?

I know it's a stupidly trivial point to worry about and it didn't detract from my enjoyment of the movie while I was watching it but couldn't the writers have found a 'better' way to highlight the need for absolute believability from the point-of-view of the dog?

Oh well, what're you going to do?

Of course, I have no problem whatsoever with a knocked-over [Edit]helium[/Edit] gas bottle immediately shooting off down the hallway and out into the carpark (slowly gaining elevation as it goes) and impacting with a [Edit]neon sign, causing it to topple over onto a[/Edit] (parked) flammable liquid transporter which promptly explodes.  Go figure.

[Reply #134 on:]

Bolt actually got really good reviews. I'd watch it.

[Reply #135 on:]

It has a dog and a cat, and Miley Cyrus.

[Reply #136 on:]

Sold!

[Reply #137 on:]

I enjoyed Bolt.

It was pretty good.

[Reply #138 on:]

Another Bolt related question:

Do hamster balls* really exist?

* And no, I'm not talking about either male hamster genitalia or roughly spherical hamster-flavoured food products!

[Reply #139 on:]

My memory is a little fuzzy, but I'm pretty sure on youtube I saw a hampster ball car. It was some sort of hampster car I'm sure of that, but if I can find the link to the video, I'll post it.

Edit: here it is http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=sG2et4QRZ4I "Critter Cruiser"