Meet the Robinsons (SPOILERS)

Anime, cartoons and 3D. Animated shorts and features. And don't forget the animation genius in Bulgaria.

Meet the Robinsons (SPOILERS)

Postby Cha-Ka Khan on Mon Apr 09, 2007 1:02 pm

I didn't see a review topic for this movie yet, but I'm sure one of the mods will point me in the right direction if I created this topic in error.

I finally had a chance to see Disney's "Meet the Robinsons" over the Easter weekend, in Disney Digital 3D.

First off, I'd like to say that DD3D, or "Real 3D" as it's called when it's not a Disney picture, is TOTALLY the way to go for 3D movies. It's really fantastic. I was doing a little bit of reading on it, because I was curious to know how it works, and it turns out that the system has 2 major advantages over previous systems. The first is that the glasses are circularly polarized, as opposed to linearly polarized, which allows you to move your head around in various positions without losing the 3D or getting the "ghosting" effect that is common in older systems. I can definitely attest to the fact that this was the case. The other advantage is that it uses a single digital projector instead of two synchronized film projectors with polarized lenses. In this case, an LCD device sits on the front of the digital project and polarizes the picture instead. The picture is displayed at 144 frames per second, and so the polarizer flips back and forth between the left and right frames 6 times per second. The end result is that when you have the glasses on, your left eye and right eye never see the same image, and your brain blurs the two together to make the 3D view. Again, this is a more precise method compared to traditional 3D systems, where usually the left and right images would "leak" into the other eye, causing ghosting, eyestrain, and headaches.

If any of you saw "Chicken Little," "The Nightmare Before Christmas," or "Monster House," they all used the same system. For a CGI film that can render both views and then display it on a digital project, it's really astounding... big thumbs up on the 3D from me!

The movie.... enh... not so much. It was alright, but if you've read the book it's based on, they basically took William Joyce's cute little story and kicked it up about 700 notches for "today's youth." An entire backstory and "sub"plot are created to fill out the whole movie, completely destroying the charm of Joyce's work. I put "sub" in quotes because the subplot is really the major plot, and Joyce's original story become almost an afterthought in which, by the middle of the 2nd act, it's almost as if the director thought "oh yeah, we should give a tip of the hat to Joyce's book, I suppose."

Don't get me wrong, I understand that you have to do this to take a 20-page children's picture book and turn it into a movie, but like "The Grinch," "The Cat in the Hat," and the upcoming "Where the Wild Things Are," some books are just best left alone.

On the plus side, the story is at least interesting and somewhat entertaining, and it has a decent message for the kids, and there's not a single fart joke in the whole thing. The visuals are fantastic, and the illustrations by Joyce (who also served as an exec producer) provide the overall design for the film which is unique. There's also a great set-up gag with Tom Selleck that has a nice pay-off for the parents.

On the negative side, the movie is all over the map in terms of tone, and it wants to be all things to all people, so it's a real mish-mash of styles... trying to be a traditional Disney picture, trying to be an adventure story, trying to be a sci-fi story, trying to be all "Shrekky" with pop-culture refs, and Danny Elfman's choral-based themes are SO old at this point... he really needs to branch out, but I guess that's his signature sound. He's worse than James Horner when it comes to ripping himself off. Overall, it's a very frenetic film, which is not at all what Joyce's work is like, so prepare yourself if you're expecting the relaxing, deadpan prose of Joyce's work to be present... it's not. Also, you get a sense that they really just pulled some stuff out of their collective asses to make the whole "time travel" thing work.

So... not spectacular, but not horrible either. There are worse things to take your kids to at the movies.
Last edited by Cha-Ka Khan on Mon Apr 09, 2007 1:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Cha-Ka Khan
UNGRATEFUL BASTARD
 
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:55 am

Postby LaDracul on Mon Apr 09, 2007 1:08 pm

I found they hinted who was behind this way too early, like the remake of "That Darn Cat".

SPOILER

It was his poor, sleep-deprived roomate who went crazy after losing a little league game.

END SPOILER

I'm looking more forward to "Ratatouille" and "Enchanted" at this point.
Image
User avatar
LaDracul
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2525
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 9:37 pm
Location: Gothamized Chicago

Postby Cha-Ka Khan on Mon Apr 09, 2007 1:13 pm

See, I didn't buy that whole setup though...

SPOILERS: the little kid and the "bowler hat guy" were so different in appearance, mannerism, vocabulary, etc., that I didn't believe for a minute that they were one and the same.

Like I said, it just seemed like something they pulled out of their ass and said "yeah, this will do."
User avatar
Cha-Ka Khan
UNGRATEFUL BASTARD
 
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:55 am

Postby LaDracul on Mon Apr 09, 2007 1:13 pm

Let's just say, look at the bags under his eyes...
Image
User avatar
LaDracul
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2525
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 9:37 pm
Location: Gothamized Chicago

Postby Cha-Ka Khan on Mon Apr 09, 2007 1:15 pm

Yeah, but that's like saying "that person has dark hair!" That was the ONLY similarity. There should have been more of a hint, i.e. the hand motions of the female judge at the Science Fair and the kid's adoptive mother.
User avatar
Cha-Ka Khan
UNGRATEFUL BASTARD
 
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:55 am

Postby Zarles on Mon Apr 09, 2007 2:02 pm

Anyone else see the 3-D Donald Duck cartoon that they ran before this? Now THAT is how cartoons should be made. I was cackling all the way through it.
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby Seppuku on Mon Apr 09, 2007 2:11 pm

Zarles wrote:Anyone else see the 3-D Donald Duck cartoon that they ran before this? Now THAT is how cartoons should be made. I was cackling all the way through it.


The one where they were building a boat? That was 3D?

Heh heh, I convinced my little sister when I took her to see this that the 5-minute cartoon WAS Meet the Robinsons, and that was the end of the film. The look on her face was priceless (especially considering it took about an hour to get from her house to the cinema). :twisted:
User avatar
Seppuku
SWINGING PLASTIC LION
 
Posts: 7872
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:52 am
Location: Limeyland

Postby Zarles on Mon Apr 09, 2007 2:14 pm

No, that was the Mickey Mouse one that showed in certain theaters. I didn't see that one. Mine got "Working For Peanuts", a Donald Duck short from 1953 that Walt himself was supposedly working on in "stereoscopic 3-D". No idea what that means, but the Disney crew obviously cleaned it up a bit for this release. Looks fantastic, and the short itself is funny as hell.

I mean, shit - Chip & Dale are in it. Of COURSE it's funny.
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby Dark Knight on Mon Apr 09, 2007 2:41 pm

Well judging by the box office, I guess we won't get the Robinsons Ride at your nearest disney theme park
El Wray will find the missing reel, just watch...
User avatar
Dark Knight
GRANDO CARLISSIAN
 
Posts: 657
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:33 am
Location: Austin, Texas

Postby Chairman Kaga on Mon Apr 09, 2007 4:02 pm

Wait so there is a short in front of this? Even more reason to go....
Chairman Kaga
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7660
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:49 am

Postby DinoDeLaurentiis on Mon Apr 09, 2007 4:37 pm

Dark Knight wrote:Well judging by the box office, I guess we won't get the Robinsons Ride at your nearest disney theme park


It's a not so bad, eh? $52 million domestic inna the 10 days?
User avatar
DinoDeLaurentiis
SHE'S A THE SARAH SILVERMAN
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: Private Villa inna Santorini

Postby Cha-Ka Khan on Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:15 am

So did anyone else manage to catch this in 3D?
User avatar
Cha-Ka Khan
UNGRATEFUL BASTARD
 
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:55 am

Postby magicmonkey on Wed Apr 11, 2007 12:51 pm

No, but it sounds interesting. I saw some of the 3D stuff in Ripleys World of Adventure in Thailand and was pretty amazed by it then, and I presume that's the old system as I do remember quite a bit of scenery blur too. Incredible tech stuff. When it comes to getting bums in seats away from front rooms and back into theatres this is certainly the way to go.
magicmonkey
I AM fucking Zen
 
Posts: 6031
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 8:26 am
Location: Shanghizzo


Return to Animation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests