Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests to win things like this Logitech Harmony Ultimate Remote and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
3D Blu-ray Reviews

Monsters, Inc. 3D Blu-ray Review



  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 of 22 Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer

  • 10,627 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted February 10 2013 - 09:18 AM

Pixar’s Monsters, Inc. is a slaphappy compendium of color, invention, and mirth, but its story construction is among the lesser Pixar creations, and while the patented Pixar wit is there in full force, both verbal and visual, the film in retrospect seems less like the usual Pixar creation and more like the product of Dreamworks animation where big name stars improvise lines around a slight story that often lacks a strong human connection. (Ironically, the film lost the Best Feature Animation Oscar that year to Dreamworks’ Shrek.) The film is fast and funny, creates a new world we’ve never seen before, and contains memorable vocal performances, but Monsters, Inc. is not in the top echelon of Pixar’s best creations. Its new 3D incarnation adds depth and interest to the already flashy imagery, but like other Pixar reimaginings of their movies in 3D, it’s fun but not essential.





Monsters, Inc. 3D (Blu-ray)
Directed by Pete Docter

Studio: Disney
Year: 2001
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1   1080p   AVC codec
Running Time: 91 minutes
Rating: G
Audio: Dolby TrueHD 7.1, 5.1 English; Dolby Digital 5.1 EX English, French, Spanish
Subtitles: SDH, French, Spanish


Region: A-B-C
MSRP: $ 49.99



Release Date: February 19, 2013

Review Date: February 10, 2013



The Film

4/5


In the world of Monstropolis, Monsters, Inc. is the largest scare factory there, and the top kid scarer is James "Sulley" Sullivan (John Goodman), a huge, intimidating monster with a gentle nature and, like all the monsters, frightened of children whom they believe to be toxic. His assistant, best friend, and roommate is Mike Wazowski (Billy Crystal), a fast-talking, feisty one-eyed monster. Inside the factory can also be found the factory's crab-like head Henry J. Waternoose (James Coburn), the beguiling serpent-haired receptionist Celia (Jennifer Tilly) who’s sweet on Mike, and the sarcastic chameleon monster Randall Boggs (Steve Buscemi) who schemes to replace Sulley as Monsters, Inc.'s champion scare-inducer. Mining the screams of children is the reason for the existence of Monsters, Inc. and all of the other scare factories in town as screams contain the energy necessary to keep the city at full power. When two-year old human child Boo stumbles through the doorway into Monstropolis by accident, she turns the monster world upside-down.


The innovative world of Monstropolis is clearly the film’s greatest claim to fame courtesy of the script by Andrew Stanton and Daniel Gerson, from an original story by Pete Docter, Jill Culton, Jeff Pidgeon, and Ralph Eggleston (and there are lots of throwaway jokes that one will likely miss on a first look like the grocer spelled “grosser” and his gore-infused produce). Inside the factory world of Monsters, Inc. are the doorways into countless bedrooms around the world where the monsters emerge to terrify their tiny victims, and Pixar’s talented team of animators have made the world like many industrialized factories with workrooms, break rooms, locker rooms, vaults, bathrooms: all of which we get to visit. But the slapstick antics as the monsters pursue the child around the factory wear out its welcome fairly quickly, and attempting to win back her trust after they’ve scared her (she spends most of the movie laughing at them setting up the film’s inevitable conclusion) just doesn’t pluck the heartstrings as so many other Pixar films have been able to do through their storylines. The film even takes a surprising detour to the Himalayas after the banishment of our two protagonists, but it seems like padding despite the incredible animation. In what is very typical with Dreamworks films but less so with Pixar, there are nods to famous films: The Right Stuff, for instance, and a succession of toys Sulley offers Boo to keep her quiet includes quite a few pieces of merchandise from previous Pixar hits, inside jokes that aren’t worthy of the geniuses at Pixar. There are no complaints about the pacing or the quality of animation, however. When Sulley and Mike chase after Boo through the bedroom door vault, the studio puts its best foot forward with incredible speed, dexterous animation, and a breathless pace, all hallmarks of Pixar at its zenith.


Voice casting is very strong. John Goodman is tremendously appealing as the gentle giant Sulley. As his motormouth friend Mike, Billy Crystal can become tiresome with his constant yakking, but the character’s thrill at any kind of recognition is undoubtedly endearing. James Coburn’s authoritative voice establishes his control over the factory beautifully though Steve Buscemi scheming Randall seems a bit underwhelming surrounded by this collection of scene stealers. Jennifer Tilly makes a fragile love interest while Bob Peterson as administrative assistant Roz is a scream in every scene in which he/she appears.



Video Quality

5/5

3D implementation – 4/5


The film has been framed at 1.85:1 and is presented in 1080p using the AVC codec. The colors are riotous in this feature with all of the different monster creations evincing every hue of the rainbow. The attention paid to Sulley’s blue and purple fur is perhaps the encode’s most astonishing achievement, so real a viewer may feel he could reach out and touch it, never more so than in the snow sequence when snow and dew work their way through the fur so believably that it takes the breath away. No banding or other artifacts mar the pristine appearance of the image, another bull’s eye for the artists at Pixar. The film has been divided into 32 chapters.


As with other Pixar 3D reinventions from original 2D presentations, the depth to the image is sometimes quite impressive (Sully’s bed looks as long as a football field, and the first view inside a tunnel seems to stretch to infinity) while the assortment of characters and objects on different planes becomes mind bogging from the delightful opening credits clear through to the end (the door warehouse/vault that the characters race through near the climax is even more exhilarating in 3D than it is in 2D). But like most of Pixar’s redos, there is very little emphasis on outward projection. There are a couple of pointed fingers (claws?) that come out slightly toward the viewer, and there is a moment where some shredders send floating bits that seem to momentarily waft in front of our eyes. But the extent that the animators avoid using forward thrust is a bit frustrating with all of the pointed horns, claws, and tails that they have at their disposal.



Audio Quality

5/5


The Dolby TrueHD 7.1 sound mix has been imaginatively constructed to place Randy Newman’s jolly score throughout the soundfield and then to use the available channels for all manner of ambient sounds, from Boo’s echoing gurgles which bounce around your home theater to thunderclaps and closing doors all beautifully directionalized. Everything sounds impressively rich and robust in this sound mix, one many fans of the film will undoubtedly treasure and one of the most sonically active of Pixar’s animated output.



Special Features

5/5


The 3D disc in the set contains some entertaining 3D extras in addition to the feature film and the animated menus. Everything is in 1080p 3D.


“Partysaurus Rex” is a hilarious Toy Story-based short with Rex making some new friends with the bathtub toys and his well-meaning attempts at partying which naturally go awry. It runs 6 ½ minutes.


“For the Birds” is the Oscar-winning Pixar short which accompanied Monsters, Inc. in the original theatrical engagement. The 1080p 3D short runs 3 ½ minutes.


The especially created animated outtakes are also in 3D and include Monsters, Inc.’s company play in this 5 ½-minute short.


There are 3D promo trailers for Monsters University and Planes.


Both Blu-ray 2D discs in the set contain bonus material.


Disc one has the audio commentary ported over from the original DVD release. It features director Pete Docter, co-director Lee Unkrich, and Pixar executives John Lasseter and Andrew Stanton. It’s a lively and energetic discussion about the making of the movie with references to early plans for the film and characters which get more elaboration in other bonus features elsewhere in the set.


The Filmmakers’ Round Table finds Pete Docter, Lee Unkrich, Bob Peterson, and Darla Anderson sitting down and discussing the movie almost a decade after it premiered. They discuss favorite sequences, some cut sequences, changes in design of the characters, the casting of stars, and the impact of 9/11 which happened about two months before the movie’s premiere. This 1080p featurette runs 21 ½ minutes.


Monsters, Inc. Ride and Go Seek: Building Monstropolis in Tokyo” is pretty self explanatory. This is an exanimation of the Monsters, Inc. ride in Tokyo Disneyland with plenty of clips showing its various sections. This runs for 8 minutes in 1080i.


“For the Birds” is the Oscar-winning Pixar short which accompanied Monsters, Inc. in the original theatrical engagement. The 1080p short runs 3 ½ minutes. There is optional director commentary available for listening.


“Mike’s New Car” is a short created using the Mike and Sulley characters from the film, and this short received an Oscar nomination, a slapstick 3 ¾ minutes involving Mike trying the figure out the various gadgets on his new car. It’s in 1080p. This contains the optional annoying commentary by the young sons of the film’s directors.


The disc is BD-Live ready.


There are 1080p trailers for Wrexk-It Ralph, Monsters University, and The Little Mermaid 3D.


The second Blu-ray 2D disc contains the bulk of the background features on the making of the movie. With few noted exceptions, they’re in 480i.


“Roz’s 100-Door Challenge Game” is a fun trivia game in which the viewer answers trivia questions about the movie to qualify for different position levels at Monsters, Inc. This is in 1080p.


The Pixar Fun Factory Tour finds Pete Docter, John Lasseter and others on the Pixar team taking the viewer on a quick guided tour of the new Pixar facility. It runs for 3 ¾ minutes.


“Story Is Key” spends 2 minutes with the executives reminding us that Pixar’s movie stress well developed stories more than any other component of the movie and explaining how the story department at Pixar works.


“Monsters Are Real” finds the stars of the film and important crew members giving their (tongue-in-cheek) theories about the possibility of monsters’ existence. This lasts 1 ½ minutes.


The original story treatment for the movie is presented in a very interesting 13 ¾-minute featurette illustrated with temporary voices. Almost all of the story in the original pitch was discarded, but the central idea of Monstropolis was retained as the jumping-off point for the film.


Then head story supervisor Bob Peterson shows us a typical story pitch for a segment in the movie that ultimately didn’t end up getting used. This runs for 4 ½ minutes.


There are five banished concepts discussed for the character and story of Sulley showing just how much the character changed from these early drafts to the finished film.


The storyboard-to-film comparison shows how the animators movie from the earliest illustrations called a story reel to the final color product and then these two segments are shown in a split screen overlay for comparison. This runs 5 ¾ minutes in 1080p.


The extensive art galleries for the film contains hundreds of sketches and color drawings arranged in four large groupings: Characters, Color Script (drawn scenes from the film), Concept Art, and Posters.


There are many featurettes on the fashioning of the world of the film:


“Designing Monstropolis” lasts 2 ¾ minute talking about how their ideas for the new world took shape.


“Set Dressing” is 3 ¼ minutes on how props and set pieces are designed and placed on the sets already constructed.


Location Flyarounds are the very entertaining trips through the interior and exterior sets without (hardly any) characters in view. This lasts for 7 ½ minutes.


“Monster File” shows the recording of the voice actors for the movie in a 6-minute segment. “What Makes a Great Monster?” finds actors and crew discussing getting into character for the film for 1 ½ minutes.


Animation Process takes us through four stages of work to get to the finished product: illustration, layout, shaders, and lighting. In this section are five subsections with vignettes:


“Early Tests” are some ideas that didn’t pass muster in this 8-minute look at the movie. The fashioning of the opening titles is covered in a 2-minute clip.


The hard parts that the production team had to tackle (mainly the fur and cotton fabrics) are discussed for 5 minutes.


The Shots Department, a new department within Pixar created for this movie and in use ever since, discuss their approaches to the seemingly unsolvable computer puzzles the picture presented for 2 ¼ minutes.


Then there is a production demonstration showing how each department adds their expertise to what comes before. The viewer uses the angle key to toggle between the four phases of production: story reel, layout, animation, and final color.


The Music & Sound section has two segments:


“Monster Song”  finds stars John Goodman and Billy Crystal laying down the vocal tracks for Randy Newman’s Oscar-winning song in a 3 ½-minute vignette.


Sound Design has sound executive head Gary Rydstrom and assistant Tom Myers discussing the creation of the sound effects and Foley tracks for the movie in a 4 ¼-minute piece.


There are two theatrical trailers,  four television ad spots, international inserts, and a film clip played in thirteen languages. There is also a 1 ½-minute look at toys manufactured for the film. All of this is in the publicity section.


The hilarious outtakes runs for 5 ½ minutes.


The wrap-up of this section lasts ¾-minute. However, the viewer is reminded to look for an (easy to find) Easter Egg which will open six new doors of brief featurettes.


The New Monster Adventures section of the disc offers these features:


TV blackout sketches that run for 1 ¼ minutes.


Ponkickies 21 is a Japanese children’s show which Pixar provided some animation for.


The music video for the Oscar-winning song “If I Didn’t Have You” runs for 1 ¼ minutes.


“On the Job with Mike and Sully” is a brief 2 ½ minute piece featuring the stars of the movie.


Some fun faux-orientation videos round off the bonus features:


“Welcome to Monsters, Inc.” is for new employees of the plant. (1 minute)

“Your First Day” acquaints new employees with the rights and wrongs of the workplace. (3 ½ minutes)

“History of Monster World” is in story reel form, an uncompleted short on how man and monsters happened to exist in separate worlds. (1 ½ minutes)


Disc four in the set is a DVD release of the film.


Disc five in the set is a digital copy of the movie with enclosed instructions on loading it onto Mac and PC devices.



In Conclusion

4.5/5 (not an average)


While it might not be the greatest of the Pixar accomplishments, Monsters, Inc. makes a delightful entertainment, bold and brassy and brimming with delights. The 3D Blu-ray offers an astonishing dimensional picture experience and outstanding sound in the expected Pixar fashion and comes highly recommended.




Matt Hough

Charlotte, NC



#2 of 22 AlexF

AlexF

    Second Unit

  • 496 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 14 2005

Posted February 10 2013 - 11:41 AM

I'm looking forward to picking this one up, and I'm thrilled that the shorts were included in 3D. I just wish that more of the shorts originally shown in 3D would be made available in such a format.

#3 of 22 JohnS

JohnS

    Producer

  • 4,436 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 17 2001

Posted February 10 2013 - 02:35 PM

But like most of Pixar’s redos, there is very little emphasis on outward projection.

When we went to Disney for the HTF meet back in October, they have stated that they tend to stay away from outward projection gimmicks.

all-banner.jpg


#4 of 22 Doctorossi

Doctorossi

    Supporting Actor

  • 833 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 2012

Posted February 11 2013 - 01:44 AM

When we went to Disney for the HTF meet back in October, they have stated that they tend to stay away from outward projection gimmicks.

If outward projection is inherently a "gimmick", inward projection is no less one.

#5 of 22 Adam Gregorich

Adam Gregorich

    Executive Producer

  • 14,591 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 20 1999
  • LocationThe Other Washington

Posted February 11 2013 - 03:38 AM

Originally Posted by Doctorossi 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnS 

When we went to Disney for the HTF meet back in October, they have stated that they tend to stay away from outward projection gimmicks.


If outward projection is inherently a "gimmick", inward projection is no less one.
I think that is John's choice of words.  Pixar plays it safe (both inward and outward) due to eye fatigue:



One thing that's going on physiologically when you watch a 3D movie is that you have two main muscle systems in your eyes.  One is for focusing on distance.  So you're focusing at a distance from you and then your eyes are also converging obviously at that distance.  And so our entire life those two muscle systems work in sync.  By looking right here at my finger [holds up index finger], here it's focusing at this distance and converging at that distance.  And vice versa if I look at it a long distance.  What happens during a 3D movie is that changes a little bit because you're going to be focused at that same 3 feet away from you whatever your distance to the screen is.  But now you're converging your eyes in and out as those objects move in front and back of the screen.  That's why we try to keep our point of interest right around screen.  That's the most comfortable place to view.  You can vary off of that for short periods of time a lot or for a long period of time a little, but you can't have a layout screen forward or back for a long period of time.  That’s when you get eye fatigue headache, nausea, et cetera.  We've refined our approach a little bit so that we feel more comfortable with the point of interest being in front of screen, but gracefully in front of screen not “over the top” in front of the screen.


Full presentation Can be found here: http://www.hometheat...sor-pixar-on-3d  Its worth the read.  As to this release, I'm glad to see more of the extras in 3D and am looking forward to watching For the Birds in 3D.  Its one of my favorite Pixar shorts.



#6 of 22 Chuck Anstey

Chuck Anstey

    Screenwriter

  • 1,502 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 10 1998
  • Real Name:Chuck Anstey

Posted February 11 2013 - 04:35 AM

So in other words "Our research has found 3D works best when it is done as if it were 2D". I understand their point that they cannot have an audience member's entire interest really far out or in on the screen the whole movie but unfortunately they seem to take that to mean "You cannot have anything far in or far out for more than a few seconds and far outward is a total gimmick". Right now Madagascar 3 seems to be the CGI movie that makes the best use of 3D, using the full range without hesitation while keeping the general focus closer to the screen for less fatigue. Finding Nemo 3D was good but it could and should have been great. I mean how much more natural an environment is there to have something floating suspended far forward or backward than underwater? On land characters have to be attached to the ground or an object which causes the edge of the screen to unnaturally cutoff an outwardly projected image, making it clear that the 3D is simulated.

#7 of 22 Doctorossi

Doctorossi

    Supporting Actor

  • 833 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 2012

Posted February 11 2013 - 04:52 AM

So in other words "Our research has found 3D works best when it is done as if it were 2D".

It doesn't surprise me to see this philosophy from Pixar. I recall an early Pixar documentary in which one of their creatives (Lee Unkrich?) was explaining at length the care they take to ground all of their camera moves in real-world physics, to restrict them to a simulation of actions that a real camera might be expected could actually accomplish in the real world. While I value the unconscious storytelling impact of replicating familiar camera vocabulary, I couldn't help being disgusted by the wasted opportunity: after 100 years of cameras saddled with limitations, these incredible artists build a tool that offers them complete and total creative freedom and they immediately impose upon themselves the rule, "Let's only do the same things we've been stuck doing for the last 100 years"?

#8 of 22 Colin Davidson

Colin Davidson

    Second Unit

  • 377 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 06 1999

Posted February 11 2013 - 05:44 AM

... I couldn't help being disgusted by the wasted opportunity: after 100 years of cameras saddled with limitations, these incredible artists build a tool that offers them complete and total creative freedom and they immediately impose upon themselves the rule, "Let's only do the same things we've been stuck doing for the last 100 years"?

It seems to me that if you start doing a ton of wild and crazy stuff on the screen "just because you can" it turns out to be off-putting to the general public who you want to go see your films. You are already creating a fantasy world where you want the story and situations to be believable (to a degree) and I think that instilling part of that believability is using what people are generally used to seeing in other films as to the way the camera moves. As an example, there has been a ton of debate over Peter Jackson's use of HFR in the latest Hobbit film. It seems that many don't like it because it is NOT the normal way in which to shoot a film along with other issues that they personally experienced. I have seen the HFR 3-D version and found it amazing in the depth of field and the richness of the environment that it displayed. I was present at the HTF meet and the Disney / Pixar discussion and being in the "keep the gimmicks down and let me enjoy the story" I truly appreciate what they have accomplished and always look forward to their next project.

#9 of 22 Doctorossi

Doctorossi

    Supporting Actor

  • 833 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 2012

Posted February 11 2013 - 05:50 AM

It seems to me that if you start doing a ton of wild and crazy stuff on the screen "just because you can" it turns out to be off-putting to the general public who you want to go see your films.

The trick is not to do it "just because you can", but to realize stories in an effective way with the tools that you couldn't do before- that's where the world-class artists come in. I'm not saying 'do it arbitrarily', but neither should you establish an arbitrary rule not to do it.

As an example, there has been a ton of debate over Peter Jackson's use of HFR in the latest Hobbit film. It seems that many don't like it because it is NOT the normal way in which to shoot a film along with other issues that they personally experienced. I have seen the HFR 3-D version and found it amazing in the depth of field and the richness of the environment that it displayed.

That's a fine example. Had Jackson followed the Pixar philosophy and said, "Let's use the familiar frame-rate because people are accustomed to it.", you never would've seen that amazing depth-of-field and richness.

#10 of 22 TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,428 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted February 11 2013 - 07:21 AM

That's a fine example. Had Jackson followed the Pixar philosophy and said, "Let's use the familiar frame-rate because people are accustomed to it.", you never would've seen that amazing depth-of-field and richness.

I don't think those things are worth it when you also get actors appearing to move at the wrong frame rate and so many CG shots looking like a video game. That's not progress, it's one step forward and two steps back.

#11 of 22 Doctorossi

Doctorossi

    Supporting Actor

  • 833 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 2012

Posted February 11 2013 - 07:38 AM

when you also get actors appearing to move at the wrong frame rate

:confused: And which actors would those be?

and so many CG shots looking like a video game

The CG, to me, just looked like CG, as it does in any movie with CG.

#12 of 22 TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,428 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted February 11 2013 - 09:28 AM

:confused: And which actors would those be?

Whenever any actor moved, they appeared to be moving slightly faster than normal. It wasn't as severe as a silent movie being run too fast but it was definitely noticable.

The CG, to me, just looked like CG, as it does in any movie with CG.

Not to me. To my eyes, it looked like a video game and not photorealistic CG. I can suspend my disbelief but the HFR just completely took me out of the movie. It's been discussed over in the movie but I wondered if there was an error in presentation I saw or maybe even my eyes or brain somehow register things differently than other people. Before you think I'm just a luddite, I assume that HFR will eventually become the future so I want to see it work but it looks like crap right now.

#13 of 22 Doctorossi

Doctorossi

    Supporting Actor

  • 833 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 2012

Posted February 11 2013 - 09:55 AM

I wondered if there was an error in presentation I saw or maybe even my eyes or brain somehow register things differently than other people.

Maybe so. No one moved at an abnormal speed in my screening/perception.

#14 of 22 Johnny Angell

Johnny Angell

    Played With Dinosaurs Member

  • 4,996 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 13 1998
  • Real Name:Johnny Angell
  • LocationCentral Arkansas

Posted February 12 2013 - 05:16 AM

I don't always agree with every review I read in the paper or online, but here on the HTF, I can discuss the review with the reviewer. All of my comments are heavily laced with IMHO.

Pixar’s Monsters, Inc. is a slaphappy compendium of color, invention, and mirth, but its story construction is among the lesser Pixar creations, and while the patented Pixar wit is there in full force, both verbal and visual, the film in retrospect seems less like the usual Pixar creation and more like the product of Dreamworks animation where big name stars improvise lines around a slight story that often lacks a strong human connection. (Ironically, the film lost the Best Feature Animation Oscar that year to Dreamworks’ Shrek.) The film is fast and funny, creates a new world we’ve never seen before, and contains memorable vocal performances, but Monsters, Inc. is not in the top echelon of Pixar’s best creations. Its new 3D incarnation adds depth and interest to the already flashy imagery, but like other Pixar reimaginings of their movies in 3D, it’s fun but not essential.

When I first read "not in the top echelon of Pixar" I took umbrage at that because I really like this movie. Then I started to ask my self is this the very best of Pixar and no it's not. But I consider it only slightly below the very best and I consider it to be much better than Shrek.

But the slapstick antics as the monsters pursue the child around the factory wear out its welcome fairly quickly, and attempting to win back her trust after they’ve scared her (she spends most of the movie laughing at them setting up the film’s inevitable conclusion) just doesn’t pluck the heartstrings as so many other Pixar films have been able to do through their storylines.

Sully has fallen in love with Boo and when he loses her trust its devastating to him. We have a story about two very good friends and a father/daughter relationship. It was plucking at my heartstrings a lot.

In what is very typical with Dreamworks films but less so with Pixar, there are nods to famous films: The Right Stuff

In particular, the Right Stuff reference has been done to death and usually poorly (Armageddon, anyone?) but here it was funny to see these various monsters do the Right Stuff March.

Voice casting is very strong. John Goodman is tremendously appealing as the gentle giant Sulley. As his motormouth friend Mike, Billy Crystal can become tiresome with his constant yakking, but the character’s thrill at any kind of recognition is undoubtedly endearing.

I get that Billy Crystal's portrayal isn't for everyone, but I was usually laughing at Mike and never irritated. i've heard there are people who found Elen Dengeneres's Dory irritating, which is hard to fathom, but everyone reacts differently.

Bob Peterson as administrative assistant Roz is a scream in every scene in which he/she appears.

We are in 100% agreement here. He's not even a professional voice actor (if I remember correctly) but Roz was great. Your comment about 3D not being essential is correct, because the movie (and the other Pixar conversions) is great without it. However, every Pixar 3D conversion has at the very least, added to the movie experience. Once having watched them in 3D, I don' want to go back to 2D. There is one scene in the movie I'd like to comment on just to praise the Pixar crew. MIke and Sully are in the locker room and Mike is spraying on deodorant and takes a smell of it. He does this without having a nose, but the animators still make it work. I also love the line when Mike says to his girlfriend: "When I first lay eye on you." Hilarious and it was a line they had to use.
Johnny
www.teamfurr.org
But a family cat is not replaceable like a wornout coat or a set of tires. Each new kitten becomes its own cat, and none is repeated. I am four cats old, measuring out my life in friends that have succeeded but not replaced one another.--Irving Townsend


#15 of 22 Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer

  • 10,627 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted February 12 2013 - 08:22 AM

It's always great to read the viewpoints of others. My reviews are only IMHO as well as are all other reviews everywhere.



#16 of 22 Johnny Angell

Johnny Angell

    Played With Dinosaurs Member

  • 4,996 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 13 1998
  • Real Name:Johnny Angell
  • LocationCentral Arkansas

Posted February 20 2013 - 09:05 AM

This is just a little aside, and doesn't reflect on the quality of the film, but the lenticular cover for Monsters must be the most dimensional appearing cover I've seen. Boo and the Door really project out over the cover!
Johnny
www.teamfurr.org
But a family cat is not replaceable like a wornout coat or a set of tires. Each new kitten becomes its own cat, and none is repeated. I am four cats old, measuring out my life in friends that have succeeded but not replaced one another.--Irving Townsend


#17 of 22 Johnny Angell

Johnny Angell

    Played With Dinosaurs Member

  • 4,996 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 13 1998
  • Real Name:Johnny Angell
  • LocationCentral Arkansas

Posted February 21 2013 - 03:48 AM

I just watched the movie and loved it, but encountered a problem. I selected the 7.1 mix and after 5 minutes there were some brief audio dropouts. I'd rewind and play the scene again and they'd be no dropout. That leads me to believe there's no error hard coded into the audio. I didn't get any dropouts when I switched on the fly to the 5.1 mix. After a half hour on that mix I switched back to 7.1. I thought the problem was gone but the dropouts came back as before. Has anyone else encountered this?
Johnny
www.teamfurr.org
But a family cat is not replaceable like a wornout coat or a set of tires. Each new kitten becomes its own cat, and none is repeated. I am four cats old, measuring out my life in friends that have succeeded but not replaced one another.--Irving Townsend


#18 of 22 Christian Preischl

Christian Preischl

    Screenwriter

  • 1,374 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 11 2001

Posted February 21 2013 - 09:28 PM

Johnny, I don't own Monsters Inc 3d yet but I'm not surprised to read your post. Several people, including myself, have had similar issues with the Dolby TrueHD 7.1 tracks on Finding Nemo, Brave and Total Recall. The issue seems the same on all three, although only Sony ever gave an official statement regarding Total Recall. I haven't heard anything from Disney on any of their titles and the fact that they're still using it doesn't bode well. The Digital Bits has info on the problem (and a work-around) right here: http://thedigitalbit...nts/010713_1200 Last thing I heard the usual blame shifting is going on, i.e. the studio blames the player manufacturers and vice versa. To be honest, the "complex branching" sounds like yet another f'd up copy protection scheme to me.

#19 of 22 Johnny Angell

Johnny Angell

    Played With Dinosaurs Member

  • 4,996 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 13 1998
  • Real Name:Johnny Angell
  • LocationCentral Arkansas

Posted February 22 2013 - 08:32 AM

That work-around says to have the BR player do the decoding. Does that effect the receiver? I presume the AVR sees it doesn't have to decode?
Johnny
www.teamfurr.org
But a family cat is not replaceable like a wornout coat or a set of tires. Each new kitten becomes its own cat, and none is repeated. I am four cats old, measuring out my life in friends that have succeeded but not replaced one another.--Irving Townsend


#20 of 22 Christian Preischl

Christian Preischl

    Screenwriter

  • 1,374 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 11 2001

Posted February 22 2013 - 11:31 PM

Yup, that's pretty much it. All you need to do is change the setup in the player. Still... pretty annoying and it shouldn't be necessary at all.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: 3D Blu-ray Reviews

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Forum Nav Content I Follow