*** Official MONSTERS INC. Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Ronald Epstein]

EPISODE 2 TRAILER:
I know it's only a teaser, but all this hype
for virtually nothing. It's a 1-minute teaser
that's over before you blink.
There's no music. No dialogue. There are
about a dozen 1-second glimpses at bits and
pieces of things that will make you ooh and
ahh, but when it's all over you wonder what
you just missed.
Monsters Inc. will disappoint many
Pixar fans. The animation is stellar, but
it's a kiddie movie. The film lacks any of the
charm that Toy Story 1&2 had. Jokes fall
flat very quickly, and I think many of us only
briefly chuckled at a few of the gags. There are
no adult jokes here, and the middle section of
the film gets a bit weighed down.
If you are not interested in spending $7-$10
to see the eye-blink EPISODE 2 trailer, you may
wish to wait for DVD until you see Monsters Inc..
PS: It's a shame that Lucasfilm screwed Fox
by putting this trailer on a Disney film.
------------------

Ronald Epstein (pronounced like the English "Ronald Epstein")
Circa 2000
Home Theater Forum Administrator
All forum questions & to get on our private forum mailing list (new members)... Email: [email protected]
Problems with the webpage or site? Contact WEBMASTER
Email Packy [email protected]

 

[Lou Sytsma]

Ouch!
Double bummer as I had looked forward to seeing both.
------------------
Every man is my superior, in that I may learn from him.
MyHTSetup

 

[Matthew Chmiel]

PS: It's a shame that Lucasfilm screwed Fox
by putting this trailer on a Disney film.

I think they only put the trailer on a Disney film, for:
1) Monsters, Inc. will be the biggest film this weekend.
2) No FOX films are opening this weekend (other then a sneek peek of Shallow Hal).
Also, if all rumors are true, the "big" teaser will open up with Harry Potter... which is a Warner Bros. film, not a FOX film (and Lucasfilm knows that Harry might end up being the biggest film of 2001).
What would you rather do if you worked for Lucasfilm? Put the trailer in front of a FOX film that COULD do good business, or put the trailer in front of another studio's film that WILL do good business?
------------------

Link Removed / AIM: MrMatthew / ICQ: 96444542
"I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class. Especially since I rule."

 

[Jason Seaver]

PS: It's a shame that Lucasfilm screwed Fox by putting this trailer on a Disney film.

Well, let's look at what the options from Fox were:
Waking Life (opened October 12, expanded last week, expanding wider November) - not wide release, rated R, and completely different in tone from the Star Wars movies. Not the greatest candidate.
Shallow Hal (opens November 16) - Hmm. I honestly don't know why this didn't have the trailer. I think, though, that its release date was moved up, and it is opening the same weekend as Harry Potter.
Black Knight (Opens November 21) - Be honest: Would you want the trailer for your movie to potentially boost this apparent turd's box office? (When my brother and I went to see O, there were trailers for this, How High, Two Can Play That Game and Bones back-to-back. If I were black, that would be cause to go to Hollywood with the same attitude generally reserved for villagers approaching Frankenstein's castle. But I digress)
Super Troopers (Opens November 30) - Limited release.
Truth be told, I'm surprised there's nothing on Shallow Hal, although a teaser/trailer may be attached. Of course, it's not too surprising when you consider that the Star Wars features, except for the first, aren't really Fox movies - they're independent films that Fox has had a distribution agreement for.

 

[Leroy]

PS: It's a shame that Lucasfilm screwed Fox by putting this trailer on a Disney film.

I don't think he's screwing over anyone, Fox is not financing EpII, only distributing. The more exposure EpII gets the BETTER for Fox come release time.
I was also under the impression that this WAS a KIDS movie.
[Edited last by Leroy on November 01, 2001 at 10:27 AM]

 

[Neil Joseph]

Thanks for the heads up. I'll wait and download the trailers from the exclusive website, and I'll probably buy Monsters Inc on DVD for the kiddies when it comes out.
------------------
Link Removed
------------------
My Favourite DVD's

 

[Brian Kidd]

OK folks, now remember: This is only one person's opinion. Every other review I have read of MONSTERS, INC. has been very good to excellent. I'm not saying that Ron is wrong in his opinion; he's perfectly entitled to it. I'm just saying that I think it's a bit silly to read one, very brief, review and throw up your hands. Let's face it, even if MONSTERS, INC. isn't the best film ever to come out of Pixar, I guarantee you that it will be miles ahead of the majority of films that have been released this year. I mean, come on! This forum is full of people who bought BATTLEFIELD EARTH when it came out. I, for one, will be there on Friday and I'm sure I'll thoroughly enjoy the film and the short STAR WARS (STAR WARS, durn ya! STAR FREAKIN' WARS) teaser.

 

[Pete_w]

Of course it is a kiddie movie....isn't that what it is supposed to be?

 

[Troy LaMont]

: It's a shame that Lucasfilm screwed Fox
by putting this trailer on a Disney film.

I'm not sure where the bias is coming from but, I don't think anyone is screwing anyone by putting a teaser trailer at the beginning of a movie. The studios have a business to run and if one (or more) makes the determination that they can benefit from one another's 'services', then so be it.
I'm totally disappointed at your quasi-review of this movie Ron. Not only do you not include any details or supporting evidence for your claim, but you basically lump this movie in with a 'studio' and try to unfairly compare it with other works produced by this studio. This movie should be based soley on it's own merit, just like any other new movie that comes out. I did note that you mentioned "brief notes" in the heading, but to totally trash a movie in one sentence and advise people not to waste their $7-10 and get the DVD, hmmm.
I think we are losing sight of the audience here, Pixar produces children's movies for Disney (which mostly produces movies for children also). Children aren't fans of 'Pixar' like you state in your quasi-review, they are fans of good, entertaining stories, fun and lovable characters, which I'm sure Monster's Inc will provide. The real fans of Pixar are adults and if the "animation is stellar..." and the story is sufficient enough to entertain the kids, then the fans of Pixar should be pleased as well.
When I take my six year old daughter to see a children's movie, if I get a chuckle, laugh or good time from it as well then great, but I don't go in with the expectation that this movie is supposed to appeal to everyone.
The HTF has gotten a lot attention in the past few months with mentions in major areas like magazine, TV and other popular web sites. We have great support from a lot of major studios and I don't think it fair to our members and the tons of visitors we get if are showing too much of a bias towards one studio or another. My understanding of the forum was always one of fairness, in any area.
You are beginning to hold a lot of weight and credibility in the world of DVD and movies based on this sight, I hope that nothing's changed and the same ol', fair, unbiased, Ron that I have come to know, hasn't changed.
Monster's Inc. is for the kids, let's not forget that.
Troy
------------------
:My teacher tells me beauty is on the inside.
:That's just something ugly people say.

 

[Matt Butler]

Troy,
Did you read my review of Monsters Inc a few days ago. I felt the same as Ron did. Its a cut movie but thats it. It doenst have the charm of Pixars other films like TS or Bugs Life.

 

[Dean DeMass]

I have no problem with Ron's opinion on Monsters Inc., it is his opinion and I will have my own when I see it on Friday. However, I do disagree with his opinion about attaching the trailer to a Disney film.
What is the big deal? Would people rather go see films like Monsters Inc. and Harry Potter to get a glimpse of the new Star Wars, or would they rather go see a total piece of shit like Wing Commander. I love Fox and I appreciate what they do for DVD, but they do put out their fair share of stinkers. Just because they have nothing big coming out in the next few weeks, is Lucas supposed to attach the trailer for one of the most anticipated films of 2002 to some film many people won't see? I don't think so. IMHO, this is a good business move by Lucas.
-Dean-
------------------
My HT Equipment
"I've seen you and you are not cool."

 

[John Berggren]

The reason why it can be considered that Fox is getting screwed is because they are all but giving distribution to Lucasfilm. Most of what they get for distributing the Star Wars films aside from a minimal fee is public perception that Star Wars is a Fox film. It's a great thing to have, but you'd think that Lucas might scratch their back for the inexpensive distribution solution by providing a trailer for a Fox film as opposed to 2 other studios.
I don't think they should do it like last time and attach it to a turkey like Wing Commander, but Shallow Hal would have benefitted nicely.
OTOH I can appreciate Lucas wanting to attach his trailer to 2 of the 3 biggest films of the season. And in the end, it will help Fox, as they'll likely use AOTC to run their 4 minute + block of trailers next May.
I enjoy Disney and Pixar films enough that I'm going to check out Monsters Inc. I hope to enjoy it, and I'm sure there'll be something in it for me...
At least now I know that god-awful trailer description with it's hokey dialogue is false, being that there is no dialogue in the trailer. Thank god for that.
------------------
Rationality is not a commodity which is evenly distributed.
Thank you Sci-Fi channel for Season 6 of Stargate SG-1
View SpaceDog's DVD Collection

 

[RobertR]

Sheesh, sounds like the Ep. 2 trailer tells us even less about the actual film than I thought.

 

[Dean DeMass]

Remember folks, the Fox logo is still in front of the trailer, not a Disney logo. So people will still seee that Fox is attached to Star Wars.
-Dean-

 

[Bill Buklis]

The Episode 1 trailer played in front of plenty of non-fox films. If I remember correctly I saw it before The Matrix.

Sheesh, sounds like the Ep. 2 trailer tells us even less about the actual film than I thought.

That may be a good thing. Trailers, in general, give away too much information.
------------------

 

[Scott Weinberg]

Thanks for the scoop, Ron. I've now heard a few disappointed reviews as well as a few that simply RAVE about Monsters Inc. (My friend Erik wrote one at efilmcritic.com) I'll be seeing it tomorrow afternoon and I can only hope I enjoy it a bit more than you did.
The news regarding the SW trailer is especially disappointing. I'm a big fan of 'coming attractions' and I was hoping to see a trailer similar to the one for TPM.
O well. I'm sure we'll all be "Star Wars"ed to death in the next few months anyway.
------------------
Scott Weinberg
------------------
http://members.home.net/scott2915/_vti_txt/ofcs
[Edited last by Scott Weinberg on November 01, 2001 at 11:40 AM]

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Troy,
I think you are going too way out on this.
First of all, I am not totally trashing the
movie.
But who most frequents this forum? Adults.
You are getting the perspective of this film
from not only an adult, but someone who has
been a great fan of Pixar since the beginning.
It is my opinion that if you are an adult fan
like myself, you are going to be very disappointed
in this film. I will again repeat that it has
none of the charm or adult humor that the TOY
STORY films have.
As for what kids think? I think kids like
anything animated starring cute monsters. I hate
to say it, but how could a film like this NOT go
over well with kids?
This is just the first Pixar release that seems
to totally abandon the adult crowd and instead
cater to the kiddie crowd. The film stars an
annoying baby that doesn't even talk.
To sit here and tell me that I am being bias
to any studio is simply ludicrious, and frankly,
I am tired of reading such nonsense. If you have
been a member of this forum long enough, and know
me for what I write, I have no problem telling my
opinion the way it is -- for or against a studio.
Take a few moments and read the other reviews I
have written (there is so much to choose from)
on the SNEAK PEEKS area. There are reviews
that totally trash a movie and it doesn't matter
which studio it comes from.
More than anything else, I care about what I
write here. I realize I have a reputation on the
internet and I am very careful not to tarnish
that reputation by seemingly catering to anyone.
Know who I cater to? Our members! I write
reviews keeping our members in mind. Our membership
consists of adults -- not children under the age
of 13. So, when I write that this movie is going
to disappoint, I know the audiance I am talking to.
Furthermore....
It is my understanding, talking to a few people
in the industry, that there is a big amount of
resentment towards Lucasfilm for not only putting
that Episode 2 trailer on a non-Fox product, but
also a situation involving a THX trailer that was
to star Shrek.
------------------

Ronald Epstein (pronounced like the English "Ronald Epstein")
Circa 2000
Home Theater Forum Administrator
All forum questions & to get on our private forum mailing list (new members)... Email: [email protected]
Problems with the webpage or site? Contact WEBMASTER
Email Packy [email protected]

 

[Dean DeMass]

It is my understanding, talking to a few people in the industry, that there is a big amount of
resentment towards Lucasfilm for not only putting
that Episode 2 trailer on a non-Fox product, but
also a situation involving a THX trailer that was
to star Shrek.

I can understand the resentment about the Shrek THX trailer, hell, I am a bit peeved about it too, since I really wanted to see the trailer. But I just don't get the resentment about Lucasfilm attaching the trailer to a non-Fox film. Shallow Hal is the only somewhat big Fox film coming out in the next couple of weeks. It is a Farelley Brothers film, so you are now limiting yourself to what type a crowd will see the trailer. Monsters Inc. and Harry Potter will be seen by kids and adults and they will both be much more appealing to the general public than Shallow Hal. The only reason Fox attached the Episode I trailer to films like Wing Commander is so people would go see the POS. I think Lucasfilm learned their lesson the 1st time around because of all the complaints about having to see a real shitty movie just to get a glimpse of the new Star Wars film. Hell, I waited until the trailer was attached before A Bug's Life (another Disney film) before I went to the theater to see it. Why? Because I am not wasting my money to go see a crappy movie for a trailer. I want to see a film I am looking forward to and the Star Wars trailer is just a plus.
-Dean-
------------------
My HT Equipment
"I've seen you and you are not cool."

 

[Bill Buklis]

I just took a quick look at the starwars.com site to see if they had the trailer for download like Ep. 1 did, only to find out this new trailer is exclusive to Monsters, Inc.. Admittedly I'm a little surprised by this. I certainly understand that Lucas would want to find the best vehicle to promote his film. It makes perfect sense to have the trailer before Monsters, Inc.. But, not to have the trailer before any other film is surprising. In this aspect it does slight Fox.
Between this and the Shrek THX debacle, I'm think Disney has paid for some big arrangement with Lucasfilm. I'm starting to think it's not Lucasfilm that's using the biggest movie to promote his film, but rather Disney using the Ep. 2 trailer to promote Disney's film. In this regard, the Shrek THX trailer is a competitive conflict towards Disney.
------------------

 

[Wayne Bundrick]

I wonder if the Episode II trailer attached to a Disney film is the first half of a quid pro quo deal, the other half being a trailer for a forthcoming Disney/Touchstone/Miramax film will be attached to Episode II next May.
------------------
--Wayne Bundrick