Thursday, August 27, 2015

Pixar Theory - Is Riley's Mom in Monsters University?

This would be my first addition to the growing Pixar Theory. You can check out Jon Negroni's original Pixar Theory here.



I was watching Monsters University for the first time yesterday and I noticed this character in one of the final scenes (spoiler alert!):

And I recognised this woman – it's Riley's mom from Inside Out!

Picture Source: DailyMail.co.uk


Really? You might say.

Let's see how this appearance in Monsters University fits into what we know about Riley's mom in Inside Out.



We know that Riley's family lived in Minnesota before they moved to San Fransisco during the plot of Inside Out.


We know there are some woods in Minnesota.

"We need assistance on the north side,” Riley's mom is heard as saying during this action scene during the climax of Monsters University. It turns out that there is a place in the States which includes part of Minnesota, called the Laurentian Mixed Forest Province, also known as the North Woods.

Da Da Dum!!!!


This is a little clue.


It would seem that the door Sulley and Mike have gone through leads to an orphanage in the Minnesotan woods some time before Riley's family moved to San Fransisco. This makes sense because Riley's mom looks a little younger in this scene than in Inside Out.




What do you think? Is Riley's mom really this cop in Monsters University? She could have worked there sometime before the events of Inside Out. I would love to read your comments below.








Picture Source: TheDisneyBlog.com

Monday, August 24, 2015

Movie Review - Fantastic Four (2015) - Jonathan On Paper

Photo Source: hdwallpaper.in
 This week I saw the new Fantastic Four movie. I was intrigued as I went it to find out what had made this movie less successful in it’s opening weekend than the first two Fantastic Four movies (2005, 2007). It made $25.7 million on the first weekend, as opposed to the first movie’s equivalent takings which were $56 million (more than double). 

Photo Source: Xmovies8.tv
This week I saw the new Fantastic Four movie. I was intrigued as I went it to find out what had made this movie less successful in it’s opening weekend than the first two Fantastic Four movies (2005, 2007). It made $25.7 million on the first weekend, as opposed to the first movie’s equivalent takings which were $56 million (more than double). 



The problem with Fantastic Four (2015) is that it never feels like a superhero movie. It has a negatively mysterious mood, which is aided by the gloomy colour tuning and depressing feel at times. The heroes’ super powers are painted as curses, not benefits. It takes a long time to get into any action and takes too much time setting up the story and the characters.

Fantastic Four has the Marvel logo at the start, but it is co-produced by 20th Century Fox, not Disney like the other Marvel cinematic universe movies. It seems like Fox was trying to buy into the current success of Disney’s Marvel series (while already owning the rights to this property). 

But this never feels like a Marvel movie. It has some humour, but it is not the wise-cracking happy sense of humour as in the Avengers and Ant Man. The action was never really fun. Fantastic Four’s main issue is that it doesn’t know when to be silly and when to be serious. It was is too serious.


Photo Source: hdwallpaper.in
|
Somebody was trying to make some dough out of Fantastic Four, but they missed. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it! If you want to make money out of a Marvel movie, make it like Disney does – hilarious and heart-warming with epic cartoony action.


@Steve_sipple




Tuesday, August 4, 2015

Is It True That Disney Never Makes Original Films?






I recently heard a comment that made sense, at first. The comment was along the lines of, “Walt Disney never made an original story.” I thought, “Yes, that’s right, he made movies from existing stories such as the fairy tales of Snow White, Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty, and from books like Pinocchio and The Jungle Book.” Fast forward to our lifetime, and the films were very similar to this – think the tales of Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin and ancient legends of Hercules and Mulan.




On the surface, this comment sounded true. But I now realize, it wasn’t!

The same person said once that Walt Disney’s films were controversial at the time of release, because he had made his own unique version of the traditional stories. Prior to his films, there were multiple versions that circulated around. Snow White might have had a different ending, or Cinderella might have had an extra subplot or an additional detail. People were quite comfortable with these varying versions of the tales.

And here came along Walt Disney saying, “Here’s my version, and that’s what the story is now!”




So now I see, this person who said both these things contradicted himself somewhat.

My argument is that, in creating unique, standout stories - loosely based on existing stories, Walt Disney was indeed being original and creative. Aren’t all artists inspired by something in the first place?


I will leave you with this quote:

Even in literature and art, no man who bothers about originality will ever be original: whereas if you simply try to tell the truth (without caring twopence how often it has been told before) you will, nine times out of ten, become original without ever having noticed it.

~C. S. Lewis