Animation Mentor Student
In 1995, Toy Story changed everything. It was the first fully computer-generated feature film. It was the film that made my area of study in computer animation possible. It was the film that various authors have likened both to a brilliant interpretation of Don Quixote and as an homage to humanism. Being but a 7-year-old at the time it came out in theaters, I of course could not comprehend any of this. The film nevertheless managed to capture my imagination. Ever since, Pixar, the company responsible for this film and many spectacular others, has had me hooked.
Pixar followed up its original hit with an arguably even better sequel, Toy Story 2, in 1999. That’s where it seemed things would end, for Toy Story at least. Pixar went on to do bigger and more technically proficient films. All of which, in my humble opinion, have been nothing short of spectacular. This Friday, June 18th, will mark the return to the studio’s flagship series. Toy Story 3 will release in theaters nearly 15 years after the original. Now fifteen years is a long time, especially in computer graphics. Technology leaps forward at such an amazing rate that graphics quickly become outdated, both in film and in video games. Shoot, fifteen years ago everyone was playing games that looked like this. Nevertheless, Toy Story still holds up surprisingly well to today’s standards, as seen in this screenshot from the original film. This evidence just goes to show how revolutionary and far ahead of its time Toy Story was. Therefore, it’s quite understandable to question whether Toy Story 3 could possibly live up to the precedent set for it.
With any other film studio, the move to “cash-in” on such a beloved franchise would be met with widespread criticism, and perhaps even panic. Cries of “HOW DARE THEY RAPE MY CHILDHOOD!” could very well have been heard across the country. After all, the curse of the trilogy is a well-documented phenomenon. Look no further than such films as Home Alone 3, The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor, Spiderman 3, X-Men: The Last Stand, Terminator 3, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End, The Matrix: Revolutions, Alien 3, Jurassic Park 3, The Godfather Part III, Star Wars: Return of the Jedi, Alladin and the King of Thieves….are you sensing a pattern here? Not all of these movies were terrible, but they were all at the very least disappointing third chapters compared to the better first two parts. It’s clear that not every series can be a “Lord of the Rings,” and some studios simply can’t learn to quit when they’re ahead. Don’t even get me started on films with more than three parts that just won’t die (I’m looking at you, Saw franchise!!!). But with Pixar, I have few worries. Let’s take a look at Pixar’s track record to give us an idea of what we can expect.
For the following list of Pixar films and aggregate reviews, I’ve chosen to use the website Rotten Tomatoes. I prefer this website to other review sites, because it not only summarizes the general consensus of critics, but it assigns the movie a score based on the percentage of reviews that were positive for that film. So if a film achieves a 51% on the “tomatometer,” that means that more people liked the film than did not (though barely). This method may seem overly simplified to some, but let’s face it, isn’t the bottom line of cinema to entertain? What else matters at the end of the day other than “Did you like the movie or not?” Other aggregate review sites give an average score that is difficult to quantify, because different reviewers use different means of grading a film, be it through letter grades, numeric scales, or stars. Furthermore, one reviewer may consider a 3 star film to be perfectly good, while another may consider 3 stars to be woeful. Differing standards convolute the average score. Rotten Tomatoes, however, takes into account the tone of the review when determining if it constitutes a positive or negative review. That said, here are the list of Pixar films from most universally enjoyed to least:
| Film | Tomatometer Score |
|---|---|
| Toy Story | 100% |
| Toy Story 2 | 100% |
| Finding Nemo | 98% |
| Up | 98% |
| The Incredibles | 97% |
| Ratatouille | 96% |
| WALL-E | 96% |
| Monsters, Inc. | 95% |
| A Bug’s Life | 91% |
| Cars | 75% |
From the table it’s pretty safe to say that every Pixar film has been a resounding success. Even Cars, Pixar’s least-successful film, is a far cry from being “not good.” Furthermore every single one of these films is “Certified Fresh,” a high honor bestowed upon only the best films on Rotten Tomatoes. I think it’s safe to say that Pixar will not disappoint this time around either. The first 7 reviews are already in for Toy Story 3, and the movie currently sits at a perfect 100%. As you may have noticed, this marks Pixar as the only “perfect” trilogy ever…on Rotten Tomatoes, anyway. All 3 films sit at 100% universal acclaim.
As exciting as this may be to those who root for absolutes (i.e. They want a good film to be deemed “perfect” and a bad one to be “the worst”), I wouldn’t hold your breath on this staying true. Unfortunately, as any film gains publicity these days, there will always be a “troll” that comes out of the woodwork to provide the dissenting voice, even if his remarks are invalid. Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, but too often less-respectable critics flame a good film or praise a horrible one just to generate buzz and publicity for their own website. In this day and age, a true consensus is impossible, no matter how good or bad a film is. For proof of concept, I direct the reader to Mr. Armond White, a critic that called Clash of the Titans “…a better sense of meaningful, economic narrative than the mess that Peter Jackson made of the interminable, incoherent Lord of the Rings trilogy.” When referring to the superb movie Up, on the other hand, Armond says, “Pixar disgraces and delimits the animated film as a mushy, silly pop form.” These jaw-dropping statements are not outliers either. The man’s knack for absurd statements is astounding. While a perfect score will likely be as impossible as a truly perfect film, I have no doubt that Toy Story 3 will find a well-deserved resting place in any movie-lover’s library. For a full-review, and to find out whether Toy Story 3 really does live up to expectations, check back on my blog following the weekend premier of the film.
UPDATE: (06/18/2010) – It’s opening day for Toy Story 3, folks, and as it stands now, the reviewers on Rotten Tomatoes have Toy Story 3 sitting at a perfect 100% with both of its predecessors. Only time will tell if it remains there, but things are looking good with a whopping 90 reviews in and an average rating of 8.7 out of 10 (compared to an average of 8.9/10 for Toy Story, and 8.6/10 for Toy Story 2). Will Toy Story be crowned the unofficial ”perfect trilogy,” or will “HeWhoMustNotBeNamed” (read: “Armond White”) swoop in to trash the film? Wherever the rating ends up at in the long run, it’s certainly safe to say that Pixar has produced another winner. Expect my review within the next two days.
UPDATE: (06/20/2010) - As sure as day turns to night, so-called “critic” Armond White shows up to trash an excellent film. As I and many others expected, Armond White has spoiled the Toy Story trifecta’s collective 100% after labeling it as consumerist drivel and inferior to both Transformers 2 and Jonah Hex. It’s pretty sad when the man’s reviews can be predicted simply by his infamous reputation. Check out my newest blog entry for a full take on Armond White: http://andrewbanta.com/2010/06/20/critic-armond-white/. My own, far more thoughtful review of Toy Story 3 will be coming out in the next 24 hours.
References:
Burningham, Bruce (2000). “Walt Disney’s Toy Story as Postmodern Don Quixote” (PDF). Cervantes (Cervantes Society of America) 20 (1): 157–174. http://www.h-net.org/~cervantes/csa/artics00/burningh.pdf. Retrieved June 13, 2010.
Hall, Lucia K.B. (March 1, 2000). ”Toy Stories for Humanists?”. The Humanist. http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-27546351_ITM. Retrieved June 13, 2010.