#luxo appears at some point too | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

supergoodwill · 3 years

Text

Co w duszy gra Online Cda Zalukaj Chomikuj

Movie Co w duszy gra online proves the theory that all the studio's films take place in an interconnecteduniverse.I'll also show you how Soul explains the Toy Story movies, where the Incredibles get theirpowers, and the origins of the magical doorways in Monsters Inc and Brave.Plus I'll explain how the new film fits in with Inside Out and Coco.

Of course, there'll be some spoilers, so take care.Jon Negroni first introduced the idea of a single Pixar timeline, and it's in Soul'sThe Hall of Everything where we can find especially compelling evidence to confirm Negroni's theory.The hall is overflowing with specific objects and locations which often recur in Pixar'sfilms, from the iconic Pizza Planet truck to the blimp from Up, and even the weirdlyshaped rock, called Wille's Butte from the Cars movies.And that's a huge pointer that the films exist in the same universe.But Soul goes even further than this, because even though the film appears to be set roughlyin the present day, which I'm basing on the look and feel of New York City and the cellphoneJoe uses, the Hall of Everything even has objects fromthe future such as the Axiom from Wall-E, one of a fleet of giant starliners that wasn'tused until 2105 when Buy N Large arranged for the evacuation of Earth.This implies that The Hall of Everything may even contain blueprints or at least the inspirationfor events that are still to come in the future of the Pixar universe.

Co w duszy Gra CDA also demonstrates one of the most important concepts at the heart of Negroni's Pixar Theory,that humans are batteries.The idea is that human beings are a source of energy to sentient objects such as thetoys in Toy Story which is why they crave the love of their owners;otherwise, it's suggested that if the toys end up stored away they lose their life.And in Monsters Inc, we know that technology exists that can harvest energy from humanemotions such as fear or joy.And there are several moments in Soul that strongly support this idea of humans as anenergy source.When Joe is on the elevator that leads to the Great Beyond, he notices that as the soulsof the recently deceased float up into the big bright light, they fizzle and cracklelike an electrical charge.[electrical crackling sounds] As if to reinforce this idea that a soul isa form of energy, there's also an electrical crackle sound effect whenever we see Terrycounting souls on her abacus.[electrical crackling sounds] Joe also discovers in the Great Before thatbefore new souls can take their place on Earth, they not only have to acquire a set of personalities,but they also need what the movie calls a "spark" to complete that personality.Without this spark, theoretically a soul isn't allowed to go to Earth and live a human life.

Twenty-two does end up on Earth by accident, but the general rule is that a "spark" isneeded to complete the Earth Pass which a soul needs to live a life.The word "spark" can, of course, mean a number of things such as a burst of electricity oran intense feeling or emotion, which again points to this idea of human beings as a formof energy or batteries even.Another crucial element of Negroni's Pixar theory is the idea that Boo from MonstersInc travels back in time to become the Witch in Brave.I'll get to how Soul supports this idea shortly, but first let's quickly recap what the theorysays about time travel.Brave is set in 10th-century Scotland whereas, given the monsters' advanced technology, MonstersInc takes place in the future.The clearest evidence which suggests time travel is the wood carving of Sulley thatthe Witch has in her cottage.She's also obsessed with bears which could be her way of expressing the strong friendshipshe made with Sulley in Monsters Inc.On top of that, the Witch has carvings of the Pizza Planet truck which should be impossiblegiven motorised vehicles most definitely did not exist in medieval Scotlandand she has carved parodies of famous art by artists from the future like Michelangelo.

The door to the Witch's cottage is also magical and can transport her into an alternate interiorversion of her hut, and it can also make her disappear.This is because Boo learned how the technology of the portal doors at the Monsters Inc factoryworked, which is how she travelled through time and space.Crucially in Soul, we can see this same technology in the You Seminar.After souls are paired up with their mentor, Jerry conjures up a door and sends them throughit, instantly transporting them to another location.And when Jerry gives Joe his second chance to return to Earth, he passes from The GreatBeyond through a door and emerges on Earth through another door.Given The Great Before existed at the beginning of time, it suggests that the technology formagical portals in the Pixar Universe was originally born there.Soul also makes a sneaky possible reference to Boo's time-travel shenanigans in what initiallyappears to be a throwaway line by one of the Jerrys.When Terry turns up to complain that the count is out by one soul, Jerry replies:"I seriously doubt that.The count hasn't been off in centuries."This is a vital piece of information for Pixar theorists because it tells us an anomaly similarto Joe escaping the elevator that was taking him to the Great Beyond has happened previously,several hundred years ago in fact.To understand what may have happened all those centuries ago, let's look at what happenedwhen Joe's soul accidentally fell into the body of Mr Mittens."Why am I in a cat?""I don't know!""Meow."It seems that Mr Mittens' soul was sent off to The Great Beyond.So, what if Boo did a similar thing when she time-travelled to medieval Scotland?

Could she have landed in the body of a Scottish woman and displaced her soul sending it upto the Great Beyond?That would mean there'd be an extra soul in the afterlife without a corresponding deadbody on Earth, which could be the reason for the count being off as Jerry said.Interestingly, when Joe returns to his old body in Soul, Mr Mittens appears to regainhis original soul too as we see him reunite with his owner,so if my theory about Boo and the Witch's soul is correct, it makes me wonder whetherTerry did anything about the anomaly that occurred in the soul count hundreds of yearsago.By the way, it's worth pointing out that there's also a Brave easter egg in Soul during thevideo at the You Seminar when we see a soul find its spark after it successfully shootsan arrow into the centre of one of three targets, referencing Merida's demonstration of archeryskills when she fired arrows into three targets.And there are, of course, many more Pixar easter eggs in Soul including the Chinesetakeout box, A113, and the Luxo Ball, all of which I reveal in my full easter eggs video.Now, there are two Pixar movies, Inside Out and Coco, which on the surface seem to contradictSoul and maybe pose a problem for how smoothly it fits into the interconnected universe ofthe Pixar Theory.

The first issue is to do with personality.In The Great Before, we discover that every soul acquires a set of personalities beforethey go to Earth."This is where personalities come from?""Of course!Do you think people are just born with them?"However, in Inside Out, personalities are formed whenever a new core memory is made."Each Core Memory powers a different aspect of Riley's personality.The Islands of Personality are what make Riley...Riley!"While these ideas about personality may appear to be at odds with one another, they can beeasily reconciled if we think of a new born soul as having a baseline personality at birth,some of which adapts and changes as that person grows up and has different experiences.In fact, in Inside Out we see that Riley loses her personalities when she experiences a traumaticevent, however, these are later restored and new ones are also added as she grows up;so an individual's personality is clearly not something static or unchanging.Likewise, Soul also shows us how Twenty Two's personality changes as she experiences lifeon earth.Something else we need to reconcile is how Coco's Land of the Dead fits with Soul's depictionof The Great Beyond.

In Co w Duszy Gra online, the afterlife is a relatively simple place with an escalator that leads souls toa giant white light in the sky.This representation may be alluding to the idea that many people who report near-deathexperiences describe a tunnel with a bright light at the end that draws them towards it.Coco's spirit world, on the other hand, is complex and bursting with colours, with theMarigold Bridge forming a connection between the Land of the Living and the elaborate andcomplex Land of the Dead.Fear not though, because we can resolve these differences by turning to Pixar's officialThe Art of Soul book, which describes The Great Beyond as"a place beyond all that can be known […] represented by a brilliant white light ina vast space […] What lies beyond the light is all up to interpretation."As the book suggests, we can interpret what is beyond the bright light in our own way,and so we can see the Land of the Dead in Coco as a culturally-specific vision of whatthe afterlife is unique to people of Mexican heritage.This would also explain how Coco can have its own specific rules for its spirit world,such as allowing the dead to cross over to the Land of the Living one day each year.What's common to both Soul and Coco though is that the dead souls all retain the appearanceand age they had at the time of their death, whereas in the Great Before, all the soulslook more or less similar, likely because they haven't yet taken a human form yet.The sparks that a soul acquires may even explain where the Supers in The Incredibles got theirpowers.Could it be that the souls that ended up as superheroes were supercharged with extra powersby the spark they received in the Great Before?There is, after all, a statue of what looks like a caped hero on a plinth in the Hallof Everything.

Maybe that statue was responsible for sparking the unfortunate idea of caped superheroes."No capes!"And this is just a fun idea, but could the soul that's being interviewed here for theYou Seminar training video be the soul of Buddy Pine, aka Syndrome."I'm a manipulative megalomaniac, who's intensely opportunistic.""Oh ho!This one might be a handful, but that's Earth's problem."Perhaps Syndrome got his spark from that statue, because after all it was his cape that provedto be his ultimate undoing.And yes, Syndrome wasn't born with powers, but that statue might have inspired him toseek glory in whatever way he could.Or could that soul be Evelyn Deavor, the master manipulator and evil tech genius from thesecond Incredibles movie?The soul's possibly female-sounding voice might also suggest this, although we knowfrom Twenty Two that a soul can change their voice to sound like any type of person."I can sound like this if I wanted to.Or sound like this instead.I can even sound like you."If you like either of these ideas, leave a thumbs-up or comment below with which otherPixar character you think this troublemaking soul could be

#soul #filmy online #całe filmy #co w duszy gra

2 notes · View notes

atthevogue · 6 years

Text

“Tony de Peltrie” (1985)

The basics: Wikipedia

Opened: A landmark piece of computer animation, the Canadian short was part of the 19th Annual Tournee of Animation anthology that showed at the Vogue Theater in March and April of 1986.

Also on the bill: At least one Saturday in April, it was programmed in the 9:00 slot after Chris Marker’s Akira Kurosawa documentary A.K. and Woody Allen’s Sleeper, and before a midnight showing of Night of the Living Dead, which sounds to me like a very good eight-hour day at the movies. Otherwise, you could have had a less perfect day seeing it play after Haskell Wexler’s forgotten Nicaragua war movie Latino and the equally forgotten Gene Hackman/Ann-Margaret romantic drama Twice in a Lifetime.

What did the paper say? ★★★1/2 from the Courier-Journal film critic Dudley Saunders. Saunders described the Tournee as “a specialized event that shows signs of moving into the movie mainstream,” correctly presaging the renaissance in feature-length animation in the 1990s generally and Pixar specifically, whose Luxo, Jr. short was released that same year. Of Tony, Saunders singles it out as “one of the most technologically advanced,” and that it featured “some delightful music from Marie Bastien.” He then throws his hands up: "Computers were used in this Canadian entry. Don’t ask how.” Saunders was long-time film critic for the C-J’s afternoon counterpart, the Louisville Times, throughout the 1960s, ‘70s and ‘80s. In the late 1980s, he would co-found Louisville’s free alternative weekly, the Louisville Eccentric Observer.

What was I doing? I was six and hypothetically could have seen an unrated animation festival, though I'd have been a little bit too young to have fully appreciated it. Although, who knows, I’m sure I was watching four hours of cartoons a day at the time, so maybe my taste was really catholic.

How do I see it in 2018? It’s on YouTube.

youtube

A four-hour-a-day diet of cartoons was probably on the lower end for most of my peers. I grew up during what I believe is commonly known as the Garbage Age of Animation, which you can trace roughly from The Aristocrats in 1970 to The Little Mermaid (or The Simpsons) in 1989. The quantity of animation was high, and the quality was low. Those twenty years were a wasteland for Disney, and even though I have fond memories of a lot of those movies, like The Black Cauldron, they’re a pretty bleak bunch compared to what was sitting in those legendary Disney vaults, waiting patiently to be released on home video.

Other than low-quality Disney releases, the 1980s were highlighted mostly by the post-’70s crap was being churned out of the Hanna-Barbera laboratories. Either that, or nutrition-free Saturday morning toy commercials like The Smurfs and G.I. Joe. Of course there’s also Don Bluth, whose work is kind of brilliant, but whose odd feature-length movies seem very out-of-step with the times. Don Bluth movies seem now like baroque Disney alternatives for weird, dispossessed kids who didn’t yet realize they were weird and dispossessed. (Something like The Secret of NIMH is like Jodorowsky compared to, say, 101 Dalmatians.) Most of the bright spots of those years were produced under the patronage of the saint of 1980s suburbia, Steven Spielberg. An American Tale or Tiny Toon Adventures aren’t regarded today as auteurist masterpieces of animation (or are they?), but they were really smart and imaginative if you were nine years old. Still, the idea that cartoons might be sophisticated enough to be enjoyed by non-stoned adults was probably very alien concept in 1985.

In the midst of all of this, though, scattered throughout the world were a bunch of programmers and animators working out the next regime. Within ten years of Tony de Peltrie, Pixar’s Toy Story would be the first feature-length CGI animated movie, and within another ten years, traditional hand-drawn animation, at least for blockbuster commercial purposes, would be effectively dead. That went for both kids and their parents. Animation, like comic books, would take on a new sophistication and levels of respectability in the coming decades.

I love it when you read an old newspaper review with the benefit of hindsight, and find that the critic has gotten it right in predicting how things may play out in years to come. That’s why I was excited to read in Saunders’ review of the Tournee that he suspected animation as an artform was showing “signs of moving into the movie mainstream.” His sense of confusion (or wonder, or some combination) at the computer-generated aspects is charming in retrospect, too.

Tony de Peltrie is a landmark in computer-generated animation, but its lineage doesn’t really travel through the Pixar line at all (even though John Lassetter himself served on the award panel for the film festival where it was first shown, and predicted it’d be regarded as a landmark piece of animation). The children of the 1970s and ‘80s grew up to revere the golden era of Pixar movies as adults, and the general consensus is that not only are they great technical accomplishments, but works of great emotional resonance.

As much of an outlier as it makes me: I just don’t know. I haven’t really thought so. I think most Pixar movies are really, really sappy in the most obvious way possible. The oldest ones look to me as creaky as all those rotoscoped Ralph Bakshi cartoons of the ‘70s. Which is fine, technology is one thing -- most silent movies look pretty creaky, too -- but the underlying of armature of refined Disney sap that supports the whole structure strains to the point of collapse after a time or two.

Film critic Emily Yoshida said it best on Twitter: she noted, when Incredibles 2 came out, she’d recently re-watched the first Incredibles and was shocked at how crude it looked. "The technoligization of animation will not do individual works favors over time,” she wrote. “The wet hair effect in INCREDIBLES, which I remember everyone being so excited about, felt like holding a first generation iPod. Which is how these movies have trained people to watch them on a visual level...as technology.” There’s something here that I think Yoshida is alluding to about Pixar movies that is very Silicon Valley-ish in the way they’re consumed, almost as status symbols, or as luxury products. This is true nearly across all sectors of the tech industry now, but it’s particularly evident with animation.

One of my favorite movie events of the year is when the Landmark theaters here in Minneapolis play the Oscar-nominated animated shorts at the beginning of the year. Every year, it’s the same: you’ll get a collection of fascinating experiments from all over the world, some digitally rendered, some hand-drawn. They don’t always work, and some of them are really bad, but there’s always such a breadth of styles, emotions and narratives that I’m always engaged and delighted. They remind you that, in animation, you can do anything you want. You can go anywhere, try everything, show anything a person can imagine. Seeing the animated shorts every year, more than anything else, gets me so excited about what movies can be.

And then, in the middle of the program, there’s invariably some big gooey, sentimental mush from Pixar. Not all of them are bad, and some are quite nicely done, but for the most part, it’s cute anthropomorphized animals or objects or kids placed in cute, emotionally manipulative situations. I usually go refill my Diet Coke or take a bathroom break during the Pixar sequence.

Yeah, yeah, I know. What kind of monster hates Pixar?

I don’t hate Pixar, and I like most of the pre-Cars 2 features just fine. The best parts of Toy Story and Up and Wall-E are as good as people say they are. But when you take the reputation that Pixar has had for innovation and developing exciting new filmmaking technology in the past 25 years, and compare it to the reality, there’s an enormous gap. And it drives me nuts, because if this is supposed to be the best American animation has to offer in terms of innovation and emotional engagement, it's not very inspiring. Especially placed alongside the sorts of animated shorts that come out of independent studios elsewhere in the U.S., or Japan, or France, or Canada.

Which brings us to Tony de Peltrie, created in Montreal by four French-Canadian animators, and supported in part by the National Film Board of Canada, who would continue to nurture and support animation projects in Canada through the twenty-first century. A huge part of the enjoyment -- and for me, there was an enormous amount of enjoyment in watching Tony de Peltrie -- is seeing this entirely new way of telling stories and conveying images appear in front of you for the first time. Maybe it’s because I have clear memories of a world without contemporary CGI, but I still find this enormous sense of wonder in what’s happening as Tony is onscreen. I still remember very clearly seeing the early landmarks of computer-aided graphics, and being almost overwhelmed with a sense of awe -- Tron, Star Trek IV, Jurassic Park. Tony feels a bit like that, even after so many superior technical accomplishments that followed.

Tony de Peltrie doesn’t have much of a plot. A washed-up French-Canadian entertainer recounts his past glories as he sits at the piano and plays, and then slowly dissolves over a few minutes into an amorphous, impressionistic void. (Part of the joke, I think, is using such cutting-edge technology to tell the story of a white leather shoe-clad artist whose work has become very unfashionable by the 1980s.) It’s really just a monologue. The content could be conveyed using a live actor, or traditional hand-drawn animation.

But Tony looks so odd, just sitting on the edge of the Uncanny Valley, dangling those white leather shoes into the void. Part of the appeal is that, while Tony’s monologue is so human and delivered in such an off-the-cuff way, you’re appreciating the challenge of having the technology match the humanity. Tony’s chin and eyes and fingers are exaggerated, like a caricature, but there’s such a sense of warmth underneath the chilliness of the computer-rendered surfaces. Though it’s wistful and charming, you wouldn’t necessarily call it a landmark in storytelling -- again, it’s just a monologue, and not an unfamiliar one -- but it is a technological landmark in showing that the computer animation could be used to humane ends. It’d be just as easy to make Tony fly through space or kill robots or whatever else. But instead, you get an old, well-worn story that slowly eases out of the ordinary into the surreal, and happens so gradually you lose yourself in a sort of trance.

As Yoshida wrote, technoligization of animation doesn’t do individual works favors over time. To that end, something like Tony can’t be de-coupled from its impressive but outdated graphics. These landmarks tend to be more admired than watched -- to the extent that it’s remembered at all, it’s as a piece of technology, and not as a piece of craft or storytelling.

Still, Tony is the ancestor of every badly rendered straight-to-Netflix animated talking-animals feature cluttering up your queue, but he’s also the ancestor of any experiment that tries to apply computer-generated imagery to ways of storytelling. In that sense, he has as much in common with Emily in World of Tomorrow as he does with Boss Baby, a common ancestor to any computer-generated human-like figure with a story. When Tony dissolves into silver fragments at the end of the short, it’s as if those pieces flew out into the world, through the copper wires that connect the world’s animation studios and personal computers, and are now present everywhere. He’s like a ghost that haunts the present. I feel that watching it now, and I imagine audiences sitting at the Vogue in 1986 might have felt a stirring of something similar.

2 notes · View notes

bakechochin · 7 years

Text

Book Reviews - The Goddess of Buttercups and Daisies

The Goddess of Buttercups and Daisies - Martin Millar - Ever since I started uni and set off on the path of becoming a verified smart boy, I’ve been a lot more interested in the stuff that surrounds and inspires the literature I read; I learnt about Poe’s life story just as I was reading Newman’s short story ‘Just Like Eddy’, I learnt about early drama patronage and morality plays having already developed an interest in such things from Rothfuss’ The Kingkiller Chronicle and Lynch’s The Republic of Thieves respectively, and the week I was learning about Russian fairy tales was the week I learnt about Arden’s The Bear and the Nightingale -> With this in mind, I thought I’d try to find some fantasy literature that took inspiration from shit that I was already interested in, and lo and behold I happened to stumble across a book that promised me bawdy comedy set in Ancient Greece, so I was dead set on reading it - This is a pretty bloody cool setting; when I think of Athens and ancient Greece I can’t help but think of big grandiose affairs with gods and divine entities, so it’s great to see a story from the perspective of the common grubby man going about his business, buying street food and getting gattered and watching plays with excessive dick jokes -> That’s not to say that there aren’t gods and divine entities running about, because what would be the point of setting the story in ancient Greece otherwise, but it’s all integrated relatively well into the overall society, and set against the backdrop of the wild Dionysia festival, it allows for great potential for the intermingling of the divine and the mortals and all in all makes for a great setting and premise for the story to unfold - I am a big fan of early drama with excessive ribald humour (everyone go and read Mankind and/or Gammer Gurton’s Needle immediately), and all the stuff involving Aristophanes’ Old Comedy play was a great fucking laugh that has since inspired me to read more into similar work - The real-life setting allows for some pretty funny and clever references to real-life events, with the author’s own spin on it to tie everything together in a way that elicited a few smiles out of me - The ending, whilst incredibly simple, was nonetheless gratifying and really quite heartwarming in that lovely idyllic low-effort ‘everyone gets what they want’ way; the whole book can probably be summarised by this ending, in that all in all it is an inoffensive enough read - Something that I will be infinitely grateful for is this book’s glossary of ancient Greek terms; I’ve bitched about this in the past with books like The Incorruptibles and London Falling (both books constantly utilising specialised or setting-appropriate terminology and jargon), and so I’m glad that this book doesn’t expect me to know what a hetairai or a choregos is (though I am now glad to know what said words mean, because they’re pretty cool words) - Though I tried to read the story within a comedy tale framework, I can’t help feeling that the characters and setting often seem a little bit too grim for this to be accurate -> From the blurb I’d pegged Aristophanes as a baffled defeatist trying and failing to keep his theatrical production going and Luxos as a vain idiot with an inflated sense of self worth, which could have been played up for a comedy vibe, but instead Aristophanes is surly and angry at everything and everyone around him, and emphasis is put on Luxos’ shitty living circumstances and the injustices he faces, and all in all the book just seems to have missed an opportunity for a fun story -> Similarly, a setting on the brink of war with gods and nymphs running about could lead to some fun stuff, or at least some vaguely humorous satire, but everything is played completely straight, and even the additions to the story that could have resulted in wacky mishaps (like the divine figure Late having the power to make people make dumb shitty decisions) are played totally seriously and with grave consequences - This is a short book, exactly one hundred and eighty pages, but the story’s scale far exceeds what it could possibly accomplish in so few pages, and so of course the storyline, not having room for any clever twists, is very very predictable - Whilst there were a few lines in this book that managed to elicit a slight chuckle in me, for the most part the comedy in this book seems forced and ends up falling flat, and rarely goes beyond the most basic stuff possible (y’know, stuff along the lines of ‘this character is kooky and air-headed and this character is blunt and hates fun, let’s put them together and see what wacky conversations they have!’) - There are a shit load of characters in this book, simply because what could probably have been accomplished by one person is, in this book, facilitated and carried out by a shit load, and as such there are a lot of generally unnecessary side characters with difficult to remember names who get their own little bit of exposition and sometimes never even appear again -> On top of this, because there are always new characters being introduced who do like one thing before the book moves on to someone else doing something completely different, the book does seem quite fragmented and could be a bit arduous to read with its lack of flow - 5.5/10

I have a load of other book reviews on my blog, check that shit out.

#book reviews #the goddess of buttercups and daisies #martin millar #aristophanes #old comedy #not that i want to be pedantic or anything but this book sets up lysistrata as aristophane's next big play #when technically lysistrata came ten years after peace #let us quickly go over my favourite examples of quality banter in early drama #anything the vices do or say in mankind (including when new-guise gets smacked in the bollocks with a spade)#the bit in wit and science when wit gets brutally murdered by tediousnessness #and then immediately tries chatting up the lass who resurrects him #that bit in galatea when the gods refuse to accept hebe as a sacrifice because she's too ugly #the numerous synonyms for a slag and following drag queen fight in gammer gurton's needle #riot's appearance in the interlude of youth straight from the gallows #oh and what was that liturgical drama where noah's wife is being a bitch and refuses to get on the ark so noah fuckin wrestles her

1 note · View note