Wall-E - Pixar's next film [Archive] - Straight Dope Message Board

Jodi

06-18-2008, 06:33 PM

So there have been a few Wall-E postings before but I found this article/clip (http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/new-wall-e-featurette-takes-you-into-space.php) about the idea behind the design of Wall-E...clearly Pixar does their homework. I love these behind the scenes types of things. I am looking forward to seeing how they put it all together.

Thanks for this! :) I am completely in love with Wall-E already and am counting the days until the 27th.

gaffa

06-18-2008, 07:00 PM

My personal rule is: It it is a Pixar film, see it the first day.

Even the weakest Pixar film (Cars, for me) is still better than virtually all animated films and most films of any type.

Hazle Weatherfield

06-18-2008, 07:35 PM

Whoever made Short Circuit (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091949/) should sue.

Exactly what I came in to say. Aren't the robots, like, IDENTICAL?

gaffa

06-18-2008, 09:14 PM

Exactly what I came in to say. Aren't the robots, like, IDENTICAL?
No. Other than the stereo vision and tank treads, they have no real resemblance.

Johnny 5 (http://www.uberreview.com/wp-content/uploads/johnny5.jpg) has no "body" between his tank treads. There's just a cylinder that connects to another vertical cylinder, then an "elbow" that connects to another cylinder to which are mounted his two arms and head.

Wall-E (http://friendsofdoom.com/GoD/img/2008/news/2008-04-25-walle_cube_lg.jpg) is a box with tank treads attached near the bottom, arms attached to the upper sides and a head attached to the top.

Any robot intended to work in a human world is going to have stereo cameras and general purpose "arms". Tank treads are optional, but it's much less energy consuming than wheels and is the best option in a rough environment. The shades on Johnny 5's cameras are a silly affectation

squeegee

06-19-2008, 12:14 AM

DesertDog

06-19-2008, 12:37 AM

Even the weakest Pixar film (Cars, for me) is still better than virtually all animated films and most films of any type.Pixar is like sex. There's good Pixar and there's bad Pixar, but even the bad Pixar is still pretty good.

Raguleader

06-19-2008, 12:41 AM

Its a good thing each movie's promotional materials are so (http://bigtmac68.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/wall-e.jpg) different (http://www.axelmusic.com/resources/covers/0/014381492156.jpg), or I'd be really confused which character was which.

Gee, you're right, different head, different body, different arms, and vaguely similar tank treads. Impossible to tell them apart once you look at them both.

Don't get me wrong, I loved the Short Circuit movies, but the only way these two look alike is if you haven't seen anything for one of the movies in about 10 years, or if you're not terribly detail oriented. They're about as similar as R2D2 and a Dalek.

And if they do look similar, eh, so what? They're both robots, and both designed to be cute and anthropomorphic to varying degrees. The plots of the movies look fairly different to me, and that's the important part here as long as Pixar keeps up it's thus-far pretty stellar record for quality in movie making.

Miller

06-19-2008, 01:19 AM

Just got back from it, and it's really good. I don't know where I'd rank it just yet, since it's still so fresh for me, but it's definitely one of their better movies. I will say one thing: I was surprised at how much live action footage there was in it for a Pixar movie.

Diogenes the Cynic

06-19-2008, 01:29 AM

The trailer bugs me. I'm turned off by the scenes that appear to show him falling in love with a "female" robot. That makes no sense.

Alessan

06-19-2008, 01:43 AM

The trailer bugs me. I'm turned off by the scenes that appear to show him falling in love with a "female" robot. That makes no sense.
It's contrary to everything we know about sentient robots!

initech

06-19-2008, 01:51 AM

The trailer bugs me. I'm turned off by the scenes that appear to show him falling in love with a "female" robot. That makes no sense.

Anthropomorphic toys? No problem. Anthropomorphic insects? Sure. Anthropomorphic fish? Sign me up. Anthropomorphic vehicles? Yup. Anthropomorphic rats? Here's my ticket. Anthropomorphic robots? No dice, sparky. That wouldn't make sense.

GuanoLad

06-19-2008, 02:32 AM

All the Pixar films get released in my part of the world three whole months at least after the US.

I blame Disney for such unholy madness.

SaharaTea

06-19-2008, 07:28 AM

That robot is about the cutest damn thing I've ever seen.

AlmondJoy

06-19-2008, 09:25 AM

He is adorable. I don't really care what he might resemble- the whole movie seems pretty original to me (pixar hasn't let me down so far!). i tried to find out more information about the other characters and from this youtube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlFpuSryDRQ) it seems like there are ton of robots in the movie.

Trunk

06-19-2008, 09:48 AM

Don't get me wrong, I loved the Short Circuit movies, but the only way these two look alike is if you haven't seen anything for one of the movies in about 10 years, or if you're not terribly detail oriented. They're about as similar as R2D2 and a Dalek.
???

Are people being intentionally stubborn about this because The Great Lord Almighty PIXAR can do no wrong and have no limits on their creativity?

They look totally alike.

WALL-E doesn't hover. He doesn't walk. He doesn't roll on a ball. He doesn't fly with a propeller. He has triangular tank treads, exactly like Johnny-5. They make up half his body and they're identical to J5.

For eye & face. . .he doesn't have a blank mask. he doesn't have a luminescent "eye strip". He doesn't have glowing orbs, or non-glowing orbs. He has a segmented binocular where the eyes move independently. This is his most expressive feature, and it's just like J5.

When I first saw the commercials, I just figured it was a complete tribute and/or rip-off.

On a "robot similarity scale" where R2D2 and C3PO are a 1, and the Stormtroopers are 100. . .WALL-E and J5 are about a 90.

(yes, I know stormtroopers aren't robots)

GuanoLad

06-19-2008, 10:21 AM

When I first saw the commercials, I just figured it was a complete tribute and/or rip-off.It is either pure coincidence, or osmosis. Direct Andrew Stanton claims (http://screenrant.com/archives/enough-already-with-the-walle--1424.html) to have not been influenced at all by the Short Circuit films.

Diogenes the Cynic

06-19-2008, 10:23 AM

What about that Robots movie? Same exact thing. Doesn't sound too original to me.

CalMeacham

06-19-2008, 10:35 AM

I, too, figured that Wall-E had to be designed with the robot from Short Circuit in at least the back of their minds. There haven't been too many robots with the stereo eyes and the triangular treads (plus two arms). If they're saying that they weren't influenced at all, I think they're just covering their asses. Things like the Harlamn Ellison/Terminator and the Kit Reid/Honey I blew up the Kid cases are still in people's minds.

I can see why both films chose that design -- that binocular vision thing gives an irresistable sense of personality to the character. Big expressive eyes make a character babylike and sympathetic -- look at ET. Or all those Keane paintings. (while absence of eyes is spooky and threatening -- Alien, or the eyeless bulldogs in "The Weirdstone of Brisingamen", or some of the things in the Hellraiser movies). Furthermore, Wall-E's eyes have that downward sad slant. He reminds me of those stupid robots in The Black Hole (V.I.N.C.E.N.T. and the other one), with their out-of-place "Goofy" eyes. In Wall-E, though, they seem to work.

You CAN build a sympathetic robot without obvious eyes -- Robby or R2D2 -- but in those ases there's still something you can sort-of see as an eye (poster art turned Robby's rotating gyros -- or whatever they were -- into eyes. R2D2's got that single camera lens.)

drm

06-19-2008, 10:36 AM

The Short Circuit folks should THANK WALL*E. This is the most press that Short Circuit has received in about 15 years.

garygnu

06-19-2008, 12:04 PM

CalMeacham

06-19-2008, 12:17 PM

Watch this scene and tell me if you think Wall-E and Johnny 5 are the same. That's some freaking amazing animation right there, especially the bit with the hands and when Wall-E sits down in the capsule.

Nobody said thay're the same. And there's nopt much point in comparing a rod-and-stick mechanical puppet from the 1980s to state-of-the-art computer animation in 2008. But it's hard to deny the designs of the two are pretty similar.

Bosstone

06-19-2008, 12:28 PM

I'm willing to accept that they weren't thinking of Short Circuit at all when creating Wall-E, although I find it hard to swallow. The people working on this would be of an age to have seen the movie back in the 80s, and it's the sort of movie that would appeal to someone interested in Wall-E too.

Still, the individual elements are sensible enough that they could have been developed independently. Wall-E is meant to be portrayed as a rusty outdated model, so ground conveyance instead of antigrav or whatever the white robot uses is a good way to express that. Treads are more sensible for a freely mobile unit; wheels are only sensible when you expect the unit to only travel on roads, and legs have been known to be a difficult method of transportation for a while. The eyes are simple enough, too; they wanted an expressive but still mechanical face.

Anyway, the plots are pretty clearly wildly dissimilar, so it's not much of an issue to me if Wall-E is an homage to Johnny 5 or not.

Miller

06-19-2008, 12:47 PM

Still, the individual elements are sensible enough that they could have been developed independently. Wall-E is meant to be portrayed as a rusty outdated model, so ground conveyance instead of antigrav or whatever the white robot uses is a good way to express that. Treads are more sensible for a freely mobile unit; wheels are only sensible when you expect the unit to only travel on roads, and legs have been known to be a difficult method of transportation for a while. The eyes are simple enough, too; they wanted an expressive but still mechanical face.

I agree with all of this. Particular the face: speaking in terms of in-movie considerations, if you're building a utility robot, the only features you need to give it are eyes: it doesn't need a mouth or a nose. So a pair of binoculars on a stick are a logical design. From a creative point of view, if you're making a movie about a robot, to make it empathetic all you really need are a pair of expressive eyes. I've absolutely no doubt that the guys at Pixar were aware of Short Circuit, and I'm sure they looked at their design at some point and thought, "Boy, that really looks like Johnny 5," but I don't think they deliberatly set out to mimic the design. I think they ended up with a similar look because they went through a similar set of decisions during the design process.

What about that Robots movie? Same exact thing. Doesn't sound too original to me.

I haven't seen Robots, but judging from the plot synopsis on IMDB, they're not remotely the same.

Bosstone

06-19-2008, 12:51 PM

I haven't seen Robots, but judging from the plot synopsis on IMDB, they're not remotely the same.Not at all. Robots was a clockworkpunk version of Cars: "See this city? It's made by robots! Isn't that awesome?" Wall-E appears to be plot-driven rather than setting-driven.

Precambrianmollusc

06-19-2008, 01:52 PM

Just got back from it, and it's really good.

How is if for younger kids, my 4yo son loved cars (well he was 3 at the time) and Nemo, but really could not get into Ratatouille (me I loved the animation).
I am sure just the fact there are robots will go a long way, for a 4 y.o. there is nothing better than robots (well apart from pirate robots, which are the best thing ever, (excepting of course pirate ninja robots)))

Miller

06-19-2008, 03:08 PM

This should be a good movie for little kids. The first half has almost no dialogue at all, and is entirely visual. Most of the comedy is slapstick: Wall-E's a clumsy robot, and they use that to good humorous effect. The plot moves along at a brisk pace, so most kids won't get bored. I'm not a good judge of what little kids will find scary, but I think there's not much here even a really young kid would find frightening, even by G-rated standards. The two parts that might cause some problems are:

(Minor spoiler for one of the action set pieces:)
Wall-E and Eve are trapped in the garbage dump on the spaceship, and are menaced by giant trash-compacting robots (basically, large versions of Wall-E). However, the giant robots are only dangerous because they don't realize there's anyone else in the garbage dump with them, and when realize Wall-E and Eve are in danger, they act to save them.

...and...

(Major but predictable spoiler for the end of the movie:)
Wall-E gets badly hurt in the above scene, and then later appears to be killed. Of course, he turns out to be okay in the end. Pretty much every kid's movie ever made has a scene like this, but the build up to it involved Wall-E taking a lot of abuse. The edge might be taken off by the fact that Wall-E's a robot, and there are a couple of earlier scenes of him repairing himself, which might clue the kid into him turning out okay.

I wouldn't hesitate to take my kids to it, if I had kids.

Pollux Oil

06-19-2008, 04:58 PM

tim314

06-19-2008, 05:26 PM

???

Are people being intentionally stubborn about this because The Great Lord Almighty PIXAR can do no wrong and have no limits on their creativity?

They look totally alike.

WALL-E doesn't hover. He doesn't walk. He doesn't roll on a ball. He doesn't fly with a propeller. He has triangular tank treads, exactly like Johnny-5. They make up half his body and they're identical to J5.

For eye & face. . .he doesn't have a blank mask. he doesn't have a luminescent "eye strip". He doesn't have glowing orbs, or non-glowing orbs. He has a segmented binocular where the eyes move independently. This is his most expressive feature, and it's just like J5.

When I first saw the commercials, I just figured it was a complete tribute and/or rip-off.

On a "robot similarity scale" where R2D2 and C3PO are a 1, and the Stormtroopers are 100. . .WALL-E and J5 are about a 90.

(yes, I know stormtroopers aren't robots)
They have some similarities, sure, but not nearly enough to make me think that it's anything more than coincidence.

First, you have to consider that if you want to design a robot so that a human audience will find it relatable, then giving it two arms, two "feet" and two eyes is a fairly obvious start. J5 is hardly the only other robot in fiction with bilateral symmetry.

Making the eyes oversized is an extremely common practice in cartoons to make a character look "cute". See Bambi, or practically any anime designed to appeal to young girls.

The wide, short face with no nose or mouth is similar, but Wall-e's head bears far more resemblance to a pair of binoculars than it does to J5's head. And given that the director claimed Wall-e was inspired by a pair of binoculars (as stated upthread) I see no reason to question this.

So, really that leaves "triangular tank treads" as the only remaining unexplained similarity. And that could easily be coincidence.

mobo85

06-19-2008, 05:30 PM

I think the thing that draws me the most about this movie is that Wall-E doesn't seem to talk much at all. The expressive noises he makes are adorable and while it's too much to assume that all the robots in the movie won't talk, I'm hoping most of them follow suit.

I think I read that there is very little dialogue in the film. I do like the noises Wall-E makes in the ads, though, especially the way he says his own name.

Eve was designed primarily by Jonathan Ive, the designer of the iPod and other Apple products. (Steve Jobs, of course, is the CEO of both Pixar and Apple.)

The Little Golden Book of Wall-E, like most of Pixar's Little Golden Books, is a design gem. The drawings are hand-painted to look like a vintage Little Golden Book, and the text sometimes becomes big or small to fit the tone of the sentence. There's even a cameo by Oswald the Lucky Rabbit as one of the pieces of Earth junk Wall-E picks up.

randwill

06-19-2008, 05:33 PM

Watch this scene (http://www.guesswhichmovie.com/news/391) and tell me if you think Wall-E and Johnny 5 are the same. That's some freaking amazing animation right there, especially the bit with the hands and when Wall-E sits down in the capsule.Thanks for the link. I wish website designers knew to put black around the video box so I don't have to re-shape my window to get rid of that field of white which makes the dark shots impossible to see.

bubastis

06-19-2008, 07:12 PM

I'm so nervous about this movie. I don't want to go see it. Inmost Disney/ Pixar movies, something extremely sad usually happens on the way to extreme happiness (remember Jessie's song in Toy Story 2? I cried my eyes out, at twenty-four). That's cool, you don't mind it happening in lesser movies to lesser characters (like, I could give a shit about any of the characters in Ice Age2), but in this... to Wall-E... Lets just say, I'm a grown man, but if anything sad happens to Wall-E, I'm gonna BAWL MY FUCKIN EYES OUT.

Just say it now, if you've seen the movie.... is there anything particularly sad? Don't post spoilers, just say "yes" or "no"...

Precambrianmollusc

06-19-2008, 08:09 PM

mnemosyne

06-19-2008, 08:35 PM

The clip they released, in the capsule, had me giggling and clapping my hands the first time I saw it! It was just so awesome!

Spoiler about the clip linked above, spoiled for those of you who don't want to watch it!

I nearly cried when Eve (though I didn't know the name then) goes "No....no...." and then a half second later... "wall-EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"!!! I was so excited and laughing like crazy!

I can't wait to see this movie!

Koxinga

06-19-2008, 08:43 PM

Haven't seen the movie yet, and am diligently avoiding all the spoilers.

The only thing I've seen of this movie so far was one of those Disney DVD "Coming Some Time In The Next Decade" teaser trailers.

What cast a pall over it for me was the background music: "Brazil".
Jaunty, but for me carries a bit of an oppressive undertone.
dum dum DUM, dum-dum DUMMDY dum
dum dum DUM, dum-dum DUMMDY dum

gaffa

06-19-2008, 11:10 PM

I'm so nervous about this movie. I don't want to go see it. Inmost Disney/ Pixar movies, something extremely sad usually happens on the way to extreme happiness (remember Jessie's song in Toy Story 2? I cried my eyes out, at twenty-four).
What's wrong with that? That scene's practically a Voight-Kampff test (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voight-Kampff_machine). If you don't at least mist up at Jessie's Song, there is something seriously wrong with you. I just watched it again, on a tiny YouTube window (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is_hpHzEMiE) and I'm proud to say, I'm a big, hairy 47-year-old man with tears in my eyes

Miller

06-20-2008, 12:35 AM

Just say it now, if you've seen the movie.... is there anything particularly sad? Don't post spoilers, just say "yes" or "no"...

One word:

Yes.

Mangetout

06-20-2008, 02:26 AM

GuanoLad

06-20-2008, 02:42 AM

...how we do actually build robots, in reality.Exactly so (http://images.google.com/images?q=bomb%20disposal%20robot).

Whiteknight

06-20-2008, 06:14 AM

Anthropomorphic toys? No problem. Anthropomorphic insects? Sure. Anthropomorphic fish? Sign me up. Anthropomorphic vehicles? Yup. Anthropomorphic rats? Here's my ticket. Anthropomorphic robots? No dice, sparky. That wouldn't make sense.
This reminds me of one of the promos that ran for The Office at the beginning of this past season. It features Michael Scott in his office saying, "I saw Ratatouille over the summer... didn't buy it."

CalMeacham

06-20-2008, 06:50 AM

I think the comparison to Johnny 5 is pretty spurious. Sure, there are similarities, but some of the mechanical ones (the tank tracks, for example) were based on real-world technologies for Short Circuit.

The ways in which Johnny 5 and WALL-E are similar largely pertain to how we do actually build robots, in reality.

The non-mechanical ways in which they're similar largely pertain to how non-human characters are made endearing to audiences.

I don't suppose this will convince anyone though, but there does seem to be a bit of question-begging and cherry-picking in the arguments that the one is derivative of the other.

I disagreethat this is spurious or cherry-picking. Look at all the robots in SF shows and movies and illustrations. Most, by far --- by infinitely far, don't at all resemble the Wall-E/Short Circuit model. That alone removes the argument about cherry-picking. Not Robby or the Robot from Lost in Space or the Dreones from Silent Running or Tobor the Great or Electro or Twiki or Gog or R2D2 or C3PO or any of the others, whether intended to be "practical" or to be convenient for a Guy in a Suiit at all resemble these two. I can't think of any of the examples from the Big Room o'Robots at the now-defunct Computer Museum in Boston that looked at all like these guys.

And current robots built to be practical -- like GuanoLad's examples -- closely resmble these, either. That triangular caterpillar tread combined with the stero optics is pretty distinctive.

I'll grant you the Big Ol' Pair of Eyes for Human Empathy, but I made that argument earlier in this thread. And it's inconceivable* to me that the designers of Wall-E were unaware of the design of the robot from Short Circuit.

*That word -- I know what it means.

Mangetout

06-20-2008, 07:11 AM

I disagree that this is spurious or cherry-picking. Look at all the robots in SF shows and movies and illustrations. Most, by far --- by infinitely far, don't at all resemble the Wall-E/Short Circuit model. That alone removes the argument about cherry-picking.
The cherry-picking I'm referring to is the comparison of similar features of the two robots, while ignoring the differences.

Not Robby or the Robot from Lost in Space or the Dreones from Silent Running or Tobor the Great or Electro or Twiki or Gog or R2D2 or C3PO or any of the others, whether intended to be "practical" or to be convenient for a Guy in a Suiit at all resemble these two. I can't think of any of the examples from the Big Room o'Robots at the now-defunct Computer Museum in Boston that looked at all like these guys.So what? That two examples of fictional tracked, binocular robots exist, amid all the other non-tracked, binocular robots doesn't mean one is derivative of the other. Correlation does not necessarily equal causation. In fact, this looks like they could include a component of confirmation bias, to me.

And current robots built to be practical -- like GuanoLad's examples -- closely resmble these, either. That triangular caterpillar tread combined with the stero optics is pretty distinctive.

I'll grant you the Big Ol' Pair of Eyes for Human Empathy, but I made that argument earlier in this thread.But look at what you're saying. Two features, one of which you're prepared to dismiss - so one feature - the triangular tracked drive - is similar. Why is that significant?

Actually, it's not even very similar. Johnny 5 has small triangular tracks at the front, plus a large castor wheel. WALL-E just has tracks. The two robots just aren't all that similar, really.

WALL-E has more in common with ET than Johnny 5.

And it's inconceivable* to me that the designers of Wall-E were unaware of the design of the robot from Short CircuitI haven't made the argument that they were unaware, so I'm not going to dispute that.

CalMeacham

06-20-2008, 07:23 AM

So what? That two examples of fictional tracked, binocular robots exist, amid all the other non-tracked, binocular robots doesn't mean one is derivative of the other. Correlation does not necessarily equal causation. In fact, this looks like they could include a component of confirmation bias, to me.

By itself, it doesn't prove it, but these two and only two examples of such similar robots in a huge sea of completely fifferent examples is certainly remarkable. And we're not tal;king about two random examples -- wwe're talking about examples of chief characters in movies about robots made in the same country and within only a couple of dacades. Copying seems much more likely than some sort of artistic convergent evolution.

To me, saying that one has nothing to do with the other, and claiming bias on the part of the observer (!!) smacks of perverse insensitivity to the situation.

Mangetout

06-20-2008, 07:31 AM

They're not such similar robots. You've pointed out one feature that you say is significantly similar.

I agree they have a similar 'feel' to them, but that could be said of many things.

Bosstone

06-20-2008, 07:38 AM

The real question, I think, is does it matter?

Seriously. Wall-E isn't a direct rip-off of Johnny 5, even if they did lift design elements from him. Does it matter? Shoot, I see it as paying homage to a previous sympathetic robot character. It certainly wouldn't be the first time Pixar's tipped its hat to something well-known.

Baldwin

06-20-2008, 08:30 AM

If I had never heard of or seen Short Circuit (and I wish that were true), but were asked to design a loveable robot for a movie with the basic plot of Wall-E, I would probably end up with something close to what they have.

Trunk

06-20-2008, 09:40 AM

If someone designed a humanoid robot, no one would claim "oh, they're ripping off C3P0". The humanoid robot is natural, and common.

But, if someone designed a canister with shoulders and arms that ended in wheels, you'd have to be obtuse to say they weren't influenced by R2D2.

IMO, J-5 and Wall-E fall into that R2 category.

By the way, have you guys seen the prototypes for Smaug (http://www.projections-movies.com/images/petesdragon.jpg)?

garygnu

06-20-2008, 09:49 AM

If someone designed a humanoid robot, no one would claim "oh, they're ripping off C3P0". The humanoid robot is natural, and common...
Well, to be fair, C-3PO was a bit of a ripoff from Metropolis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Metropolisnew.jpg).

Mangetout

06-20-2008, 09:56 AM

JThunder

06-20-2008, 10:17 AM

As any roboticist can tell you, tracked mechanisms are extremely common in the field of mobile robotics. It's a common way of traversing uneven territory.

As for the binocular design... What do you expect? Apart from the obvious advantages, it also provides a clear way to make the robots anthropomorphic and help them convey emotion.

mlerose

06-25-2008, 11:49 AM

I don't have a dog in the fight as to the resemblance between the robot in Short Circuit and Wall-E, but I did get free passes to a screening last night and the Superhero and I both loved it. It's not often that I leave a theater thinking "I want to own this movie" but I want to own this movie and watch it many, many times. In my opinion, it's Pixar's best to date.

Jodi

06-25-2008, 12:04 PM

AlmondJoy

06-26-2008, 02:09 PM

I got to see an advanced screening through a friend last night and I have to say the binoculars worked- Wall-E was shockingly expressive. This review (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/film/reviews/article_display.jsp?&rid=11329) kind of sums up how I felt- the dialogue was great but the added non-human language and the silent scenes took the movie to another level for me. I was really impressed overall.

MovieMogul

06-26-2008, 02:21 PM

Well, it's got a 98% at RT and a 93% at Metacritic (http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/walle) (which puts it in the #1 spot for the year)

MacTech

06-26-2008, 05:07 PM

I'm eagerly awaiting this one, will probably see it tomorrow night, Pixar has yet to dissapoint me (A Bug's Life was really the only "meh" one for me), however I did notice one little inside joke in the snippet of the film posted on the Apple trailers page.....

In the scene just after he puts the bra on his head, there's a can of "Leak Less" in the pile of garbage he's pulling in to be compacted

I also loved his reaction to the ring/jewelry box, tosses the ring aside, and eagerly inspects the box, most probably trying to figure out how the spring closure works

Darth Nader

06-27-2008, 03:49 AM

Wow. We went to the midnight show, and... and...

Darth Nader

06-27-2008, 03:50 AM

Wow.

GuanoLad

06-27-2008, 04:36 AM

Darn thing isn't released here until September!

I hate that...

Slacker

06-27-2008, 06:07 AM

Darth Nader

06-27-2008, 06:17 AM

Our 3.5 year-old was nearly glued to the screen the whole time. I was expecting him to freak out and make some noise at some point, but he only had something to say at the same time as the rest of us in the theatre did. YOU BROKE IT! Is what he said.

I didn't.

DesertDog

06-27-2008, 10:00 AM

I can't wait to see this. For those who have, what's the scary/sad level for little kids? My daughter is 3 and I'm wondering if this would be too much for her. She's never seen a movie at the theater before, and I'm afraid even G-rated scariness (like the sharks in Nemo, scary toys in Toy Story, bad guys in Monsters Inc) may be a little scary for her.I saw the midnight showing. Kids-In-Mind (http://www.kids-in-mind.com/w/walle.htm) gives it a 1.2.1 rating (Sex.Violence.Profanity) There are some loud noises and explosions, and robot-to-robot shooting (No people are involved at either end). What's apparently the last cockroach on Earth gets squished a couple times but instantly pops back up.

I loved WALL-E and EVE's pas de deux, and after starting this thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=454515) I was amused to see WALL-E repairing himself using parts scavenged from defunct fellow compactors.

I just knew Otto (Auto? There's no listing in IMDb) was up to no good. His eye looked too much like HAL's.

Definitely on the to-buy list.

OpalCat

06-27-2008, 10:57 AM

All the Pixar films get released in my part of the world three whole months at least after the US.

I blame Disney for such unholy madness.
I dunno, looking at your location... I'd be nervous about going to your part of the world, too. Isn't there a crazy person bashing in heads with rocks there? Maybe they spend the extra 3 months hiring on security people ;)

Jodi

06-27-2008, 11:18 AM

I'm going to see Wall-E tonight! I'm so excited! Yep, Friday night and a Pixar movie, because that's the kind of hardcore party animal I am. :)

Interrobang!?

06-27-2008, 11:46 AM

We're officially making this my daughter's first movie. She's 2.75 and advanced for her age, but I still half expect it to be a little overwhelming. We spent 15 minutes last night watching trailers, which she enjoyed, although every time he ran into something she'd ask "is he OK?"

OpalCat

06-27-2008, 12:32 PM

every time he ran into something she'd ask "is he OK?"
Ha! That's adorable. :)

Euthanasiast

06-27-2008, 01:21 PM

Perhaps the Johnny-5 resemblance is intentional, considering it is a movie about the future, Wall*E could be a subtle representation of a time past. Maybe it's our representation of an older time; maybe it's a way for us to further seperate his age from Eve's and her world. He resembles an 80's icon to us, so even though he is from our future, he still feels like our past, which is appropriate for our perspective of Eve.

I'm on about 30mg of Roxycodone, so sorry if I'm not making much sense.

OpalCat

06-27-2008, 01:36 PM

I'm on about 30mg of Roxycodone, so sorry if I'm not making much sense.
I'm on hydrocodone at the moment. Root canal. What's yours for?

Euthanasiast

06-27-2008, 01:42 PM

I'm on hydrocodone at the moment. Root canal. What's yours for?

They initially had me on the Hydro, but I have such a high tolerance for pain medication that they upgraded me to the Oxycodone, then the Roxy. Lowest disk in my back is almost gone and the bulging part of it is jamming the nerve against some really uncomfortable part of my spine. Having surgery on the 9th of July.

We should start a club or something. I'm at work right now and taking this stuff. Woohoo!

OpalCat

06-27-2008, 01:48 PM

I have a high tolerance for pain medication, too. Actually for most medication. It's just my metabolism. Try telling that to a new doctor/dentist when you move, though. Makes you sound like a drug fiend. "No, doctor, that won't do. I need a higher dose..."

Sucks about your back; that's gotta suck. Glad you're getting it fixed soon! Good luck with your surgery.

Euthanasiast

06-27-2008, 02:01 PM

Darth Sensitive

06-27-2008, 02:10 PM

All this talking about how WALL-E (the most adorable little robot ever - and this is coming from a 19 year old guy) looks like a different one, and nothing at all about the ship's autopilot having a HAL eye? ;)

This movie was amazing, I think I'll see it again, as I was a bit dozy at the midnight showing.

And I totally called that EVE was designed by someone who works on iShinystuff. :)

Neidhart

06-27-2008, 05:28 PM

Certainly it's sad, if you think about it a bit . . .

What about the 99.9999% of Earth's population who didn't get to go on the luxury cruise?

DesertDog

06-27-2008, 09:00 PM

Fish

06-27-2008, 09:26 PM

If you focus to exclusion on the two-camera head and the tank treads, then I give you the Treadwell Droid (http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/thumb/9/9d/WED-treadwell_negtd.jpg/250px-WED-treadwell_negtd.jpg) from Star Wars, 1977. It predates both.

FoieGrasIsEvil

06-27-2008, 10:10 PM

I don't get this "It's just like Short Circuit" argument. I just returned from seeing it and it's fantastic. Short Circuit shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence as Wall-E.

Jodi

06-27-2008, 10:16 PM

Just back. I adored it. Clever, beautifully animated, nice little message they don't thump you over the head with, funny, sweet . . . I'll definitely go see it again in the theater and buy it on DVD.

Come and get it, Blinky!

What Exit?

06-27-2008, 10:52 PM

The movie was great. The kids and adults all loved it.

As to the Short Circuit debate ... Pffffthpttt! to you. Next you're going to complain about how similar the dance numbers on the video was to Hello Dolly and how the Auto Pilot was reminiscient of Hal from 2001 or Otto from Airplane. ;)

Damn those yellow cream filmed cakes sure looked like twinkies, taking advantage of the old jokes of twinkies having a shelf life of hundreds of years.

what other silly nitpicks are there that I missed. Oh, I know roaches aren't anywhere near as intelligent as the one in the moive. How did the plant survive the vacuum of space? etc. etc.

Any way great movie, another instant classic by Pixar.

Jim

FoieGrasIsEvil

06-27-2008, 10:54 PM

Elendil's Heir

06-28-2008, 12:34 AM

Saw it Friday night with my sons, ages 11, 8 and 5, and we all loved it (although the youngest got a little fidgety in the last 20 minutes). I'd say it's Pixar's best since The Incredibles, and probably among the studio's best ever (despite the inexplicable inclusion of Fred Willard =shudder= ). Heartwarming, funny, and a pungent environmental and anti-consumerism message, too. Sigourney Weaver was just too cool as the computer voice; reminded me of the gag in Galaxy Quest, when she was always repeating what the computer said. Loved the 2001 gags here, too. Two thumbs way, way up!

The short feature about the rabbit, the magician and the top hat was terrific, too.

Two questions:
Why make Eve so trigger-happy on her mission? Didn't seem to fit with trying to find plant life; letting local critters live might lead her to plants, after all.

Why name the starship Axiom?

I liked that the final credits of Wall*E showed

human civilization being rebuilt, with the artwork mirroring earlier eras like cave drawings, Greek mosaics, Turner, Pointillism, Impressionism, Van Gogh, etc.

If you stay through all of the credits, you'll see

a big BNL - Buy N Large (pun I didn't get until well into the movie: "by and large") - logo.

Red Barchetta

06-28-2008, 04:33 AM

Disappointing. Still a good flick...or at least the first 20 minutes, then it was all down hill from there. (and this comes from a huge Pixar fan, but Finding Nemo or Toy Story this movie certainly is not).

First, the mishmash of combing real-lfe actors with CG (particulary with CG humans) was an enourmous mis-step and pulled me out of the movie every time one appeared on-screen. And Fred Willard's (often seen on The Tonight Show) portrayal as the president was a significant miscast. It instantly told me "hey, don't this this role seriously," but unfortunately, he wasn't funny either.

Scondly, as established before, the movie was great up until they landed on the ship and the ridicolously fat humans showed up -- they destroyed the movie for me. Their comic viual style was completley at odds with the rest of the movie, and even worse, they distracted from the core story. It's as if the producers at Pixar simply had no better method of providing conflict (and thus the necessary resolution) for our two robo-lovers. Shame, that.

Thirdly, the movie slapped me in the face and spanked me in the ass with its oh-so-blatant political commentary. Yes, we know we're fat, and we're trashing the earth. STFU.

Also, my overly anal detector (OAD for short) was set abalaze a couple of time too. First, THERE'S NO SOUND IN SPACE. For a movie that seemed to pride itself on minimal dialogue in the begining, those robots just wouldn't shut it when in a vacuume. Granted, few movies get this right (except for, of course, 2001 -- which is odd considering the many homages this film paid to it), but I think those scenes coud have been even more powerful devoid of audio distractions.

And next up on my OAD was the shifting of gravity when the ship tilted...what? Despite it making zero sense, it reminded me of a near-identical scene in Episode 3, and anything that reminds me of that train wreck deserves little sympathy.

Now, despite my ramblings, I don't think it's a bad movie -- in fact, I rather enjoyed myself. But just no where near on the level I had hoped, or expected based on previous Pixar flicks. I dug both the Wall-e and Eve characters themselves, but their story got lost amongst a mass of mediocrity. Although I will grant the 2001 scene near the end had me in stitches -- too bad that was the only use they found for the human characters.

JThunder

06-28-2008, 07:41 AM

First, the mishmash of combing real-lfe actors with CG (particulary with CG humans) was an enourmous mis-step and pulled me out of the movie every time one appeared on-screen. And Fred Willard's (often seen on The Tonight Show) portrayal as the president was a significant miscast. It instantly told me "hey, don't this this role seriously," ....This casting told me that the President was supposed to be a big commercial huckster. For this reason, I think it was a brilliant choice.

What Exit?

06-28-2008, 07:42 AM

... And Fred Willard's (often seen on The Tonight Show) portrayal as the president was a significant miscast. It instantly told me "hey, don't this this role seriously," but unfortunately, he wasn't funny either.

Just on this part. Willard was not the President, but just the president and CEO of BnL. I did not think that was all too bad despite being no fan of Willard.

Red Barchetta

06-28-2008, 12:31 PM

This casting told me that the President was supposed to be a big commercial huckster. For this reason, I think it was a brilliant choice.

His presence, for me, was akin to the janitor from Scrubs being in Indiana Jones. So well known for the one character they play that their mere presence in anything other instantly destroys any immersive qualities the film may have had.

Raguleader

06-28-2008, 12:40 PM

His presence, for me, was akin to the janitor from Scrubs being in Indiana Jones. So well known for the one character they play that their mere presence in anything other instantly destroys any immersive qualities the film may have had.

So, who did the janitor guy PLAY in IJ4? Indy's kid? I didn't notice him anywhere.

Red Barchetta

06-28-2008, 12:45 PM

So, who did the janitor guy PLAY in IJ4? Indy's kid? I didn't notice him anywhere.

One of the government agents briefing him after the nuclear bomb goes off.

ArizonaTeach

06-28-2008, 04:24 PM

Disappointing. Still a good flick...or at least the first 20 minutes, then it was all down hill from there....yeeaahhhh.....I walked out a little put-out, too. I really, really, really hated them using live actors, and I thought that the extrapolations of current society were ridiculous. Like you, the space scenes bothered me, especially when they exposed the plant to space. It was purty 'n' all, but...I was unsatisfied It's no Incredibles.

dotchan

06-28-2008, 06:03 PM

From the previews, Wall-E looks like what would happen if R.O.B. (http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/characters/images/hidden07/hidden07.jpg) and E.T. met in a bar and got drunk.

Very, very drunk.

Moriarty

06-29-2008, 11:43 AM

Is it wrong to admit that I'd really like one of those floating chairs?

Miller

06-29-2008, 12:01 PM

Just on this part. Willard was not the President, but just the president and CEO of BnL. I did not think that was all too bad despite being no fan of Willard.

I think the two positions are one and the same by the time they had to evacuate the Earth.

Interrobang!?

06-29-2008, 10:38 PM

My wife and I each managed to see 4/5ths of it -- our daughter was a little too young to enjoy the whole thing. She got fidgety once they went to space, in part because the theater was "too dark" at that point.

I really want to see it again, but I thought what I did see was excellent -- not up to Ratatouille or Toy Story 2 or Monsters, Inc., but very possibly my fourth-favorite Pixar film so far.

And, having seen the film, I think people who think the character design is a rip-off of Short Circuit are nuts. It's clearly a ripoff of E.T..

;)

Zsofia

06-30-2008, 08:51 AM

KarlGrenze

06-30-2008, 09:17 AM

Zebra

06-30-2008, 09:26 AM

I loved the film. It is one of the best films I've ever seen. It is a classic sci-fi movie. I also see a real Miyazaki influence with the 'dance' sequence and I like it.

I will own this movie and I'm sure I'll discover layers and layers in with each viewing.

MilTan

06-30-2008, 09:30 AM

I found it a cute touch that when Eve was rebuilding Wall-E on Axiom, the big Wall-Es provided light and didn't harm them. Perhaps they recognize one of their own (albeit a very old model).

Nitpick: the big'uns were Wall-As. The 'E' in Wall-E stood for "Earth-class," so I assume the 'A' stands for "Axiom-class."

Elendil's Heir

06-30-2008, 10:18 AM

I have some questions that may have been answered in the first page (will look back to check). Spoilers in case...

[1] How did they reproduce? Up until the woman touched the guy, it didn't seem like they developed any type of relationships with other humans that included touching (much less having sex).

[2] Where did the CEO ended up going? There is no mention of him being on the ship, and it is obvious him and his crew were about to leave the earth by the time he gave the A113 order. Are there other Axioms floating through space? Or did they die, like it happened to all those that didn't get to float into Axiom? :(

[3] What happened to all the other robots, how did Wall-E survived?

....

My guesses:

1. My eldest son and I also wondered that. Perhaps the robots do that for them, too, a la Brave New World - a DNA bank, IVF, cloning, artificial wombs, etc.? There was a robot teacher of the infant kids, after all.

2. I assume the CEO went into space and has since died. I also assume that there was just one ship, but obviously it couldn't have carried any more than a tiny fraction of all of humanity. Having more Axioms would complicate things too much from a storytelling perspective, I suppose. Which reminds me... the pudgy remnant of humanity which returns to Earth is still going to have to deal with some monster sandstorms for awhile.

3. The other robots just broke down or malfunctioned over 700 years, leaving "our" Wall-E as the only one remaining. It was just happenstance that it was him and no other.

Paranoid Randroid

06-30-2008, 10:38 AM

Eh. I thought it was so-so. The early scenes were good, and I enjoyed the post-apocalyptic Earth city. I think the live action footage worked well, but the contrast with the animated people later on was disconcerting. The whole thing just seemed to fall apart at the end for me.

Question about the plot:

For what reason was information about Earth's toxicity kept confidential to the captain? It seemed as if the president meant for somebody to receive the message. It seems to me that Auto could have revealed this information to the captain at any time and ended the charade of sending Eves to Earth.

Lute Skywatcher

06-30-2008, 11:21 AM

For what reason was information about Earth's toxicity kept confidential to the captain? It seemed as if the president meant for somebody to receive the message. It seems to me that Auto could have revealed this information to the captain at any time and ended the charade of sending Eves to Earth.Directives.

A113 only said not to return to Earth; if it had also said to stop sending Eve recons...

Infovore

06-30-2008, 11:35 AM

And I totally called that EVE was designed by someone who works on iShinystuff. :)
From what I understand, EVE was designed by Jonathan Ive, the designer of the iPod. :) So yeah, sort of the 'king iShinystuff designer.' :)

Troy McClure SF

06-30-2008, 11:49 AM

Did anyone else think that Wall-E's earth looked pretty frakkin' familiar?

Paranoid Randroid

06-30-2008, 11:56 AM

From what I understand, EVE was designed by Jonathan Ive, the designer of the iPod. :)

I think there were a few Apple jokes in there -- for one, when WALL-E collects the day's solar power, it plays the Mac startup chime.

Baldwin

06-30-2008, 12:00 PM

Liked it a lot. I think the Pixar people must have really studied silent movies, especially Chaplin.

as for "our" WALL-E being the last surviving robot on Earth (when presumably thousands of his model had been at work cleaning up); maybe his personality is what saved him. I got the impression he had more curiosity and initiative than a typical robot, including making a home in shelter that would survive the dust storms, and cannibalizing the defunct robots for parts.

Sure, if it were presented as serious science fiction, I'd have lots of nits to pick, but as a sweet little parable that looked amazing, it worked fine.

I was really struck by how real WALL-E's world looked in some scenes. I'm imagining that level of graphics applied to some science fiction classics. You could film The Caves of Steel, or Rendezvous with Rama, and at least make them look right.

Oh -- noticed a space buff joke. When WALL-E, clinging to the ship, passes through the vast cloud of old space junk orbiting the Earth, he briefly gets a little satellite stuck on his head; it looks just like the first Sputnik.

Zsofia

06-30-2008, 12:15 PM

Yeah. nobody else in our theater laughed at the Sputnik joke. Were we the only ones who caught it?

Infovore

06-30-2008, 12:19 PM

I think there were a few Apple jokes in there -- for one, when WALL-E collects the day's solar power, it plays the Mac startup chime.
Yep. When that happened the first, time, a good number of our fellow theatergoers (including the two of us, since the spouse works at Apple) had a good laugh.

I also noticed that WALL-E had an iPod (you can only see it for a few seconds--it's visible right before he fires up his 'Hello, Dolly' tape for the first time). One very nice touch was that it wasn't a current iPod, but several generations old.

On a completely different note: Did anyone else notice that Peter Gabriel did the song over the closing credits? I didn't know anything about that, and it was quite a pleasant surprise since I'm a fan. The spouse and I looked at each other as the song started playing: "Is that--? No, it can't be! But it sounds like him..." and then the name appeared and I was happy. :)

Reloy3

06-30-2008, 12:35 PM

I went to a Saturday Matinee with my kids, 15, 13, 7 and just barely 3. All of us loved it, and it was the first time my 3 year old was taken to a theatre. She now loves Wall-E.

My brilliant 15 year old daughter got the sputnik joke.

Baldwin

06-30-2008, 12:49 PM

Yeah. nobody else in our theater laughed at the Sputnik joke. Were we the only ones who caught it?
And Reloy3's brilliant 15-year-old. Sputnik 1 is kind of an iconic image by now. Obviously WALL-E isn't completely rigorous hard science fiction, but I bet Pixar is full of people who grew up reading sf and following the space program.

(Did you know your PM box is full?)

Zsofia

06-30-2008, 12:57 PM

No, I did not. To the Deletemobile!

Zebra

06-30-2008, 02:35 PM

Liked it a lot. I think the Pixar people must have really studied silent movies, especially Chaplin.

I read an article at the AV Club (The Onion) and the director said they watched silent films at lunch everyday for a year.

h.sapiens

06-30-2008, 02:57 PM

I went with my mom on Saturday, and we both really enjoyed it. I have to say it's now my favorite Pixar movie, and I quite like all of them (some more than others).

I got the Sputnik reference, and giggled out loud at the Mac startup sound. But surely I'm not the only one who has had "Put On Your Sunday Clothes" stuck in her head for the past two days!

Elendil's Heir

06-30-2008, 03:12 PM

Nice to hear Louis Armstrong singing "La Vie En Rose," too. I hadn't even known he'd ever sung it (I always associate it with Edith Piaf, of course).

AlmondJoy

07-01-2008, 03:37 PM

I loved the soundtrack- La Vie En Rose was a nice touch and Peter Gabrielle's song during the credits was really good too.
I really liked the combination of robots, animated humans and live action. I thought all 3 had different qualities- and the captain ended up being one of my favorite characters- he was just so determined. I am planning on seeing it a second time with a group of friends.

OpalCat

07-01-2008, 03:48 PM

I have some questions that may have been answered in the first page (will look back to check). Spoilers in case...

How did they reproduce? Up until the woman touched the guy, it didn't seem like they developed any type of relationships with other humans that included touching (much less having sex).

Where did the CEO ended up going? There is no mention of him being on the ship, and it is obvious him and his crew were about to leave the earth by the time he gave the A113 order. Are there other Axioms floating through space? Or did they die, like it happened to all those that didn't get to float into Axiom? :(

What happened to all the other robots, how did Wall-E survived?

I asked myself the same question re: your first. The next one... I don't think that all the people left. Remember early in the movie the recording talking about how there was lots of room out in space, and ships were leaving daily (or something like that)? I think that there were a lot of ships. Not sure if they were all like Axiom or not but I think the implication is that everybody left, not that everybody died.

Our 3.5 year-old was nearly glued to the screen the whole time. I was expecting him to freak out and make some noise at some point, but he only had something to say at the same time as the rest of us in the theatre did. YOU BROKE IT! Is what he said.

I didn't.
I'm curious at what point everyone said that? (Just because I can think of a bunch of places where that could have been said, and there was no such universal audience moment at the theater I saw it at.)

Lute Skywatcher

07-01-2008, 04:01 PM

I asked myself the same question re: your first. The next one... I don't think that all the people left. Remember early in the movie the recording talking about how there was lots of room out in space, and ships were leaving daily (or something like that)? I think that there were a lot of ships. Not sure if they were all like Axiom or not but I think the implication is that everybody left, not that everybody died.
I think the implication is a bit different: that everyone who could leave, using whatever means possible, did.

I wonder how many of those "ships leaving daily" had stowaways.

OpalCat

07-01-2008, 04:41 PM

I thought it was Pixar's best. But then I didn't think The Incredibles was all that, like everybody else seems to. Different strokes.
I'll join you in that boat. I thought The Incredibles was sub-meh at best and have never understood all the fuss. I loved Wall-E.

I do think that they should have used all CG people and not live action. The progression to fat and lazy is believable. The progression from looking like people to looking like plastic animated characters? Not so much.

Neidhart

07-01-2008, 05:14 PM

The chairman -- I got the feeling he committed suicide after recording his farewell message.

With so few plants, I'm pretty sure the atmosphere wouldn't be breathable.

And if nobody'd walked for umpty-dum generations, even standing up in 1G would be impossible.

How do you play a VHS tape through an iPod?

OpalCat

07-01-2008, 06:52 PM

I really, really doubt that he committed suicide. For one thing, it's a children's movie. For another thing, he put on a breathing mask. Also he was talking to people off camera and the implication was pretty clear that they were leaving in a ship.

I also didn't get any feeling that people had been left behind. With all the talk of daily departing ships, with the guy talking about the planet being evacuated, and with there being no sign of people having tried to keep surviving, and no signs of dead people, and again, it being a children's movie, I think that they intended that the people all left.

Infovore

07-01-2008, 07:46 PM

Did anyone else wonder which ship they took the hairdressers and phone sanitizers on? :)

Green Bean

07-01-2008, 08:23 PM

I also didn't get any feeling that people had been left behind. With all the talk of daily departing ships, with the guy talking about the planet being evacuated, and with there being no sign of people having tried to keep surviving, and no signs of dead people, and again, it being a children's movie, I think that they intended that the people all left.Further...
The BnL store had signs up for an "evacuation sale."

Miller

07-01-2008, 08:25 PM

Moriarty

07-01-2008, 08:50 PM

OpalCat

07-01-2008, 08:59 PM

The directive for the auto pilot was sent out 700 years before the current date in the movie. It is not known how long before the directive was sent that the ship left Earth. It may have been that ships such as that had been living off in space for generations already by that time.

KarlGrenze

07-01-2008, 09:03 PM

I believe they had been in space for about 600 hundred years, so I don't really think there's any mystery about the fate of the CEO...if he was there during the evacuation, I assume he's long since died (remember, the captain was also, IIRC, the sixth captain of the ship).

Yea, I assume he was dead, but I meant more if he was able to make it to another ship and live there the rest of the natural life, or if he died shortly after making that message.

And yea, I assumed there could be other ships, who knows if they would eventually return (or if their Autos would succeed and then make them remain in space forever).

lawoot

07-01-2008, 09:40 PM

Are there other Axioms floating through space? Or did they die, like it happened to all those that didn't get to float into Axiom?

Obviously (and I can't believe no one has said this yet):

The Axiom was the "B" Ark. The rest of the population was wiped out by a disease contracted by a dirty telephone. :D

Sleel

07-01-2008, 09:54 PM

Darn thing isn't released here until September!

I hate that...
Ha! I can easily beat that. Japan gets movies absolute last in the industrial world, and after quite a few of the developing countries too. Release date here: December 20th.

We got Fellowship of the Rings over 14 months after it was first released in the UK. Funny how when it's a big Sony Pictures distribution (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0145487/releaseinfo) though, or even something a little less blockbustery (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0454921/releaseinfo), it gets out at almost exactly the same time as the rest of the world.

Some of the smaller movies get no release, or some nominal release like Cashback (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0460740/) (retitled as the katakana rendition of "Frozen Time" here) which was released (almost two years after its premiere) in something like 4 or 5 cinemas in Tokyo for a very limited time. One theater in my area, one of the few outside Tokyo to show it, had it for a grand total of five weekdays. Yep, Monday to Friday, two showings a day, then gone. Why even bother? It was basically impossible for me to see it in the theater.

I am looking forward to seeing Wall*E when it finally does get here. Of Pixar films, the only one I've been somewhat meh about seeing was Cars. And even that wasn't bad, it just wasn't as great as most of their other movies.

El_Kabong

07-01-2008, 10:15 PM

Just came back from seeing it.

I'll think a bit before ranking it against Pixar's other efforts, but although more than a bit derivative I quite enjoyed it, and thought from an aesthetic standpoint it was one of the most beautiful films I'd ever seen. The rather glaring contrast between the live-action and animated humans took me out of it a bit but I thought the story overall was interesting and really well-structured. Loved how well thought-out the roles, methods of operation and behavior of the various service robots was. Aside from the various sci-fi references, a lot of the film, especially in the early going, had the feel of Jacque Tati's classic near-silent comedies.

BTW, after all the talk about the supposed resemblance between Wall-e and Johnny Five, I'm a bit surprised that no one here, or in the first 3 or 4 pages of comments I read on IMDB, seems to have picked up on how much of the visual look (of the scenes set on Earth), and elements of the plot, resemble that of Mike Judge's famously suppressed (and IMO brilliant) Idiocracy. I'm aware that initial development of this film apparently long pre-dates the latter, yet there seem too many parallels for this to be purely coincidental.

Oh, and I want to throw out major props to 'Presto', the opening short: a fabulous riff on the old Looney Toons, if you ask me.

OpalCat

07-01-2008, 10:26 PM

"Presto" reminded me of the video game "Portal" ...which is a good thing.

btw, I want the little floor-cleaning robot (M.O.?) to live at my house.

pricciar

07-01-2008, 11:37 PM

Just saw it tonight at a theatre that was relatively crowded for a Tuesday 9 PM showing. The crowd loved it, and so did I. I caught a bunch of references, but i get the feeling that there are dozens more that I will catch on rewatching. Not only did I get a Idiocracy vibe from the look of earth, but from the fate of the humans on the Axiom. Not saying it was a rip off in any way, just two good movies that mined similar ideas.

I loved it. It had humor, drama, and tension. The design, as usual, was incredible. And, some scenes were truly breathtaking. It is amazing how consistent Pixar can be with beautiful innovative animation. They don't cut corners. This carries over to the stories, as well. I think the lack of dialog was able to truly make the story shine.

Jeff Garlin was well cast as the captain. He had a small role and made the most of it. I have to admit that the live action elements did take me out of the film for a bit. I got used to them, eventually and it worked just fine. I do wonder what the motivation for using them was.

As far as ranking it goes. I have no idea. It was great and I enjoyed it. I can say that about all of Pixar.

I was a little bit disappointed that there wasn't a trailer for the next Pixar film. I seem to remember seeing teasers for Wall E before Rattatouile, and a teaser for Ratatouille before The Incredibles.

Oh. Presto was so good. A definite throwback to Looney Tunes/Merry Melodies/Walter Lantz 40s cartoon style with some fun additions of their own.

Tamex

07-01-2008, 11:54 PM

I think there were a few Apple jokes in there -- for one, when WALL-E collects the day's solar power, it plays the Mac startup chime.

Yeah, that was a lonely laugh for my family in our local theater.

lawoot

07-02-2008, 12:58 AM

Yeah, that was a lonely laugh for my family in our local theater.

Yeah, but it made it easy to spot the Mac users in the audience - PC/Windows people would have no idea...

Darth Nader

07-02-2008, 01:27 AM

I'm curious at what point everyone said that? (Just because I can think of a bunch of places where that could have been said, and there was no such universal audience moment at the theater I saw it at.)

My son freaked when near the end, the little cockroach was run over, and everyone else in the theatre took a sharp breath at the same time.

Only pixar could make a roach loveable.

KarlGrenze

07-02-2008, 05:36 AM

For you, I kept thinking about killing it and it kept grossing me out.

Guts and blood and death? Fine, no problem, I like them! Any roach? KILL KILL KILL

UncleRojelio

07-02-2008, 08:48 AM

BTW, after all the talk about the supposed resemblance between Wall-e and Johnny Five, I'm a bit surprised that no one here, or in the first 3 or 4 pages of comments I read on IMDB, seems to have picked up on how much of the visual look (of the scenes set on Earth), and elements of the plot, resemble that of Mike Judge's famously suppressed (and IMO brilliant) Idiocracy.Thanks! I've been wracking my brain trying to think of the name of that movie. I got the same impression.

Tamex

07-02-2008, 09:06 AM

Yeah, but it made it easy to spot the Mac users in the audience - PC/Windows people would have no idea...

I was the only Mac user in that entire theater (My husband and daughter, while they recognized the sound from hearing my machine, both use PC's themselves.) I did hear someone laugh the second time he started up near the end of the movie, so maybe another Mac user came in late.

So, why was this Wall-E still chugging along when all the others had "died" long ago? That was never really explained. Presumably, others could have repaired themselves as well. So, why didn't they? And if Wall-E could repair himself, why couldn't he have repaired other Wall-E's?

Lute Skywatcher

07-02-2008, 09:33 AM

I have to admit, there's one thing that really bugged me about the movie:

The giant trash compactor room on the Axiom, where they jettison their waste into space. They've been up there for seven hundred years, and they're firing enormous trash cubes into the vacuum every five minutes? Where are they getting all the raw material to generate that much trash in the first place? The ship ain't that big!Presumably somewhere along the line they started sending out bots to recycle the cubes. Of course, that raises the question of why continue sending out the cubes. A 700 year old habit would be really hard to break and putting them off the ship would be easier on their minds. Would you eat something if you knew it had been recycled from garbage?

Baldwin

07-02-2008, 09:55 AM

Upon reflection, I think it was an artistic mistake to use real people in the video recordings.

Look, it's pointless to point out logical flaws.

Obviously, you wouldn't be throwing away huge amounts of compacted stuff from a self-sustaining 700-year-old generation ship. (Though not technically a generation ship, come to think of it, since it has FTL. More like a space colony that can also go places.)

And the basic premise doesn't make sense; no matter how much junk accumulated, it'd be vastly eaiser to keep living on Earth and clean things up than to move the population into space.

Doesn't matter; it's one of those movies that don't make a lick of sense logically, but work as fairy tales.

KarlGrenze

07-02-2008, 06:17 PM

I saw it that the population had become accustomed to a very consumerism-oriented society, with little regards to the surroundings. Since it was polluting the planet and causing it to be uninhabitable, the corporation that created, supported, and perpetuated the consumerist lifestyle saw it easier to send people away to space while they cleaned up again things on Earth. Axiom was not intended to be permanent.

Euryphaessa

07-02-2008, 08:24 PM

I saw it the other night and loved it. I liked the contrast between the out-of-date Wall-E and the iShiny robots on the Axiom, and I thought it was funny how they showed each successive captain of the ship being fatter and fatter than the previous ones. I had the exact same thought as Miller, but any little nitpicky things about the movie didn't detract from the overall experience for me. Can't wait to own it!

Green Bean

07-02-2008, 08:55 PM

squeegee

07-02-2008, 09:02 PM

when WALL-E collects the day's solar power, it plays the Mac startup chime.Which one? (http://hownow.brownpau.com/archives/2005/05/history_of_the_mac_startup_sound/) Maybe some folks didn't recognize the current version.

Kythereia

07-02-2008, 11:20 PM

Two questions:
Why make Eve so trigger-happy on her mission? Didn't seem to fit with trying to find plant life; letting local critters live might lead her to plants, after all.

Why name the starship Axiom?

I don't think they made her trigger-happy. Eve's got just as much personality as Wall-E--she's impatient and fussy, and just a little fed-up with her 'Directive', and hey, it's a big planet and she's a small robot. It makes sense that she'd be jumpy at first.

As for Axiom, it means 'proverb' or 'words of wisdom'. My guess is that it just sounded cool.

The parts with the humans were a little anvilicious, but I loved Wall-E and Eve getting to know each other. It was sweet and touching, and I think it deserved all four stars it got from the Globe and Mail.

lawoot

07-03-2008, 01:39 AM

Just came back from a second showing. Just as good the second time. Also, I was going nuts trying to place the actor's voice that played Otto/Autopilot... At first I thought he sounded like the Cylon's from the original Battlestar Galactica, but not quite. The first time i watched it the actor's name didn't register during the credit roll, so this time I decided to pay closer attention - Otto was played by Macintalk. Has a computer program ever gotten an ACTING credit before?

Raguleader

07-03-2008, 02:54 AM

Just saw Wall*E tonight, loved it. Captain Macready was my favorite character, very smart despite being ignorant of the world. From the very start they showed that he cared about his job, even if he had to admit he didn't have to do anything while doing it. When he realized something wasn't right, he investigated, and acted when Auto turned on him. I love the bit when he realizes that every Captain's portrait shows Auto looking over his shoulder.

Have to admit I was a little wigged out by the idea of Wall*E cannibalizing parts from failed Wall*E units, especially with the assumption that many, if not all, of the robots develop some kind of personality over time, and then the revelation that the shelves in his mobile home weren't designed for storing random things, but rather were intended for storing Wall*E units, emphasized how alone he was.

And of course, the movie shows the key to solving the Rubik's Cube: Have a smart girlfriend do it for you. I loved how he handed her the cube, camera follows him across the room, and when he comes back, she's solved it. :D

Tamex

07-03-2008, 12:07 PM

Which one? (http://hownow.brownpau.com/archives/2005/05/history_of_the_mac_startup_sound/) Maybe some folks didn't recognize the current version.

They used the current one, which I think was the one played with the iMac, so it's been used for a while. Most people are not using computers that old. However, you're right--if you are my age and the last time you used a Mac was back in school, you would not recognize the sound.

Troy McClure SF

07-03-2008, 12:38 PM

They used the current one, which I think was the one played with the iMac, so it's been used for a while. Most people are not using computers that old. However, you're right--if you are my age and the last time you used a Mac was back in school, you would not recognize the sound.
No, they used #2 in that video, as confirmed by this extremely geeky video (http://youtube.com/watch?v=fMDdjltQfuI). It was used in the Mac Classic (and I want to say my old IIsi as well, but I'm not sure).

DesertDog

07-04-2008, 07:45 AM

But surely I'm not the only one who has had "Put On Your Sunday Clothes" stuck in her head for the past two days!A week, now and counting. Hello Dolly is one of DesertRoomie's favorite musicals and I'd read in a review that the movie opens with that song. So I was watching her when the movie started rolling to see how long it would take her to recognize the song. It was about two milliseconds.

ivylass

07-04-2008, 05:05 PM

We just saw it, and we rank it in the middle of the Pixar pack, around Cars.

My question After 700 years in space, why would the humans want to return to Earth? They've become accustomed to the Axiom, they are sedentary enough to need hover chairs to get around, their whole life is programmed for them...when to eat breakfast, etc. I would think Earth would be a very daunting prospect to them. After all...no electricity, no hover chairs!

That said, I loved the interaction between Wall-E and Eve. And I kept waiting for Auto to say, I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave.

I did laugh during the 2001: A Space Odyssey as the captain rises from his chair and begins to walk.

Raguleader

07-04-2008, 06:24 PM

We just saw it, and we rank it in the middle of the Pixar pack, around Cars.

My question After 700 years in space, why would the humans want to return to Earth? They've become accustomed to the Axiom, they are sedentary enough to need hover chairs to get around, their whole life is programmed for them...when to eat breakfast, etc. I would think Earth would be a very daunting prospect to them. After all...no electricity, no hover chairs!

That's just it, they've spent 700 years on the Axiom. The Captain sounds particularly jaded about their situation, doing the same thing for 700 years straight. Earth is a whole NEW thing for them to do, with new things and such. Also, we're given the impression that they have been under the understanding that the whole reason they were in space was to wait for Earth to be habitable again, kinda some big quasi-religious thing to look forward to.

Hm, that could be a fun angle for a story to take.

Queen Bruin

07-05-2008, 11:27 PM

Just watched this today. I personally didn't find the live action segments to be jarring at all; in fact I didn't even think on it until I read the thread. I was too busy being entertained to pay attention, I guess.

Also I've never cried so much at a movie, but then I'm terribly sentimental.

My husband nudged me a bit when
President/CEO tells the Autopilots to "stay the course". I'm not sure if that was intended the way we took it, but it was hard to ignore.

Easily one of Pixar's best offerings to date. For me it's Top 3 along with Toy Story and The Incredibles, but it is awful hard to rank any of them among themselves.

TWDuke

07-06-2008, 01:30 AM

I loved this movie. The first earthbound portion was amazing. The outer-space sequences seemed conventional by comparison, but still top-rank film-making.

On the use of live-action video, it didn't bother me in the least when I saw it. It was the sight of the CGI people later in the movie that was jarring. Upon reflection, I think it was a price worth paying for two reasons:

1) The contrast between the happy shiny world depicted in the ancient promotional videos with the desolate wasteland of future earth was made more poignant by the inclusion of actual human beings.

2) The "Hello Dolly" clip was such an important part of Wally's world, and "Hello Dolly" featured real live humans. I suppose it would have been possible to use a clip from an animated musical, but I think it would have lost a lot of that "artifact from a lost world" effect.

I know there are some problems of logic and physics, but by the standards of a cartoon about a lovable robot that goes into space and saves mankind, it's close enough to watertight.

So, why was this Wall-E still chugging along when all the others had "died" long ago? That was never really explained. Presumably, others could have repaired themselves as well. So, why didn't they? And if Wall-E could repair himself, why couldn't he have repaired other Wall-E's?Some cars are lemons, some cars can be nursed along longer than others with tender loving care, and some cars inexplicably keep on running forever. There's no reason to assume all Wall-E's are created equal, even if they came off the same assembly line.

The Wall-E has the ability to learn, so besides its initial mechanical superiority, the survivor presumably has accumulated more knowledge than those that expired earlier. Since Wall-E can communicate with other robots, it's also possible that he learned from mistakes his colleagues made in trying to preserve themselves.

TWDuke

07-06-2008, 01:33 AM

[QUOTE=Elendil's Heir]
Why make Eve so trigger-happy on her mission? Didn't seem to fit with trying to find plant life; letting local critters live might lead her to plants, after all.

Why name the starship Axiom?Isuzu once had an SUV by that name. Maybe just a coincidence, but maybe it struck somebody as a cool and/or silly name for an oversize vehicle.

Lumpy

07-06-2008, 09:52 AM

A great movie. So many things to comment on, where to begin:

Another vote for Wall-E's expressiveness. I loved it when after he accidently fired EVE's gun and blew out a wall, he somehow managed an "Ooooooh Shit!" look on his "face".

Junkyard Earth looked awesome. I wonder if they had green glass on the west coast, brown glass on the east coast, and clear in the middle? :D

Relative to the background he came from, the Captain was one of the bravest heroes we've ever seen. In fact the humans on the Axiom come across rather well once they were woken up from their torpor.

The end scene where they show over generations the humans (with help from the robots) rebuild civilzation and heal the Earth. Notice their descendents slim down again over the generations?

And finally, the genuine love between Wall-E and EVE made me misty-eyed.

RandMcnally

07-06-2008, 12:06 PM

In math an axiom is a proof that is never changing and unquestionable. That's why the Axiom ship was named as such.

Unintentionally Blank

07-06-2008, 01:47 PM

Just got back from seeing it. loved it loved it loved it.

I don't understand the hate for Cars, being a car guy, but since I was luke-warm for Ratatouille, I can see how folks like some movies better than others.

But goddamn, Pixar, on a scale from 1 to 10, hasn't made a movie under 8.9, IMHO. That still stands.

Qadgop the Mercotan

07-06-2008, 02:12 PM

Enjoyed it. One question:
how the heck did the plant grow in the ancient refrigerator??

E-Sabbath

07-06-2008, 02:58 PM

The light stays on when the door is closed.

Raguleader

07-06-2008, 03:55 PM

The light stays on when the door is closed.

Nice. :cool:

Qadgop the Mercotan

07-06-2008, 04:10 PM

The light stays on when the door is closed.
That's what my daughter said too.

But I pointed out that such a lightsource lacks the wavelengths that stimulate growth, and that lack of moisture after 700 years would be a problem too.

Why yes, I am a science geek! :D

TWDuke

07-06-2008, 04:36 PM

Some beans do sprout in the dark. So maybe they wouldn't be as green and leafy as the Wall-E plant, but that falls within cartoon license, I think.

Lumpy

07-06-2008, 04:45 PM

Some beans do sprout in the dark. So maybe they wouldn't be as green and leafy as the Wall-E plant, but that falls within cartoon license, I think.I'm pretty sure the epilog showed that the plant eventually grew into a tree

TWDuke

07-06-2008, 05:04 PM

Did it, or did it just show a progression of plant life?

In any case, you never read Jack and the Beanstalk? No telling what those things are capable of.

Unintentionally Blank

07-06-2008, 05:17 PM

This truely is a wonderous
movie season for the magic fridge
besides
the sprout wouldn't have survived the terrible sand storms.

nit picky nit picky nit picky.

KarlGrenze

07-06-2008, 05:28 PM

Hey now...

1. The fridge was 700 years old, it is possible it had some cracks that would allow moisture and some sun.

2. It would still offer protection from the sandstorms.

3. Perhaps that is how the seed got into the fridge, blown away by a sandstorm until it found refuge.

4. Who knows what sort of things were growing on those fridges anyways, for 700 years. Mutant compost.

Also, since there was one, I thought the implication was that there were more, but hidden away and difficult to find. Wall-E just got lucky finding that (and so did EVE).

OtakuLoki

07-06-2008, 05:31 PM

I just saw Wall E last night. And I enjoyed it. (Though I enjoyed Presto! much, much more. And I think that the ticket price can be justified simply for the short.)

However, I can't give Wall E more than a 7 or 8 on a scale of one to ten. Even granting it's supposed to be a fable. Even granting that it's premises contradict known science left, right and center.

I couldn't ignore the repeat of the old "constant thrust = constant velocity" and that Wall E could during the dance in space with EVE go in spirals effortlessly with that fire extinguisher. She was using some version of a reactionless drive, so she didn't bother me. But Wall E, egads. If I could get a dry powder extinguisher with that kind of gas capacity....

The homage to both Sputnik and HAL and the use of Thus Spake Zarathustra was all great. But I couldn't help thinking that someone forgot to read their Niven: EVE wasn't sent to find habitability of the planet. EVE was out looking for proof of a habitable spot. (mutter mutter mutter)

I agree that the team on the film did a great job of finding ways to make the human characters heroic, instead of keeping them passive players to the actions of the robots.

And I wonder, just how freaked out was poor M.O. when they landed on Earth, and he had to try to decon all that dirt?

OpalCat

07-06-2008, 05:39 PM

Did it, or did it just show a progression of plant life?
Yes it did. They showed the boot under the ground underneath the tree.

OtakuLoki

07-06-2008, 05:44 PM

Did anyone else look to see if there was going to be a big glowing crystal with that big tree at the end? ;)

Hey, it could have happened - John Lassiter is a big Miyazaki fan.

Unintentionally Blank

07-06-2008, 06:19 PM

Yes it did. They showed the boot under the ground underneath the tree.

I read that as symbolic. The one that came first.

I'd like to add how happy I am for movies that seem to give away so much in the trailers and teasers, only to find they just scratch the surface. In the same vein, almost all of the teasers to Iron Man are out of the way in the first 5 minutes of the movie.

DrFidelius

07-06-2008, 07:01 PM

... looked like kudzu to me.

(Did they have seeds and animal embryos in storage?)

Saw the film yesterday and I am still processing. I enjoyed it very much, and some of the images were inspired, but the story seems a little thin.

I really liked the scene in the elevator -- "look Eve, we're on TV!" BLAST. "oh..."

and, the shot of the Axiom hanging in the sky above the city exactly the way that bricks don't was perfect...

Queen Bruin

07-06-2008, 07:05 PM

Did anyone else look to see if there was going to be a big glowing crystal with that big tree at the end? ;)

Hey, it could have happened - John Lassiter is a big Miyazaki fan.
Which Miyazaki film is that? I've got a growing list of Miyazaki in my NetFlix queue and could always use some more!

(Sorry for the hijack)

OtakuLoki

07-06-2008, 09:31 PM

Which Miyazaki film is that? I've got a growing list of Miyazaki in my NetFlix queue and could always use some more!

(Sorry for the hijack)

It was released in the US as Castle in the Sky. The Japanese title is listed on IMDB as Tenkû no shiro Rapyuta (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092067/)*. In the title credits you'll see that it was released in Japan as Tenkû no shiro Laputa. ISTR that you've got some smattering of spanish, you can see why the change of title.

At any rate, I recommend the movie highly, as I do all Miyazaki films, and most Studio Ghibli productions. Certainly this one is a good thematic match to Wall E. By no means is one movie a copy of the other, but both movies share a number of similar themes.

As long as we're on the topic, have you seen Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087544/)? If not, it's another excellent Miyazaki, and again, shares some thematic similarities to Wall E. Not as many as Castle, but it's another nice view of the issues.

*I'm not completely certain, but I think that translates to: "White Castle Laputa," usually rendered as "Laputa: Castle in the Clouds".

KarlGrenze

07-06-2008, 09:53 PM

Dr Fidelius, if they had the technology to help humans reproduce, they probably had the technology for seeds and animals.

I know it wouldn't work as well as a simple fairy tale, but I keep thinking it would be cool if there were other Axioms and they also got the signal that Earth was habitable again...

Queen Bruin

07-06-2008, 09:59 PM

It was released in the US as Castle in the Sky. The Japanese title is listed on IMDB as Tenkû no shiro Rapyuta (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092067/)*. In the title credits you'll see that it was released in Japan as Tenkû no shiro Laputa. ISTR that you've got some smattering of spanish, you can see why the change of title.

At any rate, I recommend the movie highly, as I do all Miyazaki films, and most Studio Ghibli productions. Certainly this one is a good thematic match to Wall E. By no means is one movie a copy of the other, but both movies share a number of similar themes.

As long as we're on the topic, have you seen Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087544/)? If not, it's another excellent Miyazaki, and again, shares some thematic similarities to Wall E. Not as many as Castle, but it's another nice view of the issues.

*I'm not completely certain, but I think that translates to: "White Castle Laputa," usually rendered as "Laputa: Castle in the Clouds".
Thanks! I'll add it to the list, which incidentally has Nausicaa on it at the moment (due to arrive in my next batch!)

Zebra

07-06-2008, 10:11 PM

You know what nitpicky little thing bugged me about it? The people on the Axiom were too uniformly obese. Even if you showed them all as being obese, some would naturally be bigger than others.

And you know a movie has to be pretty great if this is the worst thing I can say about it!

It's not natural, that's just it. They are the perfet/perfeted consumers. They all have the exact same diet. They've been bread by the the BnL robots for 700 years, so probably 'active' people have been bred out.

Miller

07-06-2008, 11:00 PM

Dr Fidelius, if they had the technology to help humans reproduce, they probably had the technology for seeds and animals.

One of my fanwanks for the film is that the passengers on the Axiom were the recipients of some genetic tinkering to, among other things, help them maintain muscle and bone mass in a low-g environment. Which explains why, despite their entirely sedentary existence, it was still possible (with some effort) for them stand up and walk.

I know it wouldn't work as well as a simple fairy tale, but I keep thinking it would be cool if there were other Axioms and they also got the signal that Earth was habitable again...

One of the promotional clips in the beginning showed multiple ships leaving the Earth, and if you listen to the BnL president's messages to the Axiom, you can hear a slight skip in the audio when he says the ship's name, indicating that it was a boilerplate message for all the colony ships, with a specific name edited in for each ship that received it.

JThunder

07-06-2008, 11:03 PM

I couldn't ignore the repeat of the old "constant thrust = constant velocity"
He wasn't getting constant velocity, though. Rather, he was spiraling about, which implied an acceleration vector.

OtakuLoki

07-06-2008, 11:10 PM

He wasn't getting constant velocity, though. Rather, he was spiraling about, which implied an acceleration vector.

Sorry, I should have broken that up better. EVE's ship, and Axiom, were both doing the constant thrust=constant velocity. (Which doesn't make any sense if EVE is going around with a reactionless drive, anyways...)

Then, when the two 'bots were dancing outside, the motion being shown for Wall E was often perpendicular to the thrust being shown.

Two different complaints, but both related I think, to common fallacies about motion in space.

Queen Bruin

07-06-2008, 11:23 PM

One of the promotional clips in the beginning showed multiple ships leaving the Earth, and if you listen to the BnL president's messages to the Axiom, you can hear a slight skip in the audio when he says the ship's name, indicating that it was a boilerplate message for all the colony ships, with a specific name edited in for each ship that received it.
Also, directive A113 was directed IIRC to the autopilots, not just Auto.

E-Sabbath

07-07-2008, 01:52 AM

Exactly the way bricks don't. Good call, that.

Pleonast

07-07-2008, 12:56 PM

The film is great. I found the evolving interaction between WALLE and EVE very touching. I loved the perfectly ordered regulation of the Axiom's robots, especially the travel lines. I also liked the seeds of chaos that propagated out from wherever WALLE went.

My main complaint is the cliche "clunky, working-class guy manages to hook up with elegant girl with model looks".

Of course, that brings up the gender question. I think it's clear WALLE is supposed to be the boy and EVE is the girl. But is that really the case? WALLE is the hopeless romantic, pining for love and collecting kitsch. EVE is the aggressive workaholic who is all-business with no time or understanding of love. So that's a great case for a female WALLE and male EVE. I bet someone can come up with other arguments, even same-sex ones.

But, really, it's a great love story, and I'd rather not deconstruct too much.

Lute Skywatcher

07-07-2008, 01:16 PM

My main complaint is the cliche "clunky, working-class guy manages to hook up with elegant girl with model looks".Hey, it happens. (http://www.gilleslarrain.com/img/themes/portraits/celebrities/billy_christy.jpg) :)

Kizarvexius

07-07-2008, 01:40 PM

I took Kizarvexilla to see it yesterday.

My reaction is similar to what others have expressed. The first 30-45 minutes by themselves amounted to one of the single best movies I've ever seen. Once Wall-E and EVE arrive on the Axiom, it dropped one or two points.

The evolution of humans into pampered tubs-o-lard was a clever plot point, but eventually amounted to one continuous "fat" joke that got old very quickly.

All in all, I was not bothered by the inclusion of live-action footage. I could very well have done without Fred Willard, however. He is a black hole of un-funniness that sucks the humorous potential out of anything he is remotely connected with. I particularly thought that the deliberate Dubya references and "stay the course" joke were glaringly out of place. In another setting (and with a different performer) I probably would have laughed. Here, however, :rolleyes:

I, too, was disappointed that there was no preview for Pixar's next project.

Okay, enough bitching about the negative aspects. I adored this movie. It was hilariously funny, mercilessly clever, gorgeously designed, flawlessly executed, and delivered its message (for the most part) without being too preachy. I especially loved the design for EVE, and caught right away the reference to the evolution from the clunky Apple IIe to the steamlined i-Mac. Ben Burtt, in particular, deserves a tremendous amount of credit for the voice design. Beautifully done.

Oh yeah. Kizarvexilla give it two enthusiastic opposable digits up.

Lemur866

07-07-2008, 02:05 PM

I loved the movie. Of course, if you can evacuate the human population of the Earth into spaceships that are self-sufficient for 700 years, you could do the exact same thing except you could leave the spaceships on Earth and save money on unneccesary propulsion systems. But sealed bio-domes aren't as cool, and they've been done to death anyway.

Lute Skywatcher

07-07-2008, 02:09 PM

I, too, was disappointed that there was no preview for Pixar's next project.Up (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1049413/) was just announced in April so it might not have been in production long enough for one.

OpalCat

07-07-2008, 11:23 PM

cindyash

07-08-2008, 12:21 AM

Several folks were asking about taking little kids to this (a two year old??) I am not a parent, but I work with preschoolers, and have to say that this is NOT a little kids movie! The kids I saw were either running around the theatre, or asleep. There is too little action to be interesting and too much other stuff not to be boring. As far as scary - I can see a few moments when it might be, but if a child isn't old enough to follow the story it probably won't affect him.

Oh and btw, I love this movie. I don't care what Pixar based the robots on. I loved this movie. I agree with just about everything you all said about it. The part where Eve was trying to get WallE back to life, calling his name, had me in tears, and I do not tend to cry at movies (reading books is a totally different matter)

My science fiction fan DH wanted to know if they could build a spaceship like that, why the hell didn't they have the technology to do something about the garbage?

>from the clunky Apple IIe

Hey, I wrote my master's thesis on that! (and boy am I glad thats ancient history!)

Oh, did you guys see the credits? During them, you see what happens in their future. One thing I didn't see and wondered about - do they learn their lesson? Or like Canticle for Leibowitz, is it all over again (I hope thats not a spoiler, I don't know how to do the fancy black screen yet. Feel free to tell me using the spoiler mode, tho)

>not just Auto.

Um, I thought his name was Otto (slinking away embarrassed....)

cindyash

07-08-2008, 12:36 AM

>Yeah. nobody else in our theater laughed at the Sputnik joke. Were we the only ones who caught it?

I didn't, but DH did

>Did anyone else wonder which ship they took the hairdressers and phone sanitizers on

Ha! No, but we should have!

>the corporation that created, supported, and perpetuated the consumerist lifestyle saw it easier to send people away to space while they cleaned up again things on Earth

Thanks, that answered a question we had about it; if they could make a space ship why couldn't they have cleaned up the place!

Jonathan Chance

07-08-2008, 06:42 AM

Of course, that brings up the gender question. I think it's clear WALLE is supposed to be the boy and EVE is the girl. But is that really the case? WALLE is the hopeless romantic, pining for love and collecting kitsch. EVE is the aggressive workaholic who is all-business with no time or understanding of love. So that's a great case for a female WALLE and male EVE. I bet someone can come up with other arguments, even same-sex ones.

But, really, it's a great love story, and I'd rather not deconstruct too much.

You and me, both.

But EVE is clearly the girl in this story. If for nothing else her 25 ways of saying 'WALLE!' in the tone pissed off girlfriends use when I've screwed something up in the distant past.

Hoops

07-08-2008, 10:05 PM

There's an absolutely straight-faced Buy'N'Large (http://www.buynlarge.com) website. Just make sure you scroll down and check out their Privacy Policy; they play hardball :)

Siam Sam

07-08-2008, 10:27 PM

We don't get to see Wall-E until next month. Dunno why the delay with this one. :(

Maui Lion

07-09-2008, 06:40 PM

I just saw Wall-E today, and I loved it as well. I thought it was a wonderful movie with lots of really touching scenes. I just knew if I watched it with my boyfriend I'd be reaching for his hand and holding it at times and being all sappy-smiling mode.
About 30 minutes into the movie, I was surprised it had *been* 30 minutes already, it was just so entertaining, and Wall-E was delightfully expressive.

Though..

Was anyone else a little depressed in the first 10 minutes of the movie, or is it just me? Seeing everything in ruin, desolate, the environment practically toxic and seeing a 'dead earth' made me quite sad.

And then I came to realize I don't know if they took any animals into space with them, which means all the animals on the planet suffered, starved, and died. No cats, no dogs, no lions (noo!), no cows, no bears, no anteaters, et cetera. Though I tried to tell myself they made 'Arks' out of some ships and animals returned soon after the first one landed.

When Wall-E was holding up that..thing they had to put the plant in near the end of the movie, I saw how close his treads were to the edge, and I kept telling myself 'Don't slip, don't slip..'. Then he slips and gets crushed, and I audibly gasped right there. I'm sure my face had a "No!.." expression of surprise.

I will definitely buy this movie on DVD.

DesertDog

07-09-2008, 07:12 PM

Another vote for Wall-E's expressiveness. I loved it when after he accidently fired EVE's gun and blew out a wall, he somehow managed an "Ooooooh Shit!" look on his "face".At some point, I forget where now, EVE makes a two-syllable exclamation. The guy behind us said to his date, "Did she just say 'Oh, crap?'" That's what it sounded like to me.

Um, I thought his name was Otto (slinking away embarrassed....)I mentioned the whole Otto/Auto thing way back on page 1. At the time, there was no credit on IMDb so it could have been either way. All the way through Steel Magnolias (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0098384/) I thought Shirley MacLaine's character was Weezer, which is a hell-uv-a name for a woman.

Lumpy

07-09-2008, 07:46 PM

Now I keep imaging the crew of Battlestar Galactica landing on a junkyard Earth and having WALL-E come trundling along...

eleanorigby

07-09-2008, 08:17 PM

I loved this movie. I think it's a romance disguised as a sci-fi cartoon, but that just makes it all the better.

Re the nitpicks of the physics of space: who cares? This is cartoon space--did you not see "SpaceJam" where this is explained? ;) Their space dance was a fantastic visual.

I found this film to be startlingly political (not red v blue states) with its message of environmentalism, consumerism and group think. I found it refreshing, humorous and touching. I didn't cry, but I thought it was sweet (in a good way, not in a saccharine way).
This is a simple, heartfelt story. I cannot understand why preschoolers wouldn't like it? (or are they now accustomed to wall to wall action? I hope not). I love that so many adults liked this film and it was rated G. It just shows that intelligent films can be made without sex and violence (I'm not against either in film, but it's nice to see a successful one w/o).

I think it's better than "Toy Story" (I need to see TS2, though). I had no interest in "Cars" and still don't. I thought "Nemo" mawkish and odd (with some good bits--Ellen Degeneres made up for a lot).

Raguleader

07-09-2008, 08:54 PM

Though..

Was anyone else a little depressed in the first 10 minutes of the movie, or is it just me? Seeing everything in ruin, desolate, the environment practically toxic and seeing a 'dead earth' made me quite sad.

For me it wasn't so much the "dead earth" aspect as the "Last one on Earth" aspect. Same thing that got to me when watching I Am Legend. I like being around other folks, one of my big personal fears is dying alone and forgotten. It hit me a little bit early on with Wall E just trundling along going about his work, then a little more when he cannibalized spare parts off of a dead Wall E, then finally moreso when I realized that all of the numerous shelves in his shelter were bunks for other Wall Es. Kinda like having the world end and having an entire dormitory with nobody to share it with. :(

RachelChristine

07-09-2008, 10:03 PM

My daughter will be 3 in August and she LOVED this movie. She made one comment during the whole movie, and she normally talks and asks questions through everything. When we got in the car on the way home, she told me that she wanted to have a Wall-E birthday, and has been telling everyone that ever since. Up until that point she wanted to have a Darth Vader birthday. ;-)

Johnny Angel

07-09-2008, 11:19 PM

I, of course, am to shop-worn a jaded cynic to be taken in by a bunch of schmaltz in the form of a toy commercial you have to pay to watch, but it had robots falling in love, so what could I do? I agree with Pleonast that in one sense this is typical Hollywood horseshit, because in the real world a hot robot chick like that would be way out of Wall-E's league.

I loved the film when I saw it, but then I read where somebody said Wall-E looked a lot like Johnny 5, and now I want my goddamned money back. But since I still haven't gotten paid after realizing that Robots was ripped off from Futurama wholesale, I guess I'll just have to bite back my bitter, salty tears.

Seriously, folks, for those of you who believe Pixar has done a better picture than this -- did you know that smoking crack rots your teeth? It's true, man; Google that shit.

I do have nitpicks, obviously. God never sends me a day without any. The premise doesn't stand up to much scrutiny, of course, but I can't bring myself to care except as a topic of conversation. The things I do care about are:

Physics. My wife commented on the sound-in-space issue, but I could hardly hear her over the sound of myself choking in nerdy fury over how close Wall-E seemed to get to a solar flare without turning into slag -- this just after I watched him cling with appendages designed to shovel garbage to a ship accelerating fast enough to break orbit. But then the robot did something cute, and I let it slide. The point is that accoustics was far from the worst transgression of the film. But most space movies have people managing to withstand interplanetary velocities as though they were no more murderous than land-bound vehicular velocities, which are themselves treated in movies as though they were bumper car shenanigans. Quiet lay, my rage, for your hour will come.
I hate to see a future story in which people are still using U.S. weights and measures, like some kind of moon-worshiping monkey people. If they're still using Fahrenheit in 700 years, the race deserves to die off. Maybe the roaches will go metric -- they may be our only hope.

Lute Skywatcher

07-10-2008, 09:48 AM

There's an absolutely straight-faced Buy'N'Large (http://www.buynlarge.com) website. Just make sure you scroll down and check out their Privacy Policy; they play hardball :)The last two paragraphs of the Privacy Policy are cut off in IE (stupid work computer) and it won't resize to show the whole thing. To get around this, do a Select All and copy to a word processor.

Interrobang!?

07-10-2008, 11:48 AM

Complaining about the physics in this movie is like complaining that people can't really be controlled, marionette-style, by pulling on their hair; or that there's no way toys could talk or move around because they don't have nervous systems; or that really, a male clownfish left alone with offspring would've turned into a female clownfish.

It's a fantasy. Physics bows down before storytelling, as it should in this context.

What Exit?

07-10-2008, 01:02 PM

OtakuLoki

07-10-2008, 01:46 PM

It's a fantasy. Physics bows down before storytelling, as it should in this context.

Honestly, I don't disagree with you - accuracy should not be viewed as being more important than the flow of the story.

What bothered me was not that things were inaccurate or impossible in the story - but that the people behind the film chose to do things that were contradictions of physics without any story-based reason for it!

Let's consider the orbital trash scene - Wall E ends up being covered in three or four old satellites, and the last one he manages to shake off is Sputnik. This scene is completely unrealistic for any number of reasons - the most important being that Sputnik has long since burned up in re-entry. But that doesn't matter, because for the sake of the joke I could ignore the reality. It was fun, it was clever, and it didn't interrupt the story for me.

The constant thrust=constant speed however was completely unnecessary, and served no purpose (With the exception of the bit during the 'dance' when Wall E and EVE are avoiding the large jets on the Axiom.) within either the framework of the story, nor to provide any kind of joke, or even feel. IMNSHO using pulsed thrusts (a few second burn, pause, and another half second burn) to match velocity would have been almost as easy, and would have made more of the change in atmosphere from what Wall E had known and the Axiom. It would have done more to emphasize for most viewers that Wall E has come to a new, strange world, than what they did show.

Finally, the dance would still have been possible without having Wall E's trajectory change before the thrust could have accumulated to achieve that, but it would have meant moving the nozzle from the extinguisher more.

FTM, please note, I never complained about the sound in space - because I do think that some sort of audio was necessary for that part of the film. It's because the other physics impossibilities were unnecessary that I'm complaining.

And, I'll admit it's an anal complaint. And that I'm probably being a little silly. It's a dirty job, but it's mine.

Johnny Angel

07-11-2008, 12:57 AM

It's a fantasy. Physics bows down before storytelling, as it should in this context.
Complaining about inaccurate physics is another way of enjoying life. I'm sorry that you will never understand it, but the rest of us will try not to let you spoil the fun for us.

carlb

07-11-2008, 05:37 PM

One of the things I like about Pixar movies is how they can make me care so very, very much about (arguably) non-sentient things. Toward the end of the movie, when
EVE "reboots" WallE and he no longer recognizes herI wept like I haven't in a long time.

But, here's the thing. It's perfectly logical and, indeed, as it should be. But I didn't want it to be.

I'll reserve more superlatives for rewatches, but I loved this movie.

RachelChristine

07-11-2008, 06:00 PM

To comment on whether or not Wall-E was a rip-off of another robot, I have a funny anecdote to share. I bought a set of Wall-E tattoos for my almost-3 year old, and she has one proudly displayed on her shoulder. At the car shop yesterday, one of the workers said "Hey, who's that on your tattoo? Is that E.T.?" Then as he got closer, he said "Oh, not E.T., it's the Short Circuit robot!" I couldn't help but laugh out loud. The other worker guy and my daughter told him it was Wall-E. Very funny I thought.

DesertDog

07-11-2008, 07:00 PM

At some point, I forget where now, EVE makes a two-syllable exclamation. The guy behind us said to his date, "Did she just say 'Oh, crap?'" That's what it sounded like to me.I'v seen it the second time, now. It was when Auto's minion pitched the boot down the trash chute. The exclamation was only one syllable, and if it wasn't "crap" I dunno what else it have been.

Also, I noticed this time, when EVE was cradling Wall-E on the trash deck after failing to repair him, it bore a striking resemblance to The Pietà (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Michelangelo%27s_Pieta_5450_cropncleaned.jpg) but reversed, left to right. How subtle is that?

MoodIndigo1

07-11-2008, 09:20 PM

Miller

07-11-2008, 10:04 PM

How do you define a special effect in an animated movie?

OtakuLoki

07-11-2008, 10:11 PM

How do you define a special effect in an animated movie?
If we were talking about traditional cel animation - I'd talk about effects animation that's usually added to the print after the more traditional animation has been shot. The example that comes to my mind, now, is the bubble effects in the underwater shots from The Little Mermaid, as something that you may have noticed, and that I am pretty sure was added after the original cels were used to create the scene. (ISTR hearing Mencken on the DVD commentary talking about the company they'd outsourced that animation to having been very, very close to deadline before they got everything back to them.)

I don't know how or whether effects animation is being done in a similar manner with PIXAR films. Do they have one team building the main images, and then another adding the "flash" or "oomph" for some scenes? Certainly that would be one way they could be doing it.

Johnny Angel

07-12-2008, 11:13 AM

...Cutesy robots in love. Yuck.

I regret wasting the money to see it in the theatre, I don't even think it's worth a rental. It sucked.
But this is precisely what was advertised. What did you think you were in for? It's like you took your vacation in Germany and came back complaining that it was so teutonic. Here's a money-saving tip: if you suspect a movie may in fact be about cutesy robots in love, you don't have to go see it to find out for sure. That information is available on the internet.

The important thing here is that neither Elton John, Phil Colins or Sting got their hands on the soundtrack.

Unintentionally Blank

07-12-2008, 12:00 PM

But this is precisely what was advertised. What did you think you were in for? It's like you took your vacation in Germany and came back complaining that it was so teutonic. Here's a money-saving tip: if you suspect a movie may in fact be about cutesy robots in love, you don't have to go see it to find out for sure. That information is available on the internet.

The important thing here is that neither Elton John, Phil Colins or Sting got their hands on the soundtrack.

Nooo, but Peter Gabriel did. :D

Unintentionally Blank

07-12-2008, 12:29 PM

There's an absolutely straight-faced Buy'N'Large (http://www.buynlarge.com) website. Just make sure you scroll down and check out their Privacy Policy; they play hardball :)

This is what I LOVE about Pixar....a throwaway KILLER website they expect you to find virally.

OpalCat

07-12-2008, 12:52 PM

Nooo, but Peter Gabriel did. :D
Which is awesome.

aldiboronti

07-12-2008, 01:18 PM

Am I the only person who hated it? Apart from the dark mood at the beginning, I found it all special effects, blatant references, schmaltzy, unsubtle, manipulative, totally predictable Hollywood fare. Cutesy robots in love. Yuck.

I regret wasting the money to see it in the theatre, I don't even think it's worth a rental. It sucked.

You're not alone.

This had the cuteness level turned up so high that it made the Care Bears Movie look gritty and realistic. The poet Keats spoke of works which have a 'palpable design' upon us. This was such a work and it hammered us over the head with its simplistic and juvenile message from the commencement to the very end of the film.

I thought Cars was great. This one, fittingly, is junk and I believe it will be recognized as such by future critics.

Knorf

07-12-2008, 02:51 PM

There's no movie so beautiful or so well made that someone doesn't hate it, and is proud of themselves for hating it.

Anyway, I saw this last night with my fiancée and we both liked it a lot. Aside from the incredibly gorgeous animation, it's simply really great story telling, with an incredibly charismatic machine protagonist.

The remarkable human capacity to care about the lives and feelings of things that aren't human is at the center of meaning in the story. One bit of subtlety is how the humans who bump into Wall-E end up remembering and liking him, and are even influenced by him (in that they suddenly have their eyes opened to the pointlessness of the status quo, something Wall-E clearly rejected long ago). He inadvertently becomes a catalyst for change in what's left of human society, just because of who he is, and the way he values remnants of civilization, thus becoming unique. He changes everyone and everything (almost) he bumps into. Consider the robot sentry guarding the ship's bridge: Wall-E waves to it, it waves back (and surprises itself by doing so), and suddenly is startled into behavior that it never considered. I love that.

ToeJam

07-13-2008, 02:43 AM

I think one of my favorite parts of the movie was when Eve watches the saved video footage in her memory of all the things that Wall-E did for her while she was turned off. Her realization of his total devotion was really touching, and could easily have been over played but it wasn't.

I just saw the movie yesterday, and this was the part of the movie that just SOLD it for me. At that point, there must have been a freak sandstorm at the theater because my eyes were REALLY watery during that scene, and then again at the very end of the film too....

Crazy Freak Movie Theater Sandstorms.
Crazy how they happen at such vital points in the film :p .

Miller

07-13-2008, 04:56 AM

I can't overstate how much I loved this movie. But I also can't stop being a cynical bastard. With that in mind, during the scene where Wall-E and Eve are together, but before she gets taken back to the Axiom, I couldn't help thinking, "So, Wall-E meets this girl who's got a psycho temper, and really likes fire. Then she goes into a coma, so he carries her body around and pretends like she's his girlfriend. Since when has John Waters been working for Pixar?"

Unintentionally Blank

07-13-2008, 08:40 AM

I <ahem> aquired it from <ahem> a questionable internet resource (rhymes with TitBorrent) and watched it again. I figure I'll be buying the movie (The download video quality sucked...Wall*E might be the reason I get a bluray player), and the toys, and the kids will be Wall*E for halloween, so it's all good.

It stands up to repeated showings with some interesting stuff. What if Wall*E is predisposed to being different from the start? It means that he's smart enough to find shelter in the sandstorms, leaving the other Wall*E's to sandblast into oblivion. Maybe he saw something he liked and wanted to keep it....making a place to keep nice things safe...giving him shelter.

I like that the worst bad-guy in the movie (Otto) aside from electrocuting Wall*E, wasn't that bad a guy, he was just following orders and when pushed, still obeyed them...mostly.

I, personally, didn't see a single fat joke. I saw crass consumerism jokes, I saw physical comedy, but nothing that said 'hey, look at the tub o lard and laugh!'

MoodIndigo1

07-13-2008, 01:47 PM

But this is precisely what was advertised. What did you think you were in for?

I guess I should have checked other sources instead of trusting the opinions of people on the SDMB-- which I've done before, and never been disappointed. Many other RL people I know loved it, so I thought it was a fairly sure bet.

Thanks, Aldi. At least I feel less alone now. Nice "seeing" you again, btw.

want2know

07-14-2008, 12:38 PM

One of the things I like about Pixar movies is how they can make me care so very, very much about (arguably) non-sentient things. Toward the end of the movie, when
EVE "reboots" WallE and he no longer recognizes herI wept like I haven't in a long time.

I knew I wasn't the only one! Actually, the specific "breaking point" for me in that scene was when she said, "Please...".

Funny thing is, I really don't get emotional as a rule, but that just absolutely broke my heart!

It actually started a little earlier. I got kinda misty when MO started to clean Wall-E up after EVE rescued them from the airlock.

Seriously, this could be Pixar's best movie so far. And the "Presto" short was absolutely hilarious!

GargoyleWB

07-14-2008, 01:26 PM

That freak sandstorm must have hit my theater too, I couldn't see the screen because my eyes were leaking so badly.

I had to do the "stealthily pretend to drop car keys on the theater floor so I could bend over and wipe my eyes" maneuver so my wife wouldn't see me :)

cactus waltz

09-07-2008, 05:11 PM

This movie recently opened in EU.

I so appreciate that Pixar are around to make movies like this. It's reminiscent of the streak of good movies Disney had in the early 90's, only Pixar has been doing it for over ten years now.

WALL-E is a gorgeous movie to look at. And there are tons of neat little touches and character designs (I thought all the details about EVE's design were simply perfect) and great sound effects to that. The first forty minutes or so are very atmospheric.

What did I not enjoy? Well, I thought WALL-E himself was sort of annoying. Those sad puppy eyes were a bit much for two hours. Also, the movie seemed to hit me harder in the beginning, when it was mostly silent. While in space, at Axiom, there was a bit too much name shouting. WALL-E! EVA! WALL-E! Oh well. I'm not the targeted audience here. Though, in the end, I couldn't help but feel for the little robot pair anyway.

And, yeah... Overweight people really are the low-point of civilization, huh? :dubious: I think the entire Axiom rather just made me want to re-watch 2001.