The best thing about The Book of Life is the visuals - all the characters are essentially portrayed as wooden puppets and they really put a lot of work into the look. The songs are a disappointment and the story not particularly compelling but man, it looks amazing.
I agree, if only for the insanely good songs by the Lopezes. That said, the sisters do quite possibly have the worst parents of any Disney or Pixar film (not counting stepparents), as this alternate version illustrates.
Like some of you I was irritated and baffled by the “short”. Over the years I have looked forward to Pixar shorts as a delectable and original entree before the main course and I have no idea why they decided to move away from that to 20+ minutes of the most generic Disney pap.
Fortunately the main film was great, easily in the front rank of Pixar films and one which I will keep returning to over the years just for the beauty and detail of the world that was so painstakingly created. I guessed the big twist fairly early but it didn’t matter; I was still moved and the moment where the old woman’s face lights up in happiness is a marvel of animation.
I think the one mistake they made was:
to make Ernesto a murderer. It felt too dark for the film. I think they could have found a way to keep the story mostly the same where he is a thief and a jerk but not a killer
BTW if anyone finds a good piece which explains the cultural references in the film, please post it.
Thisis a good start.
If you Google “Mexican cultural references in Coco” quite a few things pop up, actually.
According to this article, the film makers strapped GoPros to the studio musicians’ guitars to create reference footage.
I’ve been to a number of movies lately that had a short “making of Coco” preview ahead of the feature, and they talk about how they took great pains to make all the guitar playing as correct as possible by doing exactly what you say - they strapped cameras to the actual live players and then animated their moves.
I haven’t seen this movie but I will take my kids this week I hope.
I loved Coco! Some parts were rather intense for the little ones, but they got through it. The music, both guitars and vocals were perfect. I’ve already got the soundtrack. I was initially confused by the family relations–the introduction was rather fast. But I figured it all out before the reveal of the importance of Coco.
The Good Dinosaur is very underrated; the marketing totally missed. It’s a classic story about a boy and his dog growing up in the American West. The twist is the people are played by dinosaurs and the dog/wolves are played by humans.
Frozen is an excellent movie. You owe it to your daughters to show it to them, because the key theme of the movie is the relationship between the sisters. About the conflict and the love between them. With an added helping of “some boys will manipulate your feelings and hurt you”. Really, watch it with them and then talk about it afterwards.
Actually the dog did die, but it was so subtle I think most people missed it. When boy and the dog were riding back on the giant flying cat, the dog swallowed his tongue. He chokes for a second. And then he turns into a colorful spirit guide. That was choking was his death; the transition from living animal to spirit guide. In the epilogue, we see the cat and dog cross over into the living world, interacting with both the living and dead.
I saw it this weekend with my six year old daughter and one of her friends. They both loved the short because they love Frozen, and I am a big Olaf fan and I liked it as well. My theater seemed to play fewer previews than usual, possibly to make up for the time of the short, which I thought was a good idea.
We all really liked Coco. The entire look is amazing, and the music is terrific. The girls were engaged throughout – sometimes even with movies that are okay, I can see them getting antsy, but they were very attentive the entire time.
One thing that I wasn’t expecting is that after the movie, both girls said they liked it, but also described it as a very sad movie. That was interesting to me, because I thought it was sad, but with many Pixar movies, the real sadness is for adults, because you have more context for sad events. Like I also think Inside Out is very sad, and obviously my kid thinks it has sad parts, but she would never describe it overall as “a sad movie.” And, while this will no doubt change after it’s released for home markets and my kid sees it eleven thousand times, I was surprised that she didn’t name more specific things that she liked, which is her usual way of reviewing a movie.
I loved this part, and thought it was so true–the dog essentially turned into a colorful version of himself, while the mild-mannered housecat turned into a gigantic winged panther thing. Cats have a much higher opinion of themselves! 
The cat-creature’s name is “Pepita,” btw. She’s beautiful, and I want a figurine of her to put on my desk.
I’ve seen both. I prefer The Book of Life, though Coco very well done.
The main difference is that The Book of Life was about more than just honoring your family (though it was that, too). The stories are very similar – Someone who wants to play music is forbidden by his parents who wants him to go into the family business and ends up in the Land of the Dead, and needs to find a way back. But in Book, it’s in order to save his village and his love, whereas in Coco, it just to achieve his dream.
Coco also doesn’t have a female character like Maria in Book.
There’s also a big difference in style. Coco goes for a realistic look for the human characters (in some cases, it’s astonishingly good), whereas Book is more stylized, with the human characters looking like wooden carvings.
Both are good films, and the director of Book has said that people should go see Coco, so that more animated films with a Mexican theme are made (he had envisioned two more films).
A female character who, despite being the “prize” being fought over by the two male characters, is able to kick ass just as hard as the men do (implausibly but amusingly). So points for that.
Okay, I’m gonna make this my last defense :). My kids have seen it multiple times, the oldest in the theater with my wife, and both of them at various sleepovers. My wife and I often alternate taking the kids to the movies. My younger daughter has an alarm clock that plays thirty seconds of “Let it Go,” and boy howdy do I know those thirty seconds well. THEY ARE NOT FROZEN DEPRIVED.
Okay; with that, I’m taking Elsa’s advice.
It always bugged me that whoever coached the kids in The Partridge Family got Danny Bonaduce to look so convincing playing the bass, and both Chrises look really good playing the drums, but could not get Tracy to look like she was really playing the tambourine.
Yeah, yeah. That’s not what I meant. I meant an* Old Yeller* kind of demise. Any time an animal is featured prominently at the beginning of a film, it seems to have to die, like a gun that has to be fired. I hate that.
The dog was a spirit guide the whole time.
That dog was a remarkably feat of animation wasn’t it? Its skin and movements seemed alive in a way I don’t think I have quite seen. It’s somewhat ironic that the dog was hairless since hair has been a towering challenge for animation and characters like Sully in Monsters Inc were rightly considered a landmark back in the day.
Best putdown line ever:
“That dog looks like a sausage rolled across a barbershop floor.”
I don’t think so. Even by film/cartoon standards, nothing chokes to death that fast.
I think it just broke its concentration to keep its real-world form. It (and potentially all animals) was a spirit guide all of the way from the beginning.
I believe they even make it clear, somewhere in the dialogue, that the dog was guiding him with supernatural clarity before it ever revealed itself as a spirit guide.
Yeah, that’s what I thought too. I never got the impression the dog died.
Of course he was… he was named Dante, after all.
Count me in for one that believes the dog died.
Ok, one more little knitpick about not the movie itself, but the way a lot of people are describing it as a Latino movie. It’s not a Latino movie. The cast is Latino (not sure about Benjamin Bratt?) but the story is Mexican.
According to Wikipedia, his mother is from Peru.
The mere fact that it could see and interact with the dead on the living side of the bridge, and cross the bridge while still alive, pretty much foot-stomps it.