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
What’s wrong with that? That scene’s practically a Voight-Kampff test. 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 and I’m proud to say, I’m a big, hairy 47-year-old man with tears in my eyes
One word:
Yes.
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.
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.”
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.
The cherry-picking I’m referring to is the comparison of similar features of the two robots, while ignoring the differences.
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.
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.
I haven’t made the argument that they were unaware, so I’m not going to dispute that.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
Well, to be fair, C-3PO was a bit of a ripoff from Metropolis.
I think it’s actually quite an interesting demonstration of the power of perception. J5 is a humanoid robot.
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.
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.
My God, what a bunch of geeks you are. I say that with much love in my heart; it’s one of the reasons for the awesomeness of the Dope. 
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 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.
Well, it’s got a 98% at RT and a 93% at Metacritic (which puts it in the #1 spot for the year)
