Inside Out

[EricJ]

I'm in the other camp: Wall-E left me cold, I thought Nemo was their least (not "worst") good movie until Cars 2 and Brave reset the goalposts, and thought Toy Story 3 was a thin retread of 2, but this I'd put on my own shelf next to Incredibles and Monsters Inc.
I might agree with the few "meanie" critics who say it's the most downbeat Pixar (where were they when Wall-E came out?), but that may be the reason I like it--It's actually affecting when Joy sees Riley's world start to crumble, literally and figuratively.

[Ben]

(In reply to Rand, before Eric's post:) Yes, exactly. As much as I liked it (and will post when I can), I'm not rushing to see it again. In fact, I know I will never have the same, ahem, emotional reaction to it ever again and kind of don't want to see it for a long while because of that.

No, it wasn't Pixar's most entertaining film, but it was the one that didn't actually simply strive to do that and nothing else. This one made us think (even though, for reasons I won't go into now, was really *really* simply constructed despite the very clever angle on the main character) and was just sooooo adept and confident about itself and what it was doing.

Perhaps more a film to be wowed by rather than just thinking it was "awesome" (which nearly every movie is deemed nowadays even when they're just mediocre), but it was still a work of insanely well crafted genius.

There was *one* little moment that I wish had been in there, but I'll save it for when I can post more...


Eric: "downbeat" but *real*. It's easily the most mature Pixar, which is why the theatre I was in was mostly made up of adults! What a great thing to see: a "kids" film where the biggest audience are all "grown ups". I think smart kids will really get the meaning of the film, and it will help those just becoming teenagers to work out what's going on inside them, while I can see the not so smart kids finding it downbeat or boring (make of that what you will in terms of critic responses!). That's why, while I kind of don't want to see it again, it is perhaps Pixar's most important film: this is education and entertainment for kids *and* adults, not just contained within a film for kids and adults, but breaking out of that to become a life lesson in a way...the impact of Inside Out *outside* the cinemas is perhaps bigger than the film itself.

[Randall]

Yes, that's much like I mentioned in my review. I think this film will be most effective for either the most self-aware teens, or adults that have already gone through growing up. My kids weren't particularly taken with the film, which didn't even surprise me, but they may get much more out of it when they're older.

It's a very mature and "artsy" film masquerading as children's entertainment.

I find the "downbeat" comment interesting, as I didn't have that reaction at all. It just goes to show that our own responses to a film can have as much to do with what we bring to it (either in terms of expectations, or personal history or personality) as the film itself.

[James]

I actually thought it was more entertaining than brilliant, but I do agree it was one of their most mature movies.

But don't get me wrong here. I thought it was a very good film. If I had reviewed it I would have given it a "7", which is the same score I gave Frozen, Big Hero 6, The Lego Movie, and HTTYD2. My point was that unlike many others, I personally wouldn't put it up with Pixar's other top films like Ratatouille, Wall-e, and Up.

But I can totally understand the feelings of those that would rank it up there.

[EricJ]

Eric: "downbeat" but *real*. It's easily the most mature Pixar, which is why the theatre I was in was mostly made up of adults! What a great thing to see: a "kids" film where the biggest audience are all "grown ups". I think smart kids will really get the meaning of the film, and it will help those just becoming teenagers to work out what's going on inside them, while I can see the not so smart kids finding it downbeat or boring (make of that what you will in terms of critic responses!). That's why, while I kind of don't want to see it again, it is perhaps Pixar's most important film: this is education and entertainment for kids *and* adults, not just contained within a film for kids and adults, but breaking out of that to become a life lesson in a way...the impact of Inside Out *outside* the cinemas is perhaps bigger than the film itself.

That was my point earlier, that we've started to get less of kids-as-monsters in Pixar films (except for Good Dinosaur), and more of the idea of "What happened and when did we suddenly grow up?", with TS3's Andy going to college and leaving his toys behind, and Monster U's Mike & Sulley realizing they never lived up to their college dreams.
Whereas the DWA-imitators stay in the sitcom world of trying to stay snarky and immature, Pixar has been hitting adults in their vulnerable spot of wanting to know how much good childhood they left behind and how much they brought with them to pass on to their kids. (Whom they probably took along to the theater with them as an excuse.)
Hence the personal overreactions and sentimental pushes to give Pixar movies every Oscar--Although here not thoroughly unwarranted.

That's the power of having a positive message, and it comes from treating CGI movies as artistic statements and not as marketing commodities or franchise strategies.

There was *one* little moment that I wish had been in there

Yeah, we never did find out what (if anything) was going through the Brazilian helicopter pilot's head, at the end.

[Ben]

No, no...not that...

But I'll give...

The film was packed with really obvious "mindisms" or "brainerisms", if we want to call them that, and perhaps the most obvious one was the Train of Thought.

At that point when - spoilers - the train crashes and is lost over the ravine, Riley is all over the place in terms of her emotions and thoughts...in trying to run away she's literally lost the plot...she has "lost her train of thought". Maybe it was too clear and right in front of the filmmakers, but when the train crumbled up and fell into the darkness below, I was just waiting - and wished that Bing Bong or one of the workmen - had just looked over (as they did do) and said... "Oh, no...(gasp of breath)...we've lost the Train of Thought..."

Okay, maybe obvious as I say, but there were a huge bunch of other ones in there just as obvious, and it would have just made that moment, where Riley really had lost all sense, perfect.



As for Oscar talk...this is the first film since, well, Beauty And The Beast, that I would love to see nominated for Best Picture. Up is wonderful, but it's ultimately a weird picture that switches pace, tone, point and plot a third in, while I don't really know how Toy Story 3 got a look in...it's a fine film, but it does just rehash a lot of the first two films" themes and plot points. Maybe they were honoring that to make up for missing the first two, but it was still an odd one to give that distinction to.

Given the real lack of true classic Picture winners or even nominees in the last few years, I would love to see Inside Out make a historic win...because it *is* the best picture in an awards sense that I have seen for quite some time.

[EricJ]

As for Oscar talk...this is the first film since, well, Beauty And The Beast, that I would love to see nominated for Best Picture. Up is wonderful, but it's ultimately a weird picture that switches pace, tone, point and plot a third in, while I don't really know how Toy Story 3 got a look in...it's a fine film, but it does just rehash a lot of the first two films" themes and plot points. Maybe they were honoring that to make up for missing the first two, but it was still an odd one to give that distinction to.
Given the real lack of true classic Picture winners or even nominees in the last few years, I would love to see Inside Out make a historic win...because it *is* the best picture in an awards sense that I have seen for quite some time.

Up's Oscar nomination was "Okay, we did it, now let's make up for lost time!" attempt to avenge Wall-E the year earlier, but it wasn't...quite five-nomination material. The one excuse everyone used was the early sniffle over the Carl & Ellie montage, but when adult fans only mention one scene from the movie--like Jessie's song in TS2, that started the whole push in the first place--it's really the scene they want to nominate and not the whole thing.
TS3 felt closer, and like it could have won out, but there you had adult fans mentioning the furnace scene and Andy giving away Woody, so we had TWO scenes.

You don't hear any of the adult fans mentioning any specific money-scene from IO (okay, maybe they all gush over Bing Bong at the end), it really seems like it's the whole movie and the basic central concept getting the push.
Although I agree with droosan that if they were to show one out-of-context Best Picture excerpt at the ceremony, it would be the skating dream.

[James]

Ratatouille wuz robbed!



EDIT: For some reason my daughter just brought up Inside Out and the Oscars and I mentioned that we were just talking about that on the forum. I mentioned Ben agreed with her about Inside Out but that I didn't think it was one of Pixar's best. Her jaw dropped and asked why I thought that, and I came up with a better way to make my point.

Pixar has made 15 movies. If there are 5 better than Inside Out that would mean it wasn't even in the top third. I mentioned Ratatouille, Wall-e, Up, The Incredibles, and Finding Nemo... and that was without even adding in a single Toy Story movie which could arguably be added to the list. That's when she understood what I was saying. Inside Out was great by a normal standard. But by Pixar standards it's average. Which says more about Pixar than Inside Out I would argue!

[Ben]

In terms of entertainment possibly...in terms of cinematic and extended greatness, possibly not.

But then I would argue that there are not five better than Inside Out!

Listen, all those films you mention are all great films, but they don't have the prolonged and "out of cinema experience" that IO probably has. I mean, I'm hearing adults who *never go to the movies* talking about it and how it made them think about themselves and their own past experiences.

And I have mini-to-substantial problems with all those films for various reasons except perhaps Ratatouille, previously the most mature of Pixar's films. Easily IO makes Pixar's top five for what it achieves *in addition* to being an entertaining film.

WALL-E? Terrific, but it's a fantasy and one that sticks fairly close to its own rules but somewhat falls apart creatively by having real humans mixed in with CG ones at the end. The Incredibles is incredible, but it's derivative of many aspects and elements from the same superhero genre that it celebrates. Nemo, Up...again, these all feel like the steps the filmmakers needed to "grow up" and get towards what Inside Out becomes.

And let's not really suggest that any of the Toy Stories are anywhere near where IO is emotionally. They're great, warm, cosy capsules of Americana and hit many emotional beats of their own...but they're all very conventional film structure beats.

I guess the thing is that you can look at it as how IO ranks amongst Pixar's films for entertainment and repeat play value (possibly not as high as some which are more of a general good time while not being totally devoid of substance) or how it simply transcends the medium to deliver so much more than your average flick.

And to do so within the confines of the studio system on a big commercial animated film ostensibly aimed at kids and geared to sell toys, dolls, happy meals, broadband packages and all other manners of product (when it is supposedly "product" itself) is nothing short of audacious.

So is Inside Out a more repeatable entertainment than WALL-E or Up? No, perhaps not. I said myself that I'm not in a rush to see it again, much as I am excited about it and what it has done. But is it a film that kind of breaks free of those conventions to become something important in its own right? Absolutely.

[droosan]

Did you ever look at Joy, and wonder what was going on inside her head..?




.. and each one of those 'Mini-Joys' has five more 'Micro-Mini-Joys' inside their heads..!

It's Joys all the way down ..

[Ben]

I did wonder about that, several times during the movie!

Yeah, one of the things that *wasn't* explained was that the emotions had their own emotions. Joy faked Sadness' attitude to guess what she might do, but then felt sadness for real later on. I guess it all starts to get a bit meta after that...but I came up with my own thought on that which works for me...

[EricJ]

Ratatouille wuz robbed!

Although the grownup fans were still just starting the Oscar push back then, too--
Of course, they were just starting small, and writing buzz columns about, "Could an actor be nominated for Best Actor just for a voice performance? Like...let's say...just for argument, totally picking a ready recent example off the top of our heads because it was the first one that sprang to mind, y'know, not committing to anything more than that...sort of, blue-sky, maybe if Patton Oswalt was nominated for Ratatouille? Not that he might, let's understand, y'know, just using that example to ask, theoretically could it ever conceivably happen?"

...Yes, they were that desperate back then. And even then, nobody ever talked about anything but the Anton Ego ending.

[Randall]

I'm certainly of the opinion that IO is Pixar's best film, in terms of filmmaking expertise. I wasn't particularly fond of Finding Nemo, Monsters Inc., or Up (aside from the brilliant prologue), and I fell asleep during Wall-E. Most of their films are great conventional movies, but not necessarily brilliant.

IO transcended the kids movie genre. It's an art film that kids can enjoy. Citizen Kane for families. And I say that with the full appreciation that not everyone enjoys Citizen Kane.

Incidentally, Ben, one thing I liked best about IO was its conscious effort to avoid such on-the-nose comments. It respected the intelligence of the audience, and is one thing that will make the film even more rewarding for grown-up kids when they see it again when they're older.

[Ben]

True...it's just that there were several others in there and I still think would have been the perfect alleviation at that moment.

You fell asleep during WALL-E? I missed that!

Eric...the voiceover thing has even broken free of the animated confines. Not that I ultimately liked the film that much, but Scarlett Johansson was very deserving of a nomination for her voice role in Her. Whoever it was that provided the voice for the computer system should have been considered, but that she brought such a dynamic to it really did hammer home that vocal only performances bring just as much to a movie than those we can hear and see. The same is true, if not truer, in animation, although she didn't even have any visual avatar to help her project her thoughts and feelings in that film. And if she couldn't bring about change with that role I feel it's going to be a long while before we start to see noms for voice acting itself, the same as with mo-cap, where the argument is the same but the problem is that there's basically a whole team of animation artists also contributing to a performance...something that quite rightly confuses matters - and the voters!

[Jpcase]

Glad to see that I'm not the only one who has mixed feelings on this. It was certainly quite good and leagues better than Cars 2, Brave, or your run-of-the-mill DreamWorks/Blue Sky/Illumination fare. But one of Pixar's greatest? Best Picture worthy? I'm afraid that I can't see it.

Honestly, I can't put my finger on the specific reason for why Inside Out left me feeling somewhat underwhelmed. A lot of it probably just had to do with seeing the film at a bad time. July wasn't a great month for me.

Once it was over, I really struggled to make sense of my feelings on it. In what was I suppose, a bit of fitting irony, my own emotions were in quite a bit of disarray at the time. And I know that this kept me from being able to appreciate the film as well as I should have been able to.

So I definitely want to see it again!

All the same, while I'm sure that I'll enjoy the film better on a second viewing, the level of praise that it's been receiving doesn't seem like something that I'll be able to relate to. I'm seeing some of you guys talk about how it's not the most "entertaining" film out there, and by this, I assume that you're referring to the humor, right? Inside Out definitely doesn't have as many big laughs in it as some of Pixar's other films. But this wasn't my main problem.

Again, I'm not really sure what it was specifically. Maybe the "road movie" format felt too conventional; maybe I was hoping for a greater focus on Riley; or maybe, as is often the case with me, I just couldn't get past the underdevelopment of the film's side characters.

Also, the film's main theme was very similar to that of Song of the Sea, which I had just seen earlier this year, and which I thought was a superior film. So maybe that made it seem a little less fresh to me.

I do have to give major props to Pete Docter, for being one of the only animation directors these days it seems, to eschew what has become an almost intolerable cliche. It's gotten to the point, where I would have felt comfortable betting hard money on a certain climactic twist regarding Bing-Bong's character (actually two now that I think of it). So I was very pleasantly surprised when neither of those plot turns came to pass.