THE INCREDIBLES

[Solscud007]

Is it just me or does Violet look like the ghost from Ring or Grudge? haha that one eye peering thru the hair is creepy!!!!!

[EXO]

Dash's effect is the best I've seen as far as superspeed goes... before this you can always tell that its some film sped up or the actor is slowed down, but with the help of the interactive environment CG, dash looks like he was running at supersonic speed in real time. The water splashes and trees getting hit was convincing.

[chrono]

Simply Incredible.

But seriously, WTF is with the short in the beginning?

You didn't like the intro?

I think every PIXAR movie comes with a intro animation. Right?

pixar animators have waaaaaaaaaaaay to much time on their hands.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigggggggggght..... 4 years is to much time?

The movie is good not because of it's 3D or it's story. It's because they BOTH worked nearly perfectly together. The plot was actually SOLID and thought out, so was the animation(slightly understated textures and vibrant colors) and directing.

[JKeats]

Best movie of the year, hands down. Go watch it, you won't be disappointed. Oh and they played the Star Wars Ep. III teaser before the movie, so it was a win-win.

Elastigirl is awesome.

[Kamui 777]

I can't add anything, but Dash's scene's were the best!! Man, they were exciting and funny.

The capes thing and Mr. Incredible going through all the dead heroes was disturbing for me though.

[UN Spacy]

Elastigirl is awesome.

She was GREAT....and we all know this part wasn't for da kiddies.

[Mercurial Morpheus]

I saw it a couple hours ago, and loved it. The characters work, the plot works, the pacing was neither too fast nor too slow, even the look is right(and I'm not one to intently love the look of something CGI). I've enjoyed all the Pixar films, this, Monster's Inc. and Toy Story II are my favorites of theirs. I've seen some of Shark Tale, and just thought everything didn't mesh. The jokes are easily going to be dated quickly. I skipped Shrek 2 as I didn't like Shrek. This is just a great film, and much better than the director's previous "The Iron Giant"(the ending just ruined that film). Even if Cars sucks(too Chevron-like in the preview), this still would make up for it. The weren't kidding, it really is Incredible.

[Jemstone]

Dash's effect is the best I've seen as far as superspeed goes... before this you can always tell that its some film sped up or the actor is slowed down, but with the help of the interactive environment CG, dash looks like he was running at supersonic speed in real time. The water splashes and trees getting hit was convincing.

I still say they were inconsistent at the end when that explosion should have taken out the windows of the surrounding buildings. Especially if you consider the size of it.

[BoBe-Patt]

I looovveed this movie!!! Dayum that was fun!! Anyway, I was a little disappointed with their intro animation. They haven't done something this before. The other intros in past movies were hella funny. This one was just a cute thing for the kids, and a lesson in life. Bah, screw the kids, they were all sleeping anyway! if not then they were yelling, talking, kick my damn chair!! Arrggh!! I just wanted to yell at these little snot headed brats!! Anyway, the intro was eh. I was surprised that they didn't do an outtakes at the end either. All their other movies had outtakes at the end. I guess they might add those in later just to have us go watch it again! Bastids!! But overall this movie was Incredible!!!

[rocco_77]

That movie was.... AWESOME! It's my favorite Pixar film now for sure. I can't wait to see this one again.

"HEY... NO FORCEFIELDS!"

[JsARCLIGHT]

Pixar strikes again.

I got back from seeing it just now. Awesome sums it up well.

I like the more mature turn that Pixar has taken... I liked Finding Nemo more than their other efforts because it was darker and seemed to me to be more down to earth... even if it was a talking fish movie. Now The Incredibles has replaced Nemo as my favorite Pixar flick. I just hope they continue their trend of smarter and more mature...

... allthough from the preview "Cars" looks a tad kiddie.

... and the "Bounding" short was on crack.

[wolfx]

Incredibles rocks! And.....

Mirage oans j00r behind!

[Radd]

Saw this on Monday, then again on Thursday! Definitely the best film of the year, with Sky Captain as a good runner up. I absolutely adored the movie. Exellent characters, excellent voice acting, excellent animation, excellent plot.

Seeing as how Disney has completely dropped traditional animation and plans to open a CG studio now that Pixar finally really is leaving them, and that there are rumours that Pixar would like to open a tradtional animation studio, I just do not see Disney keeping pace with them in the coming years.

I'd also have to say that The Incredibles is most likely my favourite CG film to date. Shrek was alright. I liked Monsters Inc. quite a bit, even Ice Age was pleasantly suprising, but this movie was just absolutely wonderful in every way. I can't wait until it's out on DVD.

[Briareos]

Great movie!! Now I'm inclined to watch the Iron Giant which I passed over for being one of those dumb kiddie flicks. It's interesting to note that Pixar was once a division under George Lucas which separated and bloomed on it's own. Even though the last two movies out of Lucas were pretty sad, we have much to thank for from the companies he instigated; ILM, THX, Skywalker Sound.

Anyone else wondering if and when Pixar will be sued by Marvel Comics Inc.? Marvel has been pretty sue-happy these past years and if they did sue they would have a reason to since Fantastic Four is coming out soon. What gives them ammunition for legal merit is the powers of Violet. In the Fantastic Four, Sue Storm has the powers of invisibility and force fields. Violet interestingly enough has exactly the same powers which don't exactly go hand in hand. A comidic movie about a family of four with an inivisible woman and someone who stretches can apply to both movies.

[KingNor]

yep incredibles is a great movie.

to any who havn't seen the IRON GIANT: go see it. it is for 2d what incredibles is for 3d.

[Feyd-Rautha]

on that note...i expect BIG things from lucas on III...it better happen georgie!!!

must go see incredibles

Edited November 14, 2004 by Feyd-Rautha

[Mislovrit]

Marvel could sue Pixar as many of the superheros in the movie if not all of them are based on a comicbook superhero. However Pixar can argue that the Incredibles is something of a homage slash parody movie of the genre.

[eugimon]

Marvel could sue Pixar as many of the superheros in the movie if not all of them are based on a comicbook superhero. However Pixar can argue that the Incredibles is something of a homage slash parody movie of the genre.

nah, similar is not enough to sue over, marvel would have to argue that by showing these characters, pixar somehow weakend marvel's brand name, or deliberately tried to confuse consumers into thinking that the incredibles was a marvel product.

ya gotta think, how many "superman" type characters are out there now? archetypes are fair game.

[Lynx7725]

Just saw it today.. sufficiently good to be entertaining, I think I will pick up a home copy.

If Marvel sues Pixar over this, they got way too much money and way too little new creative ideas.

EDIT: Hmm.. having sat down and thought over things, both the CG and the story are not very impressive.. we know the CG can be even more life-like (but deliberately toned down for the story's atmosphere -- correct decision there), and the plot and eventual conclusion are both predictable, nothing too surprising there.

The reason why this movie is good IMO is, one, the CG supports the story, and two, the story focus on character development without getting too angstsy. I particularly like the way Violet grew up over the course of two hours, and the way Mr. and Mrs. Incredible were shown to be a couple.

Favourite moment? Must be Elastigirl's multi-door predicament. That was funny. : Second on the list is probably the way Violet got the whole family off the hook -- understated sacrasm tickles me.

Edited November 14, 2004 by Lynx7725

[Radd]

'Lifelike' at least if you mean 'realistic' does not equal "good" CG.

The Incredibles was very well animated, very fluid and lifelike in that the characters did not seem like puppets with jerky or awkward movements.

The character designs and style of texture mapping worked very well with what they were going for.

That said I cannot understand how anyone could think that the CG in the movie was "not very impressive". It's probably some of Pixar's best work to date, and Pixar does some of the most impressive CG in the industry.

[Lynx7725]

Don't get me wrong. The CG is good.. but shows like Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, the Matrix trilogy, LOTR Trilogy and others demonstrate that technically, we have already reach the stage where we can practically do anything we like in CG. Practically every major movie that has been produced in recent years has about the same level of CG.

The CG in The Incredibles introduced nothing new, but it makes very good use of CG to get the story across, and to me, that's what's important and that's what makes this movie worth watching. The standard is very good -- that is unquestionable.

Where The Incredibles raised the standard is to not use CG to its fullest potential for the sake of tech, but to use a non-SOTA CG to support an excellent story.

[JsARCLIGHT]

Two totally different styles of CG. Yes you can compare a Chevy Tahoe to a Lamborghini Diablo under the guise that they are both passenger vehicles but they are two totally different animals. Pixar's cartoony and surrealistic style is far superior in my eyes to the "more human than human" style of FF: Spirits Within.

Square's ultra-realistic CG creates a strange problem for them like it does all realistic CG: when CG becomes too real people pick up on all the little quirks that are just "not right". For instance, look at the lip synch in FF:Spirits... it's terrible. It's downright horrid. The characters look so emotionless and stale. The more real you push CG the more everyone notices that it is CG. Movies like the Incredibles, being more cartoony in nature, you forget you are watching CG and you just get drawn in to the show. Not once while watching the incredibles did I say "fake!" or "that doesn't look right"... when you make your own style and art from the beginning people can't bash you because it was not "real enough".

In the long run a lot of people like the "realistic" CG but then there are people like me who say "why make it CG in the first place if you are just trying to immitate reality?". I saw Polar Express last night and for what it is worth I'll take the Incredibles over it any day of the week... Polar Express was just... eerie.

[Lynx7725]

JsArclight is touching around the idea. I'm not saying the CG is terrible.. I'm saying the CG was appropriate, even though it's not the highest tech available. It's high time producers think about using CG as a support and not a showcase. Can't have a movie without a story and all that.

If you ask some Pixar techie, they will probably tell you that they can do FF:TSW better than Square can.. and I'll believe them. Have you looked at the credits? They had an incredible amount of people on the animation team for The Incredibles.. heck, they have an entire team devoted to cloth!

They also had renderers named after the company.. that bespoke of serious attention to detail with the talent AND hardware muscle to execute it. I am willing to bet, given the right incentive, Pixar can blow FF:TSW away technically.

So why the "simplified" CG (or style, as JsArclight puts it)? I am willing to bet (again), if you go and talk to the project manager of this movie, it was a conscious design move to not tackle it with an emphasis on technical magnificance (either as a general company policy or specific to this project). Whoever made that decision knew story and character development are more important in capturing the audience in the limited time they have -- something FF:TSW obviously failed to achieve.

The brillance of The Incredibles is that they struck the right balance between story, character development, and technical excellence. That's why it's a must-get for me.

One thing about FF:TSW, you gotta think.. which language are they lip-synching to?

[Max Jenius]

It's high time producers think about using CG as a support and not a showcase. Can't have a movie without a story and all that.

Dude, movies have been doing that for years. There's tons of movies that use CG effects shots and people don't even notice.

[Radd]

The modelling and texturing in the Final Fantasy movie were impressive in their realism, however, despite a few great moments of animation, overall those realistic (though also very bland) models were animated very poorly. It was strange to see an ultra realistic CG modelled character moving around like they walked off the set of a Thunderbirds tv episode.

Anyways, I do not see the ultimate goal of CG to be mimicking reality to the utmost. I understand what you're trying to say, I simply have issues with the connotation of how you say it.

Is the work of an artist that can draw absolute realism, but who cannot draw a good looking cartoon to save his life, any more impressive than someone who can create beautifully imaginative imagery even if that imagery is not all that realistic?

It is a stylistic choice, but what I'm trying to say is that choice is not between "good" realistic art, and sub-par stylized art. They're booth good, and they both can be done impressively or unimpressively. It's simply the style they choose to go with.

It still takes effort to create either, and I think many people don't realize that the amount of effort is not all that different.

As for the lip synching in the FF movie, they were doing it to an english script. The movie was written and made in America, by Americans, for primarily an American release. A Japanese dub followed sometime after.

[JsARCLIGHT]

As for the lip synching in the FF movie, they were doing it to an english script. The movie was written and made in America, by Americans, for primarily an American release. A Japanese dub followed sometime after.

That was not the point I was making... my point was lip synch, not "translation". I've seen far too much CG and know too much about how it was done to let that one slide. The Lip Synch in FF:SW was abysmal. The mouths not only barely moved at all, in many key scenes they did not even match the words being spoken. As Lynx said, the animation team on FF:SW totally bricked it. That is one of the core points where Pixar totally mops up is the range of their models and the skill of their animators. Just look how totally innane that "Bounding" short was but it was built, lit, animated and produced to top of the line standards... while the actual script and content was a tad bizzare it was top flight.

[Jemstone]

Two totally different styles of CG. Yes you can compare a Chevy Tahoe to a Lamborghini Diablo under the guise that they are both passenger vehicles but they are two totally different animals. Pixar's cartoony and surrealistic style is far superior in my eyes to the "more human than human" style of FF: Spirits Within.

Square's ultra-realistic CG creates a strange problem for them like it does all realistic CG: when CG becomes too real people pick up on all the little quirks that are just "not right". For instance, look at the lip synch in FF:Spirits... it's terrible. It's downright horrid. The characters look so emotionless and stale. The more real you push CG the more everyone notices that it is CG. Movies like the Incredibles, being more cartoony in nature, you forget you are watching CG and you just get drawn in to the show. Not once while watching the incredibles did I say "fake!" or "that doesn't look right"... when you make your own style and art from the beginning people can't bash you because it was not "real enough".

In the long run a lot of people like the "realistic" CG but then there are people like me who say "why make it CG in the first place if you are just trying to immitate reality?". I saw Polar Express last night and for what it is worth I'll take the Incredibles over it any day of the week... Polar Express was just... eerie.

I'm quoting this post only because it echoes what mroe than half the animation department (both faculty and students) have argued for years straight now. I also believe "The Polar Express" will bomb for that very reason. Alot of it does come off as "fake" because it's supposed to look very realistic yet wth characters doing unrealistic things.

[JsARCLIGHT]

Polar Express is just... creepy. That is the only way I can express my feelings on that movie. I saw it with my wife last night and... ugh. Both of us agreed in the car ride home that if you change the music and just darken the whole thing down a bit in terms of lighting the movie would pass as a low key horror film. Certain parts went out of their way to be realistic and then the next cut you had waiters stiffly dancing and throwing around sludge-like hot chocolate.

Plus Tom Hanks weirds me out... hearing how he did all those roles in a mocap suit with facial capture just weirds me out even more.

[Radd]

As for the lip synching in the FF movie, they were doing it to an english script. The movie was written and made in America, by Americans, for primarily an American release. A Japanese dub followed sometime after.

That was not the point I was making... my point was lip synch, not "translation". I've seen far too much CG and know too much about how it was done to let that one slide. The Lip Synch in FF:SW was abysmal. The mouths not only barely moved at all, in many key scenes they did not even match the words being spoken. As Lynx said, the animation team on FF:SW totally bricked it. That is one of the core points where Pixar totally mops up is the range of their models and the skill of their animators. Just look how totally innane that "Bounding" short was but it was built, lit, animated and produced to top of the line standards... while the actual script and content was a tad bizzare it was top flight.

Bwah? Um...read my statement again, and the rest of the posts I've made. I'm agreeing with you, and I was the one harshly critisizing the animation in FF.

On the topic of Polar Express, another thing to consider is that the CG might be trying to look realistic...but the animation is very...not good. One might even say it's bad. Wretched is another adjective that comes to mind. I've seen plenty of stop motion animations that had more fluid motion.

You can have realistic characters doing unrealistic things, if by that you mean bounding between buildings like a super hero, flying over a city, pulling off Elasticgirl powers, or running from the police with a broken arm wobbling around behind them, all things that just do not look "right" with a realistic character, but they will work IF they are well animated.

[KingNor]

talk to anyone who DOES CG and Computer Animation. the INCREDIBLES is FAR more technically advanced than Final Fantasy.

Pixar did things with those models that Squares line up couldn't have hoped to do. its EASY to make a human character and walk them around, and square couldn't even do that convincingly.

still not convinced got back to incredibles and just watch the fire. wow. its the first time i've ever seen fire in cg look that good.

[Lynx7725]

Oh yeah, I was impressed with the fire.. I'm not sure if that was CG or real life footage digitally merged in, but it was good. Talking about that, the Ice effects were good too.

Hmm I won't write off Square so fast; I think, if we sat both Pixar and Square down and gave them the same work to be done in the same style, both companies would be able to produce astonishing works.

I think where Square "bricked it" (to quote JsArclight) is that they are not really consistent. Some parts of FF:TSW was good but others weren't Pixar was -- every frame -- and won out.

Actually, I thought the FF:TSW animation was fairly okay. Where it was important, IIRC the animators went to the trouble of putting in body language. Frankly though, the darn show fell flat because it didn't have a decent script or any characters you can relate to.

The Incredibles, because they showed the family as a normal everyday family, built a connection with the audience before the goofy (and fun) stuff started.

Max: Yeah, I know. But when the CG boom hit, too many movies went over-the-top with the special effects, and that really left a sour taste in my mouth. Actually, I was thinking more in terms of fully CG stories..

Hmm come to think of it, Forest Gump used CG extensively right?

At the end of the day, I guess I walked in with the expectation that the CG would be good, and Pixar didn't disappoint. (Same as FF:TSW actually). I was more skeptical about plot and character development, and it's these departments that Pixar/ Disney delivered -- and Square fell on its face, to quote one example.

[JsARCLIGHT]

Sorry about the confusion Radd I misread the meaning behind your post.

While we are all bashing Square I think the obvious should be pointed out: Square went $113 million in the hole on FF:SW and lost the farm... Pixar is still around, booming, and as some might argue the only reason Disney is still around for the moment. I myself find it ironic that Disney is making their own CGI studio to fill the gap of Pixar... talk about just not "getting it". It's that intangible magic that Pixar's things have that Disney used to have... the final media the show is presented on is irrelivant, CG, traditional, etc etc it's the heart behind the show that brings it to life and attracts the viewers. FF:SW had no heart, it was a cold piece of technology... Polar Express is just creepy in this doll eyes and department store dummies sort of way. Both Polar and FF have one thing going for them, the lure of "new tech" but they both lack all the requisite items of a good, attrative and engaging story and characters.

... and now I have nightmares of Tom Hanks playing all the characters in the new CGI remake of Bosom Buddies.

[JsARCLIGHT]

Hmm come to think of it, Forest Gump used CG extensively right?

But when CGI is used in real filmed movies it is used to produce the unproduceable... it's hard to make an army of orcs, two spaceships smash into each other or (in the case of forest gump) phantoms come screaming in and napalm a section of jungle into a blazing mess. In the CG world those are the easy things, the cheap show pony tricks that pay the bills. Just like in real cinema the meat and potatoes, the truly hard stuff is creating an endearing character, a "human" character that audiences can feel for and identify with. Most audiences are a tad spooked by surrealistic "real life" human characters because it is just so hard to capture that certain je ne se quois that real people posess... "real life" CG just comes off creepy nine times out of ten before it appeals to a wide audience.

[Dangard Ace]

Gonna ignore the debate since ....well I feel like ignoring it.

Anyways, just got back from watching the Incredibles and, wow, I haven't had that much fun watching a movie since....wow. It's got character, it's got mad scientist, remote islands, doomsday devices, it's got betrayal, it's got class. In fact it's like one of the old Bond films. I'm talking Connery/Moore Bond. Moonraker, Goldfinger, Live and Let Die. It's ....INCREDIBLE!

and LOVE the one liners. This one had me howling in the aisles.

"You tell me where my supersuit is woman! We're talking about the greater good!"

"Greater good? I AM YOUR WIFE! I'm the greatest good you're ever going to get!"

I can't wait for this and Sky Captain to hit the DVD stands.

[eugimon]

Don't get me wrong. The CG is good.. but shows like Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, the Matrix trilogy, LOTR Trilogy and others demonstrate that technically, we have already reach the stage where we can practically do anything we like in CG. Practically every major movie that has been produced in recent years has about the same level of CG.

The CG in The Incredibles introduced nothing new, but it makes very good use of CG to get the story across, and to me, that's what's important and that's what makes this movie worth watching. The standard is very good -- that is unquestionable.

Where The Incredibles raised the standard is to not use CG to its fullest potential for the sake of tech, but to use a non-SOTA CG to support an excellent story.

yikes...

the CGI in the FF movie, while they might look like humans, did not move like humans... the motion capture stuff sure, but all the animated stuff? pretty hideous, very akward.

Matrix movies? those models had some serious deformation problems around the limbs, especially the shoulder joint.

LOTR, sure, gollum was amazing, but this was a motion captured performance.

the animation in incredibles was very state of the art, the level of fluidity, and integrity of the model's posability was just astonishing.

BTW, the matrix CGI team also did the polar express movie, just look at the difference in the way those characters move and tell me that they do better work than pixar.