OP
OP
That, my friend, is irony.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
The Incredibles' animation has made me scared to rewatch older Pixar titles
- Thread starter CloseTalker
- Start date
I watched The Incredibles on Sunday and thought it looked pretty rough. I was kinda surprised, but when I think about it, yeah, it's a 2004 CGI movie. Shouldn't be too surprised.
Haven't seen 2 yet, planning to this weekend. Will be interesting going into it with such a fresh comparison.
Haven't seen 2 yet, planning to this weekend. Will be interesting going into it with such a fresh comparison.
You're advocating some sort of middle ground stance while describing responses in this thread as either "blind fear" or "uncritical praise" and then categorizing people who don't want to tarnish their mental image of a movie they like with the slightly crusty reality as "fragile creatures"? Okay. I don't think OP is quaking in their boots and clutching their safety blanket. They are just expressing that they don't want to be disappointed by movies they like when revisiting them.
You also didn't find the post I replied to a teensy smidge condescending? The aesthetics of animation are a huge part of the medium, and they were writing it off as if it didn't matter, and that worrying about such matters was beneath them.
OP
OP
Yeah the movie itself was still amazing, I'm really excited for the second one.
To be clear, the movie wasn't ruined for me, I was just expressing how I was taken out of the experience more than I was prepared to by the aging tech. Some of you are hilariously defensive. Don't worry, I'm not coming for The Incredibles :P
To be clear, the movie wasn't ruined for me, I was just expressing how I was taken out of the experience more than I was prepared to by the aging tech. Some of you are hilariously defensive. Don't worry, I'm not coming for The Incredibles :P
That's true, right now we've hit a level that may be "timeless" as hand drawn animation. But I specifically mean these older films, that just seem to fail the test of time, these days.
Who is being condescending now?
I was pointing out that the fact that the movie was well made and works on a storytelling and entertainment level was more important than having nice textures or holding up to technical advances since its release.
Sure, the movie could look better if redone with modern tech, as Incredibles 2 has shown. But that is not the reason that I have watched the film countless times over the nearly 14 years it has been out. I watch it multiple times because I love the characters and the story because they are done well.
You seem to be taking it personally that others are looking at the movie from a different perspective that does not align with yours.
I don't see the difference between this type of "aging" and any other old film with "bad" special effects. Is Jaws any less relevant because we can tell the shark is rubber?
Like any film of any kind, they're limited by the technology of their time. In no way does that make them bad.
And yes, I also watched The Incredibles right before going to see the new film, and I thought it held up just fine.
Like any film of any kind, they're limited by the technology of their time. In no way does that make them bad.
And yes, I also watched The Incredibles right before going to see the new film, and I thought it held up just fine.
Watched it a few weeks ago after seeing I2. The only shot that really stood out to me was a quick one of Helen washing Jack-Jack in the sink. Wasn't distracting enough that I still watched the movie three times that weekend haha.
Jaws doesn't even appear on screen until 80 minutes in, and even then, mostly in quick glances. Otherwise it features real people; Incredibles is full of rubbery people the entire way through and looks dated as a result.
There's nothing inherently wrong with that at all--I think it almost makes it more interesting in some ways--but I would argue it has aged worse visually (and far faster) than probably almost any pre CGI film.
Honestly I always thought the shark in Jaws looked fine (it helps that we don't see it often).
Looks a lot more convincing than that CGI shark in The Shallows movie.
I didn't find your post insulting or anything, just a bit "tut tut" holier-than-thou in tone. I didn't take it personally that you had a different opinion. Your reply just sounded a bit snarky, so I replied with snark.
The second post that you quoted was a response to another poster whose post was much more condescending than either of ours, while telling me not to be condescending. I took that one more personally, just out of the irony of it all, and some of that might have bled over into describing your original post. Sorry if I came across too harshly toward you, I don't wholly disagree with you. I just don't think criticisms of aesthetics aging poorly should go out the window because the movie is well written and directed.
Animation-wise, yeah it hasn't aged well but it looked pretty cutting edge at the time. I can't wait till the sequel comes out on video for some better comparisons, though even now it's easy to see how much the technology has gotten better.
IMO, it wasn't until Ratatouille where the animation obtained that timeless look where it wouldn't look like crap technical wise years later.
IMO, it wasn't until Ratatouille where the animation obtained that timeless look where it wouldn't look like crap technical wise years later.
OP
OP
Lol there are like six shots of the shark in the entirety of Jaws, that's a terrible analogy. And I never once said The Incredibles is bad.
lmao my avatar is supposed to look shitty. Tekken 1 aged horribly lmao
Toy Story will never be completely dated thanks to the genius of making your lead characters be made of plastic.
There are some anime franchises that will do this between the televised run and the home video release and the results are typically pretty mixed.
The first Incredibles movie was highly stylized, either by choice or as a way of masking/handwaving the technical limitations of the CGI of the time.
But as others have said, I'd be fine watching a 90 minute Playstation 2 cutscene if it had the writing of the 2000-era Pixar films.
As someone who was using Maya in 2004, that's not even close to how bad the preview window looked.
how old is your daughter? i am having my first this winter and have been curious at what age they start watching disney movies
She's two. Honestly I think it varies by kid. We didn't watch any TV or movies till she was two, though I know some people that put on baby Einstein within the first year. She's captivated by it, but I try to limit it as much as possible
The movie isn't great but I rewatched The Good Dinosaur recently and was blown away by how good that film looks in parts.
When Toy Story 4 comes out it will be interesting to compare that to Toy Story!
When Toy Story 4 comes out it will be interesting to compare that to Toy Story!
Also lol.
I watched it a few nights before seeing the sequel opening night, and the extent of me noticing it was a "oh yeah, this is old huh?" in the very beginning of the film. I never thought about it again.
The movie looks fine.
I saw it for essentially the first time the other week and it was distracting throughout the film. Lovely story though, if a little dry.
I could still watch it over and over to this day, but I agree some aspects of it look rough now. Not like the first Ice Age movie bad though.
Same goes for Monsters Inc, A Bug's Life, and Toy Story. Still great films though. I think Finding Nemo is one of the "old" Pixar films that truly stand the test of time.
Same goes for Monsters Inc, A Bug's Life, and Toy Story. Still great films though. I think Finding Nemo is one of the "old" Pixar films that truly stand the test of time.
I might try to fish my Incredibles DVD out of storage this weekend and give it a watch. Been a good decade since I've seen it as well.
Yeah, it's something I noticed a lot while re-watching it last year but it hardly ruined the movie. It's still an amazing film with fantastic characters, great chemistry between the actors, and a lot of heart. Just like all of Pixar's old films (besides Bug's Life, which is just okay-ish).
I saw Incredibles 2 last night and, yeah, it's a huge improvement(visually), obviously.
Wow, can't unsee.
I saw Incredibles 2 last night and, yeah, it's a huge improvement(visually), obviously.
Wow, can't unsee.
i think A Bug's Life looks kinda bad, but i think Finding Nemo and Incredibles to look great, Incredibles accomplishes alot aesthetically to overcome the lack of tech i feel
Incredibles does make Nemo that much more impressive though, the jellyfish scene still looks amazing
Incredibles does make Nemo that much more impressive though, the jellyfish scene still looks amazing
Last edited:
Toy Story looks great. It has the right textures in its movie, perfect characters and iconic visuals. The Incredibles is a great movie, but its visually a little aimless. Yet its Art of book is great, it feels like it was developed as a 2D film. It also has really fun animation, and some truly cartoony character moments that were translated well.
Also, Geri's game (short) look is pretty great I recall. And of course Ratatouille (which also started, being developed by Geri's Game's Jan pinkava).
Cars, right after The Incredibles is another one that feels visually murky to me though, and 2003's Finding nemo looks better than that as well
Also, Geri's game (short) look is pretty great I recall. And of course Ratatouille (which also started, being developed by Geri's Game's Jan pinkava).
Cars, right after The Incredibles is another one that feels visually murky to me though, and 2003's Finding nemo looks better than that as well
The differences are very noticeable in this. The bottom one looks like draft-quality footage, like before lighting is done.Animation-wise, yeah it hasn't aged well but it looked pretty cutting edge at the time. I can't wait till the sequel comes out on video for some better comparisons, though even now it's easy to see how much the technology has gotten better.
IMO, it wasn't until Ratatouille where the animation obtained that timeless look where it wouldn't look like crap technical wise years later.
Lighting and animation has really come a long way.
Here we go, every few posts it gets worse and worse! By page 8 it'll apparently have been rendered on a ZX81!
I don't see the issue, technology progresses and improves constantly. Some of the greatest films of all time are in black and white and have what today would be appalling special/visual effects.
I don't see the issue, technology progresses and improves constantly. Some of the greatest films of all time are in black and white and have what today would be appalling special/visual effects.
This "2D is timeless" nonsense has to stop.
Sure, 2D animation made using mature processes will always look good, but when new technology is being pioneered, the results could look atrocious. Look at Disney's early xerography pictures, or even some of the early uses of CAPS and 3D rendering- it's not as uncanny valley as some pioneering CG is today, but they grew into the technology in much the same way that modern CG animation did.
Sure, 2D animation made using mature processes will always look good, but when new technology is being pioneered, the results could look atrocious. Look at Disney's early xerography pictures, or even some of the early uses of CAPS and 3D rendering- it's not as uncanny valley as some pioneering CG is today, but they grew into the technology in much the same way that modern CG animation did.
Huh, I actually disagree with the OP. I recently watched the movie with my wife as she'd never seen it, and I thought it looked fantastic. Maybe I get too immersed in the plot or something, but I didn't notice any obviously stiff animation or super bad texture or anything.
