Cars...
 

I'm not an animator.

I saw Cars tonight and it was probably the most amazing thing I've seen on screen in the form of animation. I mean, don't get me wrong.. the story was great, but the painstaking detail that was shown in every scene just blew me away

5 stars. Three Thumbs up. Go See it. Now.

Why are you still here? GO!

Re: Cars...
 

I sware Tom I wanted to go! Nobody wanted to go with me! :ahh:

I know, I'm going to see this tomorrow ASAP, I can't wait.

Make sure to check out the VW Bus's bumper stickers for some good ones (including a "save traditional animation" one!)

Re: Cars...
 

Yeah... I work at Mc******'s and we started the Cars toys today. I was staring at the Happy Meal boxes b/c I do pretty much nothing. And anyways... I was amazed by the amount of detail on Steve McQueen's decals on the car. I need to go see it.

Re: Cars...
 

Just saw it. Wow, it's beautiful, and at some parts you have to remember this is all animation! This is what sets Pixar appart from Over The Hedges of the animation world. Beautiful, well done, lots of heart and magic, well worth the price of admission. (stick through to the end, trust me ;) )

Re: Cars...
 

I've yet to see Cars, but probably will go watch it eventually.
Pixar's next animated movie, Ratatouille, has been announced and has a trailer. View it here I'm not an animator either, but both are very visually appealing.

Re: Cars...
 

It's only because Pixar is absolutely amazing.

Toy Story, Incredibles, Nemo, Monsters Inc. Some of my absolute favorites.

I can't waitttttt to go see Cars :D .

Re: Cars...
 

Cars was very good but I consder it the least of the Pixar films. That's more of a testament to the greatness of the other Pixar films than a knock against Cars.

Re: Cars...
 

When it's all said and done, the three most important things in ANY film are the script, the script, and the music. Yes, I said "script" twice on purpose. As my exhibit #1, I give you "Toy Story." If you read the script you will be just as impressed as seeing on the screen. In theater they say "if it's not on the page, it's not on the stage." "Toy Story" is not the best-produced CGI animated movie, but it is the best movie overall because it had an incredibly good story. I'm looking forward to "Cars."

Re: Cars...
 

Just got back, it made me smile.
Jane

Re: Cars...
 

I heard that they actually made "Cars" a few years ago. But then I thought, well yeah, they've probably been rendering it ever since. :D

Re: Cars...
 

Yeah they actually did. I think Fall of 2004 was it's first time, then 2005, and then fianlly 2006. I was looking forward to it, mostly because I am a HUGE (and I mean HUGE) Nascar fan (lol) and they have a good number of Nascar drivers in it. Well, and because I just love cars haha. When they said Summer 2006, I was going insane Lol. This is the best movie of the year... no doubt! Deffinately worth the wait! :)

Re: Cars...
 

The origional time frame was winter 2005, but they pushed it back till last Friday for some reason (I think so Chicken Little didn't have to go against Hitchhiker's Guide and other sci-fi ish movies that summer.) As for rendering, it took on average 17 hours to render each frame of the movie!

Re: Cars...
 

OMG is that Paris shot CG? Stunned

Re: Cars...
 

117 mins x 60 x 29.97 x 17 / 24 = 149 days or about 5 months :ahh: :yikes:

Re: Cars...
 

I saw "cars" and "Over the Hedge" opening day.
As an animator I normally think "I'm doing pretty good, I can make models and animate them in a realistic fashion. I could do an entire film if I really wanted to spend that kind of time on it." But then I go see Pixars film and realize how much of a rookie I am when it comes to animation.

One thing I did notice about Cars. It seems that every Computer animation movie that comes out the company tries to "show off" a technical part of the movie. For example "Over the Hedge" when crazy with extremely good particle effects. So Dreamworks was saying "look how good we can do particle effects." Pixar was trying to show off how well they can do landscapes and computer generated backgrounds. So Pixar was basically saying "ha! It looks so real you probably thought we went out and filmed the rocky mountains."

I'm not dissing anybody here I just think its funny to notice these kinds of things.

Re: Cars...
 

One of my favorite things to do while watching computer animated movies is find errors, like textures that got messed up, meshes with odd holes, odd joints, random eye movement is really fun to do. There was quite a few in the movie Hoodwinked, not to mention the water in the movie when untouched looked great, but when a character went into the water it was terrible.
Haven't seen Cars yet but I plan to soon, yet at $6 a ticket + mad expensive food, and me not having a job, yeah... I'll probably wait until its on dvd.

Re: Cars...
 

unless you are the fortunate ones that have a high definition 62"+ TV screen with surround sound capabilities you should start playing the "I-Love-you-mom-and-dad-oh-so-very-very-much" Game cause this movie you definitely have to see in theaters

Re: Cars...
 

Invite them to go with you, it worked with me. :)

Re: Cars...
 

You want to see this in theaters, trust me. ;)

Re: Cars...
 

hey, yeah. you just hit the nail on the head. It really IS that way. pretty much every 3D movie is a giant showcase for a new feature in programming/animation. Robots had A huge number of reflective surfaces and sparks and odd lighting tricks. Toy Story was one of the first movies to use a translucent shader, with A Bug's Life following it up with Tons of translucents. so yeah, i like to see movies and see all the new goodies they are developing in animation.

Re: Cars...
 

Good catch. "Monsters, Inc." was all about hair.

Re: Cars...
 

I am always impressed by the little jokes Pixar throws in their movies. Seeing a swarm of flying VW bugs made me realize this ;)

Re: Cars...
 

Anyone see the Apple sponsored car? It was aptly numbered 84. :P

Re: Cars...
 

Wait...what?

This is poorly written, so I can't tell if it's wrong or if it doesn't make sense.

Pixar has to date produced nothing for Walt Disney Feature Animation and we'll likely never see something produced in-house by Pixar, but branded as a WDFA production. Pixar is a successful brand name and Disney wouldn't likely abandon that brand in an effort to prop up its own productions. They will, however, try to get some of the folks from Pixar to imbue a bit of their own corporate culture into WDFA and try to revive it to its glory days.

Re: Cars...
 

I saw Cars ... at a drive-in theater in Scranton, PA ... during a road trip ... to see the Pocono 500. Beat that. :cool:

It's hands-down my favorite 3D movie since Nemo. Ray-traced reflections were awesome, especially during the scene where they drive up the mountain path. See it!

Re: Cars...
 

As Madison has written, Pixar was only recently acquired by Disney in January. Here is an article about the acquisition.

Prior to this, Disney served mainly as the distributor for Pixar films, but took in the lion's share of profits. Their original agreement was for Pixar to deliver a specific number of films, to which Disney would hold the rights for all sequels. To date, Toy Story 2 is the only sequel.

The delay of Cars may have been due to technical work, but it also didn't help that an economic struggle was going on between Pixar (Steve Jobs, CEO) and Disney (Michael Eisner, then CEO). Pixar wanted a larger share of future profits, and Disney was unwilling to agree. The canning of Eisner led to a smoothing of relationships between the two companies, which finally ended up in Disney buying Pixar.

Disney would be insane to put their "brand" onto the Pixar movies. Name the 7 Pixar movies released to theaters, and then try to name the last seven Disney animations released to theaters. (Using the internet is CHEATING!)

Re: Cars...
 

An in the "Incredibles" it was all about water....

It's funny how each movie, we all can pick out what they are trying to show off.

Re: Cars...
 

Hmmmm....

I thought Incredibles was more about them finally getting good human characters down.

Re: Cars...
 

Except it's 117 mins x 60 x 24 x 17 / 24 = 119340 days or about 327 years. So, assuming that the article that said it took "3000 supercomputers 17 hours to render each frame" was slightly wrong, and meant to say it took 17 hours on each of the 3000 supercomputers, it took almost 40 days, or a little over a month.

I think you misspelled "Finding Nemo"

Re: Cars...
 

i would disagree. Finding nemo was primarily UNDER water. you only see the surface a few imes, and i thought that was pretty ugly, IMO. when modelling underwater, you don't actually model the water. Yoou just treat it like it was air, and the fish are "flying."

I think FN was all about lighting. I mean, the ENTIRE movie had caustics and shineys all over. the deepsea scene with the glowing angler fish, and nifty little reflection. that's where it's at.

Re: Cars...
 

I thought the humans in the Incredibles looked very "cartoonish" and I was more impressed with the humans in Toy Story 2. Technically I'd say nothing stands out in the Incredibles. Story wise and acting wise it is a very strong movie.

Re: Cars...
 

The plants in the jungle Island. thats all i can think off.

Re: Cars...
 

Honestly the forests in Oblivion are more note worthy than the forests in Incredibles.
Incredibles
Oblivion
Not a film but if your able to run a forest that amazing in a game that is definitely more not worthy than a long rendering film.

Re: Cars...
 

I don't like the oblivion forests. all they are are cylinders with a plethora of 2d leave sprites, impressive fo a game, but nothing compared to the Incredibles' forests.
i might say that the incredibles was showcasing refractions (heat off the lava, the girl's glowy orb things, water) but maybe not. I'm kinda going from memory here. I personaly loved the hair, first human hair i ever saw and thought "wow." another thing could be the human modelling. It's true that they are cartoonish, but the way they are rigged is amazing. the motions are so smooth and natural, mostly. Seriously, How would YOU set up the skeleton for the stretchy girl (helen)? max doesn't have any character rigging functions for stretch, far as I know. The incredibles didn't have one thing that stood out to me, but i think it really took alot to another level.

Re: Cars...
 

I got it! Its particle effects. One of the last scenes when Buddy's plane smashes into the incredibles family's house the smoke from the explosion was amazing. It was until a couple of years latter when dreamworks could replicate it in "Over the hedge." Also the fire scene in the "Incredibles" looked amazing too.

Re: Cars...
 

Well, I finally saw Cars, and I agree it was amazing. If anything, this movie was entirely about reflections. However, some of the scenery stuff was amazing. The only real complaint I had was that a lot of the distant scenery looked too good -- the fact that it was so sharp and detailed made it look really fake. That said, the close up stuff was amazing. The scene when Lightning and Sally go driving through the woods is probably the most photorealistic thing I've seen in a Pixar movie (if you ignore the cartoonish talking cars).

Oh, and John Ratzenberger fans should make sure to stay through the credits!

Re: Cars...
 

Yup. I just saw Over The Hedge last night, and I kept looking for the different particle effects. It was done very well. The hair/fur on the animals was awesome too. Although I still haven't gotten around to seeing Cars yet...

Re: Cars...
 

yeah, Over the hedge was great, the particles and fur was amazing! I could never do that :( . lol. I did see one error though. for like a fraction of a second, one of the characters moved back slightly, and his eyballs lagged behind. I would think that they would have linked the eyes to the skeleton, but I geuss not. I still haven't seen cars yet. I probably will eventually

Re: Cars...
 

You must have the eyes of an eagle with binoculars. I thought the entire movie was flawless.

Re: Cars...
 

Doesn't that count as a theater? Buy a pre-release and watch it at home.

Re: Cars...
 

You shouldn't download movies off the Internet, its unethical. Plus you don't get the cool extra stuff that comes with DVDs that only us geeks would watch :D

Re: Cars...
 

Huzzah, there is a chance I might not be the only one who watches the special features before they watch a rented movie!

Re: Cars...
 

Ive also bought my sister Kingdom hearts for her birthday (shes a junior in college), she and I get along like two peas in a pod. So were hanging out one day she finally beats the game. As were watching the credits, John Williams pops up as the music director and coordinator. Also my sister recognizes a few other famous people who lent their voices to the characters. Here I was expecting to see names like Yoshia Yomishaki, Yoyshia Nominati, or other random Japanese names. How much money did Disney put into the game?

Also the second Kingdom hearts (which I also bought for my sister. $50 :ahh: ) I marvel at how much keying they put into every little cut scene. (I must say better then the last one). Disney yet again dumps hours and millions into making this game. (How did they get the voice for Maleficent? I thought the actor who played here is dead.)

I know this thread is about Cars but since were talking about good computer animation I thought Kingdom Hearts would fit this. The game is almost like watching a Disney movie with all the cut scenes and Disney character jumping around.

(no really my sister plays the game. And I enjoy sitting with her and we talk about stuff.)

Re: Cars...
 

Actually, without my contacts I'm blind as a bat! :ahh:
I just happened to be looking at the right place at the right time :D

Re: Cars...
 

I think that was "Toy Story," actually, but I'm prejudiced. "Toy Story" is the "Citizen Kane," "Casablanca," and "Cocoanuts" of CG animation. (My vote goes to "Beauty and the Beast" for traditional animation.)

I saw "Cars" last night. Oh. My. What a beautiful film. The desert plants were my favorite part. Along with the shiny cars. OK, the desert plants and the reflectivity on the cars were my two favorite parts. And Bonnie Hunt. I love Bonnie Hunt. My three favorite things...

My least favorite thing was the script. Too long, too cliched, and too predictable. I thought it was more "Bug's Life" than "Toy Story." Even though it is a good but not great movie, it is more than worth what I paid to see it in a theater. No television, no matter how large the screen, is going to look as good as it will in your local megaplex.

Go see it now.

Re: Cars...
 

I saw it, finally, and it looked amazing. shineys and heat refraction and OOOOOH the shineys. Too bad the theater only had showings with SUBTITLES! (subs really detract from a movie).

anyway, i gotta say i would've loved to be the dude in charge of the paintjobs for that lowrider. Truly beautiful texturing.

Re: Cars...
 

a bunch of us 237ers went to go see it last night, and i have to say all of you people in this thread that are saying the graphics are bad and that you could do better, you are TOTALLY joking yourself because this must have been the best graphics i've ever seen in an animated movie. the plot was also awsome.