Why "Toy Story 3" Is Level With "Wall-E" and is the best animated movie of all time!

It has been awhile since I posted anything on this blog but here goes. For the year 2010, Summer Movies are always the time to look forward to. It is a "season" of seeing beloved film-makers showcase their masterpiece to audiences world-wide. PIXAR does it year after year again. After a slightly down to Earth "Up", I felt that 2010's "Toy Story 3" may not be a winner since trilogies usually don't fare too well, especially the third of the final three parts. PIXAR has delivered time after time again. They are the most consistent movie studio on the planet. 2010 may just de-throne that.

First of all, "Toy Story" was epic. It was in 1995 that it became the first ever full 3D animated movie to be released in cinemas. The groundbreaking word done was a stepping stone for other movie studious such as Dreamworks Animation and of course PIXAR themselves. This movie was such a success, others wanted to follow up. And they didn't fare too well. PIXAR then released "A Bug's Life". Again, they surpassed all expectations. From toys to bugs, they did it brilliantly. Audiences were believing that PIXAR had that magic touch. And lightning struck twice here. Then it was time for a sequel. "Toy Story 2" was hailed as even better than the first film - - an impossible feat considering how successful "Toy Story" was. PIXAR is now regarded as the movie studio to produce the best 3D animated flicks.

I dare not say this, but here goes - - I wasn't fond of 3D flicks. I never watched them in cinemas. I never really liked them. But PIXAR's magic was something you couldn't turn a deaf ear. After the sequel, it was time to give audiences something fresh in the form of "Monsters, Inc.". Ah... I remember watching it on a 'non-genuine' video disc. It was blurry and the sound was off. But I enjoyed it so much. The thought of watching these flicks in cinemas got to me. Not just yet. It took a further two movies to convince me. "Finding Nemo" and "The Incredibles" were next. "Finding Nemo" was beautiful. I remembered every scene of it. "The Incredibles" is the only PIXAR film I have never watched. Why? Because it was a time when there were other 3D animated movies. I still wasn't in that PIXAR-movie-this-year-must-watch! mode yet. But the reception that "The Incredibles" got was enough to finally make me go to the cinema for the PIXAR film.

"Cars" was PIXAR's 2006 film. After a two-year gap since the last film, it was hailed as "great but not magical". Watching it in the cinema, I thoroughly loved it, but felt it relied too much on having to try on getting the audiences hooked on the 'emotional' side of things. "Cars" tried a lot, it worked and it didn't. Still, it was a huge success.

What happened after "Cars" is something the world won't forget. The world just wasn't ready for it. They had no idea what PIXAR had been cooking up. Pun intended.

"Ratatouille" was PIXAR's greatest at that point. It was utterly beautiful and absolutely crushed every other 3D flick ever made that year and the years before, PIXAR included. It shattered expectations and it blew me away. It made me wonder - - how did they do it. It was a movie that is leaps and bounds ahead of other 3D flicks. It was the first PIXAR film I rated near perfect score.

When "Ratatouille" was released, the teaser for "Wall-E" got me. It felt at that time the next PIXAR movie was something different altogether. I eagerly waited for 2008's PIXAR film. In Malaysia, the movie was released months later to coincide with the school holidays. It was a painful wait. The reviews were all out. They were, how to put, perfect. Not a single score was out of place. I couldn't believe it. Could "Wall-E" actually be better than "Ratatouille". No way. At the Oscars, "Ratatouille" won Best Animated Feature.

Finally watched "Wall-E" when it was released locally. After leaving the cinema, I told myself "This is the best animated movie I have ever seen." Nothing. Else. Mattered. Nothing. Yes, "Toy Story" was epic, and that the films that followed from PIXAR were great but this... this was beyond that.

"Wall-E" took me to a place that was both beautiful and dillipated. Earth was dillipated. Space was beautiful. The humans were fat, and the robots were servants. How could a non-verbal speaking robot convince audiences to fell the emotions and action? "Wall-E"s magic lied in the sounds of the movie. Every beep and blop. Every electronic device. Every sound was the life of the movie. In fact, the first cast credited as 'starring' in the movie was Ben Burtt. That's right - the sound designer. He was the star of the movie. Little did I know that Lee Unkrich was also part of "Wall-E"s direction but was not credited. A bit on this dude later. "Wall-E" won Best Animated feature at the Oscars. TIME magazine hailed "Wall-E" as one of the best movies of the decade. Damn right.

In "2009", PIXAR released "Up". Hailed another 'first' for PIXAR, released in 3D and featured human characters ("The Incredibles" were 'superheroes' and "Wall-E" humans were 'another dimension of humans'). "Up" had the first human characters that were grounded solid as 'real humans' with 'real emotions'. No fakery or magical powers or in-space bloatness. Carl Fredricksen was the main character. It was about an elderly who missed the things he cherished in life so much, and to only find it later in a boy that had somehow mistakenly entered his life. It was a heart-warming story filled with adventure. It was a movie that PIXAR could only do. The movie worked. But because of how ridiculously good "Wall-E" was, I still had that feeling that "Up" was great but never magical. It had the warmth that grew on you, a feeling that is rekindled when you watch the movie knowing that one day you will lose the ones you love. It was a movie that will always be great but not superior. It overwhelmed critics and was so well received, it won the Oscar for Best Animated feature. Third time in a row. Now that's PIXAR for you.

Ah... finally 2010. "Toy Story 3" was released. I shrugged it off. "Yeah, but I don't know how will it be great." Why? Because it is the last part of a trilogy and we all know - - the film makers want it to better than the previous two. OK, here is the thing. The first two, were among the finest. You couldn't put a foot wrong in the first two films. They were too good to be made 'better'. No way. An impossible feat for director "Lee Unkrich".

How could I be wrong? "Toy Story 3"s early reviews were positive. Well, perfectly. I could not believe it. 20 reviews. Perfect. 40 review. Perfect. 100 reviews. Perfect! Oh my goodness. This is all before I watched the movie myself. This is not possible... over a hundred reviews and it was perfect on RottenTomatoes.com. Then I got the chance to watch it myself (in 3D).

I left the theatre and... was completely overwhelmed with emotions. "Toy Story 3" was not only the best animated movie of all time, it was the best movie of the year. It literaly beat every other movie, kids and adults alike, out there, squarely. It was a movie that was unlike anything PIXAR had delivered. It was first of all, familiar. Returning characters and voices. Then it was the last in a trilogy. And it had a story that will make you weep. That's right, weep. Well, maybe not but it will choke you to want to weep. I know I did.

"Toy Story 3" now is the most beloved animated movie ever. PIXAR had done it. After Dreamworks "How to Train Your Dragon", this movie is absolutely better than that and all the rest. I hailed it as the best movie of the year and the best animated movie ever. Yes. It sits pretty with "Wall-E". It is sitting with it. No other animated movie sits with "Wall-E". But this one does. I gave it a splendid 9.5/10. I later agreed wholeheartedly to give a full 10/10 after watching it... a second time. That's right. A first for me. Not only did I watch a PIXAR film, but I watched it twice. Wow.

And now... we look forward to the Oscars. Best Animated feature goes to, "Toy Story 3". Without doubt this will happen. I have nothing to lose to bet for this. PIXAR will win the Oscars again. "Lee Unkrich" is a God. Maybe. But he will be hailed as the director that has done the impossible. It is like climbing Everest barefoot twice in a row. Or rowing a boat with your hands down the Amazon river. Or swimming with sharks with fish taped onto your body. Maybe. But he has done it. Congratulations Lee. I can now safely say, "PIXAR, you are the best animation movie studio in the world." Nothing else can ever touch PIXAR. They are Gods.

Next, in 2011, is another sequel. This time to the great (but not so magical!) "Cars". "Cars 2" will be released in 2011. Then its "Brave" and "Monsters, Inc. 2". The movie "Newt" has been postponed, perhaps to give way to these two movies first, but work has apparently been halted. Don't worry, PIXAR knows best. Even if they scrap it, it matters not. They will give you the magic.... I know this because they gave me magic in 2007, 2008 and 2010.

Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs - - No, Wall-E Remains Top

Sometimes I wonder, what makes a great 3D animated flick? The ingredients are similar to any other type of movie genre - - a damn good story that ends well. No one wants a damn good story that ends in a manner that throws everything good about the story. And well, it is a rare feat for a movie to have a 'bad' story only to end in a manner that makes you re-think everything. Which is good.

Just recently I watched Sony Pictures Animation 'Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs' and boy was it really good. I did not watch it in 3D, after a not so great 3D adventure with "Up" (which I am still dumbfounded by). Cloudy is based on a book of the same title and is definitely one of the pleasant surprises of the year. Watching the trailer - - it felt good. Everything just felt fresh. Perhaps it had to do with the one thing this movie did so damn well - - food! Mouth-watering food aplenty in this flick.

Comparing Cloudy with "Up" may not be a good idea, since they are both remarkable 3D flicks (low at how far we have come in terms of image quality, stunning!). But the one thing Cloudy does so well is the humor and its undying sense of giving it to the audience. It never tires you out, it never really pushes everything forward. Everything is flowing like a chocolate fountain. Yummy.

I love to compare any 3D animated flicks with my all time favorite - "Wall-E" ; the mother of all 3D flicks. It is an astonishing human achievement to make robots feel and then more, giving you a feel from a mere movie that is made of polygons that perhaps even live-action movies can't do. "Up" to me was quite a tiring ride. A worthwhile ride while it lasts. The appeal didn't take it to me to the extends of what "Wall-E" did. "Wall-E" is by far, the best 3D animated movie ever made. Period.

Whatever comes after that, would be a comparison to it. "Up" wasn't as great as "Wall-E", but then again PIXAR delivered the goods. As for Cloudy in the ring with these two, I say Cloudy beats "Up". Yes. It does. At least to me. Kudos to Bill Hader and Anna Faris for doing such a wonderful job voicing the characters of Flint Lockwood and Sam Sparks. Andy Samberg as Baby Brent was equally fantastic. I'd give Cloudy a 9/10 while "Wall-E" remains an untouchable 10/10. "Up" was a 8.5/10. I added 0.5 to "Up" for its Digital-3D experience.

Kanye West. Strikes Again. Again.

I love Kanye West. His style, his music. And he never runs out of ideas for catchy new tunes. What amazes me even more, is his... sudden outburst. Worse, it goes public and well, the next thing the whole world knows about it, and then is made fun on the web. Its fine to 'burst' out in public for a good reason, but to take away someone's moment on-stage, is absolutely ridiculous and downright stupid. And it had to happen to... Taylor. Oh, sweet Taylor :-)

I just keep thinking about what the heck just went through his mind before going on stage. Perhaps he was too excited or he watched 'Single Ladies' music video one too many times and started dancing to it.

Anyhow, it is something that should not have happened. MTV VMA's never is dull. Every year there has to be something memorable and this year didn't fail. Well, one fail did exist and it is (dubbed by me) as...

#kanyefail

Miley Cyrus™ : Manufactured Disney product

The notion that talent comes from within is all a blur. Rules need not apply to everyone. The same goes to Billy Ray Cyrus' daughter Miley Cyrus. I am not a hater like many of those out there, but I genuinely find Disney products quite disturbing, with a following trend.

I believe there has always been 'generations' of Disney products. To put it into perspective, the old-timers (e.g Hilary Duff, Raven Simone, Christy Carlson Romano) are like the forefathers to the newer generation. The newer generation, is less diverse and more all out fun rather than genuine talent on-screen. Its more like picking out the loudest, most extrovert and the best looking people in a line and then trying really hard to get the 5 elements of Disney products out of them.

The 5 elements are (1) singing and dancing, (2) quirky and funny, (3) looks to boot, (4) huge fan base and (5) clean image.

There is nothing wrong with these elements. Except for the fact that is it the disturbing trend used by Disney to make a star out of newcomers. You might say, well, without those how could anyone ever get on Disney? Disney in fact requires those elements in order to get a following (such as the cult TV show, Hannah Montana). The thing is, the rules are quite clear - - you need not have to be genuinely talented. You could be polished to have those elements. Singing and dancing, Miley Cyrus. Can she sing? 'The Climb' remains one of the best songs Miley has done. And that's one. There a few others as well, but since this is what many claims to be her milestone, so be it then. Fine. Miley can sing. Once in a while. Dancing ? I have to admit 'Hoedown Throwdown' was wicked cool, but seriously, she dances when instructed. She is not a dancer. The saying of 'dance like Miley' has no real base whatsoever. Anyone can dance when instructed. Miley has to do it (and do it well) because that is what Disney needs.

Quirky and funny. Hmm... interestingly, without much personality disorder, it is quite common to see most teen stars as quirky and funny. Disney on the other hand, does it so well in picking out the right ones. There isn't a single actor or actress on Disney that isn't quirky or funny. Its all done for the benefit of the show. And that's the problem. Since the manufacturing methods require tossing in pretty much all the ingredients required, at times, even WITH a personality disorder, you HAVE to be quirky and funny. There isn't much choice. Its either your way or Disney's way. Ah... the glory days of 'Lizzie McGuire' and 'Even Stevens'. There is no question you need good looks to be on any TV show especially ones that last quite a while. Miley is glammed up, occasionally she looks amazing and then there are times she looks absolutely normal. Then again, we all are. Disney seem to go the mile to glam up Miley for her fans. Nothing wrong here. About her fanbase, its quite a phenomenon. And I mean the tweens. They can't get enough of Miley. Remember the news about the girl who wrote in to Disney to say that he dad died in the Iraq war and that she wanted tickets to see Miley performing live? They go the distance. And until today parents camp out for their kids to get tickets.

Let's talk clean image. This is one element that is very hard to secure. No matter how well you are around friends, there will always be those lurking around to get some kind of image of you that isn't up to taste. Miley's leaked photos sparked outrage, others saw it as a normal kid having fun. Then there are those who started the whole I hate Miley trend. Squeaky clean image are hard to come by. And the same goes for Miley. Her photoshoot with Vanity Fair was questionable. I really wonder what went through her mind (knowing she is still with Disney) to do that photo shoot. The only real squeaky clean image of a teen/tween sensation as of this moment I can think of is my favourite Taylor Swift. She is miles ahead of anyone trying to be her. Indeed.

What I'm really trying to say is that, most of these Disney stars are packaged for success. For Disney's success. There isn't much dynamic freedom. Sure there is the occasional endorsement of a new fashion line or a new music album, whatever it is, they are bound by the rules of Disney. Break it, and face the music (e.g Vanessa Hudgens who had someone leak her photos). It is all good if people like Miley keep their feet grounded as long as they can until they wish to break away from their Disney image (e.g Zac Efron). Miley Cyrus is not an ideal role model - her dad, Billy Ray Cyrus is definitely the major reason why Miley (and Hannah Montana) is a success. Miley rides on her dad's back and wherever it takes her, it will be a place both Billy and Disney agree on. Its not Miley's own will, rather what seems to be appropriate for maximum benefits of the dollar bill of the TV network.

Now comes news of so-called next Miley. Meet Bridgit Mendler (that's two 'i's in the first name). She is in the show 'JONAS'. Now she is getting her own full TV series. Much like Miley, she is going to be exploited the same way. The show is called 'Good Luck Charlie' and premieres in 2010. Well, I already headlined the news. Let's see how Bridgit performs. And how Disney tries to pull the five elements I mentioned earlier. And then manufacture with Disney as a.... Disney product. This is getting familiar again.