Brad Bird Directing Tomorrowland

[Tacit Ronin]

Since quality only correlates to body odor, everything is just rosy.

 

[TheVileOne]

My review:

The most movie was mostly watchable. It has those Bird visual highlights, like the visual gags that he and many animators have perfects. The acting is good..the production design is good.. I'm kinda puzzled why this movie is only PG, when it should've been PG-13..oh well.

But I do have an issue with the ending:

Spoiler

So David Nix gets killed (which is dumb), and the monitor (another dumb thing) gets destroyed right? His philosophy of how to conduct Tomorrowland failed.

What does Frank and Casey do afterwards? They're doing the same damn thing that Nix did, just without the Monitor and only with dreamers now, excluding the majority of the population on Earth.Tomorrowland still ends up being a secret club for a select group of people.

Maybe I missed it, but how does this improve actual Earth and its population? '

If I missed anything, Bird should've made it clear that this Tomorrowland will invest its effort to make Earth into a better place. Maybe by broadcasting Earth's probable future, it'll show that people, no matter what background, can make a difference. You can be a plumber, or a McDonald's employee.

I just don't understand Nix's motivations. They explained it but I just don't buy it. Why not turn off the monitor? Why not turn the monitor's dial to positive? And then only to kill him off? He never learned a damn thing, did he?

It breaks my heart because it's actually a well directed film with a lousy script. It makes me kinda angry. Also, the first two acts went on for way too long. Bird should've condensed it all, and then focused on Tommorland in the second act and third act, not just squeeze actual plot into the (seemingly) third act.

6.5 (pushing a 7)/10

Vaporizing innocent people into dust is not violent enough for PG-13 from MPAA. Go figure.

I pretty much agree with all of these sentiments. The fact is that it is very well directed, it's just such a lazy and bad script. I don't think Bird and co. really thought out all these concepts well enough.

 

[CGHulk]

So did Disney cancel Tron 3 because this movie bombed, did they get cold feet?

 

[TheVileOne]

I would say no, but who knows.

However, Disney has generally not been doing well with more male oriented action adventure fare as of late.

 

[Slick]

Saw it. I thought it was just ok. 7/10

 

[Octoberist]

Vaporizing innocent people into dust is not violent enough for PG-13 from MPAA. Go figure.

I pretty much agree with all of these sentiments. The fact is that it is very well directed, it's just such a lazy and bad script. I don't think Bird and co. really thought out all these concepts well enough.

It felt like it was all build up and then the last 15 minutes was the actual story. Like the two female leads has no idea what's going on, while Clooney knows the plot but isn't reveal anything. The first two acts stretches out for an hour and a half, where nothing really happens. It's maddening.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

And the last 15 minutes is pretty damn dumb, probably the last 30 minutes if I'm being honest.

 

[Octoberist]

Why destroy the machine? Why kill the bad guy? Just to make it into a tentpole?

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I was surprised they killed the bad guy, that seemed like the wrong thing to do in such a film. You think that was studio interference?

 

[Octoberist]

It's so hard to say.

I think it's notes from Disney, and I think it's Lindeloff and Bird not knowing how to end it so it can please them and themselves. Lindeoff had issues with Prometheus too, and I don't think he knows how to handle the Hollywood system. I think he doesn't have the personality to create compromises.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It's so hard to say.

I think it's notes from Disney, and I think it's Lindeloff and Bird not knowing how to end it so it can please them and themselves. Lindeoff had issues with Prometheus too, and I don't think he knows how to handle the Hollywood system. I think he doesn't have the personality to create compromises.

I think you are right about Lindeloff. And no I'm not just trying to blame him, it's Brad Bird's film as well.

 

[Octoberist]

Yeah Bird's to blame too, because the last 30 minutes was just...a mess. And the ending contradicts everything the heroes were fighting against in the first place.

 

[Marvin]

It felt like it was all build up and then the last 15 minutes was the actual story. Like the two female leads has no idea what's going on, while Clooney knows the plot but isn't reveal anything. The first two acts stretches out for an hour and a half, where nothing really happens. It's maddening.

Classic Lindeloff in my experience.

 

[dark_b]

Lindelof's scripts dont alow a director to tell a story.

i dont understand why he wanted a Lindelof story for his second live action movie.

 

[DaddlerTheDalek]

Saw it today... It was nice and I enjoyed it, but I think it's Birds weakest movie yet.

 

[Octoberist]

Classic Lindeloff in my experience.

It's an enjoyable movie but..it's also one of those movies where you go 'wait..a minute' as the credits roll.

 

[Anita18]

It's an enjoyable movie but..it's also one of those movies where you go 'wait..a minute' as the credits roll.

I thought Tomorrowland was meh, and went, "Wait a minute..." BEFORE the credits rolled. My husband HATED it and thought it was garbage. He just didn't like any of the characters, at all. And he found entertaining and redeeming qualities about all of the characters in Fury Road, even the nipple-stroking People Eater.

And just saying, as one of those "gifted optimistic dreamers/makers," and being related to and friends with many such people, Casey and Frank didn't seem like one of "my people" at all. Nothing about Casey's demeanor showed that she was bright in the way that everyone kept telling us she was. (And as if we couldn't be told enough how smart and special she is! ) It felt so fake.

I guess that's why my husband reacted so negatively toward them. (He has a very negative reaction in general to fakeness. The super-obvious product placement for Disneyland, Coke, and Oreos didn't help.) They did feel driven by plot and message, rather than driven by character.

I saw it at an AMPAS screening that also had a short Q&A with Brad Bird and Michael Giacchino (a quick pic I took), and I think that's where they went off the rails. Bird talked about wanting to make an optimistic movie about the future, so they started with the message first. That's not how you're typically supposed to do it, to make a good movie. You're supposed to start with the story. And there simply wasn't much story there, and the story they DID want to tell was packed into one monologue at the end. (Hilarious, given the part in The Incredibles that lampooned bad-guy monologuing...)

Devin Faraci wrote an article about Tomorrowland and its attitude about dystopian entertainment, and I agree wholeheartedly with it. Bird seems to think we enjoy dystopian entertainment because we want to see ourselves fail. Not true at all - we enjoy dystopian entertainment because we want to see ourselves LIVE. And the most powerful survival story is one where we have nothing, and somehow prevail.

And it totally lost me at the end, where they recruit "dreamers" to go back to Tomorrowland. I'm sorry, but hopelessly optimistic people don't just abandon the people they're trying to help. Yes, we SHOULD have spaces where dreamers are free to make things, but IMO, the biggest difference we can make is to give opportunities for people to dream, wherever they are. I feel the most triumphant when I inspire another, not when I take all my dreams and say "F*** y'all cynics!" And no, I didn't see/hear at any point where they wanted to share their wonders with the rest of the world. They only wanted to bring people to Tomorrowland. That was a HUGE part of the movie I just fundamentally disagreed with.

Just one big meh, sad to say.

 

[Anita18]

Giacchino had some interesting things to say about how he scored it, during the Q&A though. Like, he goes with his gut and doesn't think too hard about it. That's why one theme of the score sounded "Arabian." He also described Athena's theme as "relaxing Mexican vacation."

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I thought Tomorrowland was meh, and went, "Wait a minute..." BEFORE the credits rolled. My husband HATED it and thought it was garbage. He just didn't like any of the characters, at all. And he found entertaining and redeeming qualities about all of the characters in Fury Road, even the nipple-stroking People Eater.

And just saying, as one of those "gifted optimistic dreamers/makers," and being related to and friends with many such people, Casey and Frank didn't seem like one of "my people" at all. Nothing about Casey's demeanor showed that she was bright in the way that everyone kept telling us she was. (And as if we couldn't be told enough how smart and special she is! ) It felt so fake.

I guess that's why my husband reacted so negatively toward them. (He has a very negative reaction in general to fakeness. The super-obvious product placement for Disneyland, Coke, and Oreos didn't help.) They did feel driven by plot and message, rather than driven by character.

I saw it at an AMPAS screening that also had a short Q&A with Brad Bird and Michael Giacchino (a quick pic I took), and I think that's where they went off the rails. Bird talked about wanting to make an optimistic movie about the future, so they started with the message first. That's not how you're typically supposed to do it, to make a good movie. You're supposed to start with the story. And there simply wasn't much story there, and the story they DID want to tell was packed into one monologue at the end. (Hilarious, given the part in The Incredibles that lampooned bad-guy monologuing...)

Devin Faraci wrote an article about Tomorrowland and its attitude about dystopian entertainment, and I agree wholeheartedly with it. Bird seems to think we enjoy dystopian entertainment because we want to see ourselves fail. Not true at all - we enjoy dystopian entertainment because we want to see ourselves LIVE. And the most powerful survival story is one where we have nothing, and somehow prevail.

And it totally lost me at the end, where they recruit "dreamers" to go back to Tomorrowland. I'm sorry, but hopelessly optimistic people don't just abandon the people they're trying to help. Yes, we SHOULD have spaces where dreamers are free to make things, but IMO, the biggest difference we can make is to give opportunities for people to dream, wherever they are. I feel the most triumphant when I inspire another, not when I take all my dreams and say "F*** y'all cynics!" And no, I didn't see/hear at any point where they wanted to share their wonders with the rest of the world. They only wanted to bring people to Tomorrowland. That was a HUGE part of the movie I just fundamentally disagreed with.

Just one big meh, sad to say.

Brilliant ****ing post.

 

[Anita18]

Brilliant ****ing post.

Thanks ISS.

I'm also having a bit of fun psychoanalyzing my husband in the kind of entertainment he likes and dislikes, and I think I've finally got it with fakeness. He hates 99.999% of entertainment out there, but what he DOES react positively to, is authenticity. It's just that 99.999% of entertainment is made to just make as much money as possible, and by committee.

He stated the moment with Coke was one of the cringe-worthy moments for him, because of how stupid it was.

 

[Octoberist]

The ending sucks. It still ends up being an exclusive club. I really don't now how this is gonna help out Earth since it's an alternate universe.

 

[Anita18]

The ending sucks. It still ends up being an exclusive club. I really don't now how this is gonna help out Earth since it's an alternate universe.

Seriously.

My former boss at the cancer research lab HATED The Incredibles because he thought it was Randian, and it doesn't hold a candle to how Randian this is. Dude even grew up in Los Alamos, with parents who worked at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. I have parents who both worked at Bell Labs, which is pretty much a mini Tomorrowland. If there's anyone who should be on board this "Tomorrowland should be for dreamers!" train, it should be us, but NOPE. What we want to do is help and inspire people, and what this movie's message is to preach to the choir.

 

[Marvin]

[YT]NSkF56CyYGE[/YT]

looks promising

 

[Snow Queen]

Seriously.

My former boss at the cancer research lab HATED The Incredibles because he thought it was Randian, and it doesn't hold a candle to how Randian this is. Dude even grew up in Los Alamos, with parents who worked at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. I have parents who both worked at Bell Labs, which is pretty much a mini Tomorrowland. If there's anyone who should be on board this "Tomorrowland should be for dreamers!" train, it should be us, but NOPE. What we want to do is help and inspire people, and what this movie's message is to preach to the choir.

He or she is dead to me.

 

[Anita18]

He or she is dead to me.

He has weird interpretations of movies. I mean, I can kiiind of see how The Incredibles is Randian, but they ARE superpowered so that approach kind of makes sense. I did think that interpretation was overreacting, but Bird is definitely showing some Randian tendencies in Tomorrowland. )

Here, it's just "dreamers" but that's the thing - as an optimist, I believe ANYONE can be a dreamer. Anyone can have hope. You just have to inspire them. Locking the dreamers away while telling everyone else is eff off is NOT inspiring!

Ratatouille had the right balance of it, out of all of Bird's movies about "special people." And even then, I'd still argue that anyone CAN cook somewhat if they put their mind to it. But yes, talent can come from anywhere, at any time.