Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pixar in a Box: the art of storytelling

khanacademy.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 89 posts

Re: Pixar in a Box: the art of storytelling

#61

Post by jerome-jh »

willismichael wrote: post #56
jerome-jh wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Limiting my complain to recent Pixar movies: I think Coco, Soul and Inside Out are fairly obvious and not multi-layer. Definitely they talk of "difficult" subjects to kids: death, depression, regrets about ones life. They are not much fun either and the story is rather weak: often predictable, déjà-vu moments (Soul and Inside Out are strangely very similarly built with a meta-world in both), repetitive loop of slow a…

Frozen? Elsa makes absolutely no proactive decisions for the entire movie. She is completely reactive.

Well that's a valid analysis: she's afraid of her power, both real and magical.

A quite strange Japanese anime I recently watched with my kids was "Ginga-tetsudô no yoru" (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089206/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1). I warn you: it is really slow and dreamlike, and is about death. One daughter slept during the movie while the younger one watched till the end. The morning after we were discussing about the movie during breakfast. I love that! Never happened with a Pixar movie: they are just too obvious. The analysis is made for you. And for the more recent ones they are not even fun. Of course they are beautiful and polished but too slick for me.

Re: Pixar in a Box: the art of storytelling

#62

Post by vlunkr »

klmadfejno wrote: post #26
kinghtown wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel that Pixar’s mastery of storytelling is overrated. Coco was lovely but I find their movies to be needlessly sad and curiously episodic in form. In “UP”, each sequence was very well crafted but they fit together randomly as though each scene was brainstormed by a group. They lack a singular vision in their films, there are no auteurs at Pixar: just art by committee. This isn’t to say that their stories are bad,…

Hmm, no I disagree strongly. I quite like Pixar's stories. In particular I appreciate how differently they come off to adults vs. children in ways that feel meaningful to both. As a kid, I completely missed what were obviously concerns of Mr. Incredible's infidelity. In the emotions one, kids see the obvious narrative that the emotions control the child, whereas adults are likely to see the emotions as a metaphor for…

This is how I've felt about Disney and Pixar for a long time. As a kid, I liked them for action, adventure and comedy. But as an adult I like them for the animation, storytelling, and good emotional/moral lessons on top of everything else. As a parent who sees lots of content for kids, it's not easy to find things that legitimately appeal to multiple age groups like that.

Re: Pixar in a Box: the art of storytelling

#63

Post by clairity »

kinghtown wrote: post #14
superbcarrot wrote: post #2

What people don't realise about Pixar is how much iteration goes into their stories - they're very comfortable with taking some idea and working on it from different angles until it's good. And there's a process there that can be taught. I think that's contrary to the way some people imagine storytelling - it's almost never the case that some creative person has a brilliant story come out perfect in the first draft.…

I feel that Pixar’s mastery of storytelling is overrated. Coco was lovely but I find their movies to be needlessly sad and curiously episodic in form. In “UP”, each sequence was very well crafted but they fit together randomly as though each scene was brainstormed by a group. They lack a singular vision in their films, there are no auteurs at Pixar: just art by committee. This isn’t to say that their stories are bad,…

> "I feel that Pixar’s mastery of storytelling is overrated."

me too. the incredibles was pixar's high point of storytelling imho. of the first six films, i liked the toy stories the least. a bug's life, monsters, inc., finding nemo to the incredibles was like a crescendo of animation, reaching a satisfying zenith of art. cars, which came next, was ok (but unoriginal for storytelling, the characters were mostly great!), but then ratatouille through inside out were all groping for relevance while nakedly harvesting their reputation. of the last 8 movies, only coco has been worth watching so far (i haven't seen the good dinosaur or soul yet). so perhaps a quarter of their 23 films have been good enough to watch again for me; contrast that with the studio ghibli collection, nearly all of which are imminently re-watchable (spirited away is an absolute masterpiece).

Re: Pixar in a Box: the art of storytelling

#64

Post by wrongdonf »

I have watched every single video in this series. To be honest, it was a disappointment. There are a few cool videos, but most of it is very surface level. You won’t get any deep or thorough insights into what makes good characters, stories etc. I would suggest you pick up some books on story telling and the rest will do itself, if you are a programmer.

Re: Pixar in a Box: the art of storytelling

#65

Post by whatshisface »

NortySpock wrote: post #48
onion2k wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pixar does this iteration using a technique called "plussing". When you see someone's work you accept it regardless of whether you think it's good . You're encouraged to do what you can to make your colleagues look good. Work is always a starting point for the next iteration. When you do need to be critical of something you should always add something about how to make it better. There's a good video on YT about it -…

Sounds similar to the improv skit mantra of "Yes, and...", where any improvisation ("and then I found the cat on the shelf!") must be accepted and built on. (e.g. "Oh BooBoo, how did you get on the shelf you silly cat?") If an actor instead said "No, the cat wasn't on the shelf, the cat wasn't even in the room" the skit ends awkwardly.

"Yes, and next let's change everything."

Re: Pixar in a Box: the art of storytelling

#66

Post by philips »

wrongdonf wrote: post #64

I have watched every single video in this series. To be honest, it was a disappointment. There are a few cool videos, but most of it is very surface level. You won’t get any deep or thorough insights into what makes good characters, stories etc. I would suggest you pick up some books on story telling and the rest will do itself, if you are a programmer.

any book recommendations?

Re: Pixar in a Box: the art of storytelling

#67

Post by dmitriid »

jerome-jh wrote: post #39
dmitriid wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frozen is as cliched and as boring as possible. Compare it to, say, Coco. Or Zootopia. Or Klaus. Or, if we're talking about relationship with parents, Inside Out.

Truly it has quite a bit of depth and is not predictable from the start. Certainly it appeals more to girls. Pixar movies tend to be rather didactic: "OK we are going to talk about [death|depression|aging|following your passion]" whereas the best kid movies just tell a great myth.

> Truly it has quite a bit of depth and is not predictable from the start.

It... really isn't. There's not much depth or unpredictability. It's the regular Disney hero journey: oh, I'm a misunderstood loner, oh, I've found my own path, oh, I've prevailed. Oh, and comic reliefs.

There are "unexpected" twists as in "wow, these sisters don't need a strong man to save them", and that's as much depth as it gets.

Unlike, say, Coco. Which actually:

- "has harshness". There's an actual murder involved. There's the uncomfortable truth of people losing their memory. People facing death etc. What harshness is there in Frozen that we haven't seen 15000 times before? Most Disney musicals from before 2000 have significantly more harshness than anything Frozen has.

- "complex character relationships". The relationship between Miguel and his relatives, especially grandmother. The ever evolving relationship between Miguel and Hector. In Frozen there's next to zero character development except "suddenly we don't talk, suddenly I'm strong, suddenly we're good, suddenly sister powah".

- "appeals both to adults and children". Coco definitely caters to a more grown up children who understand the concept of getting old, and death. Frozen is for the kindergarteners who will hug an Olaf plushie and sing Letitgo on repeat. The scene where Miguel sings to Mama Coco is such a gut punch to anyone who has relatives with memory loss, Frozen couldn't even approach the depth of it in the wildest dreams.

The same goes for all other movies in my list. Frozen is a flashy loud entertainment for kindergarteners. It's definitely not "the only American animated movie that's worth saving in the last 10 years".

> whereas the best kid movies just tell a great myth.

And Frozen fails to tell that myth. It's flashy, loud, with memorable songs. And the first quality animated musical in a long while. That's why it is memorable. But "the only animated movie in the past 10 years that deserves to be preserved"? Hahaha, no.

Re: Pixar in a Box: the art of storytelling

#68

Post by jimbob45 »

wegs wrote: post #11
jerome-jh wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK edited :) To summarize my mind, I think the only american animated movie that's worth saving in the last 10 years is Disney's Frozen. It has some harshness, complex character relationships and appeals both to adults and children.

Frozen teaches kids all the wrong lessons. Shirk your responsibilities. Ignore your community. Focus on yourself. "Let it Go" is like an ode to everything I dislike about American culture. It's so very American. Best animated movie I've seen in the past decade was probably Moana, but I can't say I've seen many.

I’m fairly sure they created “Let it go” before they really knew what the story would be about.

They knew it was a snowy movie, knew they wanted something to rhyme with the traditional “Let it snow”, and vaguely had the idea that an angsty girl would be singing the song. As a result, the lyrics are incredibly generic and hardly seem to fit her specific situation.

Re: Pixar in a Box: the art of storytelling

#69

Post by dragonwriter »

wegs wrote: post #11
jerome-jh wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK edited :) To summarize my mind, I think the only american animated movie that's worth saving in the last 10 years is Disney's Frozen. It has some harshness, complex character relationships and appeals both to adults and children.

Frozen teaches kids all the wrong lessons. Shirk your responsibilities. Ignore your community. Focus on yourself. "Let it Go" is like an ode to everything I dislike about American culture. It's so very American. Best animated movie I've seen in the past decade was probably Moana, but I can't say I've seen many.

> Frozen teaches kids all the wrong lessons. Shirk your responsibilities. Ignore your community. Focus on yourself.

Reading Frozen as teaching that is like reading Veerhoeven’s Starship Troopers (which, sure, is abysmal on all sorts of other grounds) as an endorsement of Fascism.

Yea, those things occur in the movie, but the movie is quite specifically about it producing bad outcomes that must be dealt with by people doing exactly the opposite.

Re: Pixar in a Box: the art of storytelling

#70

Post by fbcx »

philips wrote: post #66
wrongdonf wrote: post #64

I have watched every single video in this series. To be honest, it was a disappointment. There are a few cool videos, but most of it is very surface level. You won’t get any deep or thorough insights into what makes good characters, stories etc. I would suggest you pick up some books on story telling and the rest will do itself, if you are a programmer.

any book recommendations?

Story by Robert McKee seems to be the classic. The Story Grid by Shawn Coyne looks promising as well, though I haven't finished it yet.
Post reply on HN