Toy Story 3

[Gemini Cricket]

100% on rottentomatoes.com (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/toy_story_3/) as of this posting.

Looking forward to reading Alex's review.

I can't wait to see this movie.

[Snowflake]

Ditto Cricket!

[scaeagles]

I never go to movies on opening day, but we've already got our tickets and our plan for tomorrow. Tha'ts how excited we are.

Speaking of Rotten Tomatoes, I've watched all the trailers and promo materials linked to for Toy Story 3. The interview with Ken is hysterical.

ETA: I just went to Rotten Tomatoes and I'm glad I wasn't interested in seeing Jonah Hex. It's running at....uh...0%.

[Chernabog]

From Roger Ebert's Review (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100616/REVIEWS/100619990):

"Day care seems like a happy choice, until a dark underside of its toy society emerges in the person of an ominously hug-prone bear named Lotso (Ned Beatty). They pick up, however, some additions to their little band, including a Ken doll with an extensive wardrobe. If you ask me, Barbie (Jodi Benson) is anorexic, and Ken (Michael Keaton) is gay, but nobody in the movie knows this, so I'm just sayin'."

Hee hee! I loves me some Roger. :)

[innerSpaceman]

I wanna see it so bad. Can someone clone me, please.



PLEASE!

[Kevy Baby]

Can someone clone me, please.No: one is enough (too much according to some people).

[Gemini Cricket]

Could you imagine, your very own pocket-sized iSm? Need someone to give you a hearty laugh? Need someone to bitch someone out? Say hello to my little friend... iSm!
:D

[innerSpaceman]

Oh, I could make a fortune in licensing fees!

[Not Afraid]

(I'm refraining from saying lots of things.) :)

[Gemini Cricket]

Is that an ism in your pocket or are you just glad to see me?

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Could you imagine, your very own pocket-sized iSm? Need someone to give you a hearty laugh? Need someone to bitch someone out? Say hello to my little friend... iSm!
:DAs Joel McHale would say...that's a little gay.

DING!

[Strangler Lewis]

We'll be seeing it. I gather from the reviews that this is yet another fine Pixar movie that had a thoroughly off-putting theatrical trailer.

[Chernabog]

ALL Pixar movies have sh!tty trailers. It's a rule.

[Alex]

I was ambivalent (http://www.mouseplanet.com/9296/Toy_Story_3).

[Moonliner]

I was ambivalent (http://www.mouseplanet.com/9296/Toy_Story_3).

I've been on the fence about seeing Toy Story 3 now or waiting for NetFlix so I read your review.

Now I'm solidly in the "Aww Hell No!" category. I might even cancel my netflix account.

I've got one kid getting ready to head off to college and one more not far behind. I have plans. Plans that don't include keeping/storing 17 years of their accumulated crap. So a sentimental tear inducing movie with an old toy theme is definitely not on the menu.

I'll have to give this one the kiss of death.... I'll suggest that their younger cousins would LOVE to see it and I'll pay for their movie if they'll take them. :evil:

[CoasterMatt]

One of these days I'll see the second Toy Story movie.

[Alex]

So a sentimental tear inducing movie with an old toy theme is definitely not on the menu.

Well, it might work out for you in the end.

WARNING: COMPLETE SPOILER ABOUT HOW THE MOVIE ENDS

SECOND WARNING: SERIOUSLY. IF YOU PLAN TO SEE THE MOVIE DON'T EXPAND THIS SPOILER.

Andy ends up giving all the toys to a young girl in the neighborhood.

And for anybody who won't follow my link above. I was kidding. I'm not ambivalent. I loved the movie.

[Strangler Lewis]

I loved the movie.

You could have said that in a sentence.

I didn't read the whole review, but I did scroll down to the bottom. Slightly off topic, but I continually fail to see how Ratatouille is not dinged for the fact that the lead human is such an unsympathetic sh*t-for-brains.

[Alex]

Because personally I found him to be a sympathetic ****-for-brains.

[scaeagles]

I read your review. Then I had to look up the meaning of ambivalent to make sure I was correct on the meaning. Then I figured I misread your review.

[innerSpaceman]

One of these days I'll see the second Toy Story movie.
Don't bother. It's funny, and it adds a few good characters, but it's a sequel plot through and through with, imo, none of the charm of the original. It was written as a direct-to-video film, and that's exactly how it plays.


I'm in the minority in that opinion, but I thought I'd try and save you two hours.

[scaeagles]

Don't listen to the curmudgeon. Toy Story 2 is outstanding.

[Ghoulish Delight]

I more or less agree with iSm. With the slight caveat that Pixar direct-to-video quality is still leaps and bounds better than most studios' major-motion-picture quality. It's a good movie, maybe even an excellent movie, and worth seeing, but I've never understood why it seems to be more highly regarded than the first (though I've long suspected it comes down to the fact that the humans in it aren't as creepy as they are in the first).

[scaeagles]

"none of the charm of the original" is far different than not agreeing with it being more highly regarded than the first.

[Ghoulish Delight]

You're right. But I agree that it's not a travesty if Matt doesn't see it. It's good, but it didn't add enough to the characters or the story to be a must see.

[innerSpaceman]

I don't mind watching it. But Toy Story is, imo, an outstanding film with tons of heart - and TS2 is a fun romp with poor story construction and very little heart. It plays like a sequel (i.e., no point to the story or arc to the characters), and I think it's well known around here that I don't much care for sequels.

[Kevy Baby]

I agree about sequels: The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi both sucked. Nothing will ever beat Episode 1: The Phantom Menace

:D

[innerSpaceman]

That all being said, I'm very anxious to see Toy Story 3. I hope I find some time this weekend, but that's doubtful.

[Snowflake]

I won't have time this weekend, either. :(

Probably not until after July 5th for me.

[Chernabog]

I don't mind watching it. But Toy Story is, imo, an outstanding film with tons of heart - and TS2 is a fun romp with poor story construction and very little heart. It plays like a sequel (i.e., no point to the story or arc to the characters), and I think it's well known around here that I don't much care for sequels.

What the ... hell? All the stuff about Jesse had no heart? All the adventure of rescuing poor Woody was "poor story construction"?

You are a sad, strange little man. ;)

[Alex]

I expected someone wouldn't like it but with 120+ reviews counted it is still 100% at Rotten Tomatoes (though I do see some tepidly positive in there, such as Ebert).

Toy Story 2 is also 100% though, so that is not a reliable indicator of whether iSm will like it.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

I happen to know someone who won't watch Toy Story 2. Again. Because he saw it once and he loved it so much and it made him so sad that he can't bear to watch it again. But it's lovingly tucked among our-- I mean, this person and his wife's-- DVD collection.

[Gemini Cricket]

Lots-O'-Huggin' Bear Commerical (Circa 1983) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6dZtNYGlLM&feature=player_embedded)

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Damn. I work on viral campaigns for a living and I have never seen a better one.

ETA: Japanese Lots-o-Huggin' (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5ZwkcHCVkE&feature=related)

[scaeagles]

What an outstanding movie. Simply loved it.

[scaeagles]

I am curious....I had heard the movie wasn't 100% on RT anymore so I went and looked at the negative review (only the blurb, not the whole thing). The main point in the blurb was that the movie was too full of product placement and that the movie was not about imagination, it was about consumerism.

I have tried to remember the product placement - any product placement - and I can't. Am I forgetting something? Or the consumerism? I am wondering if anyone here who has seen it might agree with that or if the guy is just trying to be a controvesial moron.

I am ready to go see it again today. :)

[Alex]

I haven't looked at RT yet, but I'm going to make a prediction.

If the negative review is from a well-known critic, I'm going to guess it is Armand White (he also really didn't like Wall-E or Up).

[Ghoulish Delight]

Correct.

[Alex]

Well, to compensate he did give a positive review to the recent Clash of the Titans.

There was an amusing incident when last year when he trashed District 9. He got a lot of crap for that and Roger Ebert stood up for him on his blog saying essentially that it is not a critics responsibility to try and reflect the taste of either the mass audience or the critics. Then the next day he said (essentially) "uh, I read more of his stuff, never mind" and called him a troll.

[innerSpaceman]

The main point in the blurb was that the movie was too full of product placement and that the movie was not about imagination, it was about consumerism.

I have tried to remember the product placement - any product placement - and I can't. Am I forgetting something? Or the consumerism?

Hahaha, sounds like a Gemini Cricket sort of review. :p

[Alex]

Well, to be fair the entire movie is product placement of a sort.

The only reason a third Toy Story was made is because of a desire to sell a lot of toys (and many of those toys are pre-existing products from before the movie). It is just a bonus that Pixar made a great movie to achieve that goal.

[Alex]

And just as a demonstration, to show how predictable White is, here is a blog writing about White panning Toy Story 3 before the review was published:

http://www.blackbookmag.com/article/when-will-armond-white-review-toy-story-3/19763
and here
http://www.movieline.com/2010/06/who-will-write-the-first-bad-toy-story-3-review.php

[scaeagles]

Very interesting. I'm not huge into movies reviews, and had never heard of White. Thanks for the info on the guy.

[flippyshark]

Saw it today and was delighted. Big Baby was incredibly creepy. And the monkey, oh I think that's going to show up in some little one's nightmares. Also, I was amused when I went into the Men's room afterwards to blow my nose, and found half a dozen teary-eyed guys having to do the same. ("When did I turn into a woman," I overheard one of them say.) Why can't "grown up" summer movies manage to be this engaging?

[Gemini Cricket]

I liked Toy Story 3 a lot.
But something prevented me from loving it. I guess I'm still trying to figure out what that something is.
I guess it may have to do with how dark the dark moments in the movie were. (Andy's a jerk at the beginning, toys going to the dump, toys can die (or "break" as the put it), Woody's girlfriend Bo is gone, the prison setting of the daycare center, Lotso's story, Jessie mentioning that asshole Emily for a second made me think that Jessie is still depressed about her and had not moved on like we thought in the 2nd movie, the furnace scene, the freakin' creepy giant baby...)
I felt like there wasn't enough comedy to off-set what was going on. In fact, I thought TS2 was way funnier. Although the whole Spanish-setting thing, the tortilla scene and the clown doll were brilliant little gems in the film.

The "there's no way out of this" moment at the end was amazingly handled. It was so real and so very touching. One of the best moments of any Pixar film. But I'd have to agree with Alex that the film is good but Ratatouille is better. And like he mentioned in his review, I started thinking about what happens to the toys at the landfill. I mean, even chopped up they can still live on, Mr Potato does. I kept thinking of them living a life like the rejected robots did in A.I.... yuck.

I didn't read anything about Lotso before seeing the film but I sort of thought something was up with his character when I recognized Ned Beatty's voice. I thought, hmm why did they cast him in that role. He must be a villain. And he was.

I like that Ken turned good again at the end. And I looooved seeing Totoro in the movie.

And where the first 15 minutes of Up! was amazing and a total tear-jerker, the last 15 minutes of TS3 had me all weepy. So awesome.

[Gemini Cricket]

Link contains spoilers.
Easter Eggs in Toy Story 3 (http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/06/18/toy-story-3-easter-eggs/)

[Bornieo: Fully Loaded]

http://www.cartoonbrew.com/bad-ideas/spotted-at-my-local-target-store.html

heheh

[scaeagles]

That's funny!

[innerSpaceman]

Bwahaha.


Though I don't know why there's a choking hazard if there's small parts. Usually it's the other way around in those kind of situations.

[innerSpaceman]

Loved.That.Movie.


I knew so much about it going in, so I'm surprised how moved I was. But wow! Laughter, crying, suspense, and - um, a bit too adult for kids in one part. Loved it, loved it, LOVED it.

[RStar]

Loved it, too!

The "Day & Night" Pixar short was a little odd, though....

[keith - SuPeR K!]

The "Day & Night" Pixar short was a little odd, though....

I loved "Day & Night!"

[innerSpaceman]

Yeah, I really liked Day & Night. Extremely clever, I thought, and yet a throwback to a way earlier cartoon style. Dug it completely.


Ok, are we spoilering for Toy Story? I don't think so. I'm like the last person on earth to see it, right? Anyway - no tags, so don't read if you haven't seen it.




K - I was crying all through end scene where Andy gives the girl all the toys and then plays with her and them before leaving for college. I had heard the end was a tear jerker, but I just was not expecting this - or my reaction to it. I would have thought I'd think such an ending was aww, how sweet ... but instead I was teared up and cry flowing through the whole thing.


I had also heard the trash conveyor belt scene was a little harrowing. But I was not prepared for how moving it was when the toys all accepted their fate and held hands to go down together. I swear it was ten times as moving as Cameron's Titanic.


Pixar (and their ace vocal talent) consistently pack more character into one of their pixel creation movies than any ten live-action films combined.



Not only that, but this goes into the record books as one of the handful of sequels that gets an A+ rating from miserly me.




Oh, and Mr. Potatohead as a tortilla was hysterical. :D

[scaeagles]

I had also heard the trash conveyor belt scene was a little harrowing. But I was not prepared for how moving it was when the toys all accepted their fate and held hands to go down together. I swear it was ten times as moving as Cameron's Titanic.

That's where I had tears. Wouldn't call it a full out cry, but some definitely went streaming down my face. Considering I didn't find Titanic moving at all, though, I can't make the same comparison.

I think my favorite scene was the Tortilla Head scene. Hilarious.

Day and Night though.....didn't do it for me.

[Alex]

I liked the creativity of "Day and Night" and it was definitely better than "Knight and Day" but it didn't do a whole lot for me.

It has been announced that there will be a Toy Story short shown in front of Cars 2 next year. I know I wasn't looking forward to Toy Story 2 or Toy Story 3 and was proven wildly wrong to doubt Pixar, but I'm also not looking forward to Cars 2. I'm a bit more tolerant of the idea of Monsters, Inc. 2

[innerSpaceman]

Is there going to be a Monsters, Inc. 2???

I'm open to Cars 2, but mostly because I thought Cars was meh. Completely cute, but absolute story-trite and meh. Not bad at all, just didn't do anything special for me. I think it will make a better theme park land than a movie.


So a Toy Story short? Will that be sorta like the Ben and Hurley short on the Lost Blu-Ray set?

[Alex]

Yes the next three Pixar movies now that Newt was taken off the calendar are:

Cars 2
Brave (was The Bear and the Bow)
Monsters, Inc. 2

[Gemini Cricket]

I enjoyed how they incorporated 2D into Night & Day. That was great. But as a whole, the short was just okay. But I love the idea of a short being there in the first place. It's such a cool idea that has been brought back to life, I wish more studios would do that.

I would like to see TS3 again.

And my two cents on Titanic. It wasn't a tear-jerker for me. I was completely meh about the film.

[innerSpaceman]

Tangent Warning
I liked Titanic, but mostly because I am a Titanic freak, and I loved the verisimilitude of the ship and the sets and everything down to the dishes, and the way the sinking happened. It all LOOKED exactly like it would have.

But I had no feeling for fictional characters and their stupid class-barrier romance and their fake deaths.

Conversely, A Night to Remember, an earlier film about the same events, filmed on a barge with a four dollar budget (comparatively speaking), moves me to tears when the Titanic sinks and the stories of real people are involved. Of course, the sinking was directed more like a tear-jerker than an action flick, but I found that much more fitting. Too bad the sensibilities of one couldn't be combined with the art direction of the other. Together, they make one helluva good Titantic film.


Still would not be as good as Toy Story 3.

[Alex]

Yes, a tangent, and I've probably said before, but I found Titanic to be an immensely compelling movie while watching it. But it is one of those things where as soon as it was over I couldn't quite understand why I had been so caught up. But I've only ever seen it the one time so I don't know if I would be so entranced again.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

We're going to see it!!! This weekend!!! YAY!!!!!!!






My expectations are a bit high

[Alex]

Well, since both iSm and I are effusive in our praise it falls to you or GD to take up the curmudgeon role. Make us proud.

[RStar]

Mr. Tortilla Head was histerical!! It was so out of the box that it was almost jarring, and made me stop and think "what were those guys smoking when they came up with that???"

But there was so much fantastic humor, that it balanced the darkness and sadness, and was such a roller coaster of emotion that by the time that the tear-jerking end came along you are an emotional wreck and can't help by cry like a blubbering 3 year old. Masterfully done!

[Strangler Lewis]

Without going so far to say that everyone has lost their minds, I'm going to have to blow it the raspberry. Some of the major problems:

1) the set up was tedious.
2) the villain was a retread from Toy Story 2.
3) the conflict at the daycare center: the problem of the lack of age appropriateness was contrived and uninteresting. Perhaps the plight in which our hero toys found themselves was meant to evoke some of the horrors of the 20th century, but it still needed to stand on its own, and it did not.
4) The moving set up of the characters' demise at the dump--which, frankly, I was expecting--was shat on to throw in another claw joke.
5) At first I thought Bonnie was a poor kid who was stuck at the center where her mom worked. Then it looked like she was quite well off. Why did she deserve all the toys?

Etc.

Yes, there were some good jokes, and a few moving bits, but it didn't add up. For a more moving meditation on the putting away of childish things, I recommend listening to Puff the Magic Dragon a few times and saving the ticket prices.

[Alex]

CP and GD, you're off the hook.

[innerSpaceman]

Yep, he handled that quite well. But the only thing contrived was SL's entire take on the film. I can only surmise that he was on the rag that evening, or the popcorn had glue in it.


Ok, yeah, yeah, entitled to his opinion ... but, well, since apparently 99.99375% of human beings on the planet disagree, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that opinion is simply Dead Wrong.*




* I'm just being facetious: Most people love Toy Story 2, and I pretty much think it's an amusing piece of sequel crap.

[Strangler Lewis]

I could work myself into a lather comparable to my lather about Cars in that Toy Story 3 seems to imply that unless you have the perfect, creative job, your life is unfulfilled. Except that it undercuts that premise in the closing montage by showing all the toys at the daycare center working together to let the little ones play.

The whole bad situation at the daycare center was contrived, forced and unconvincing. It's not like these kids were Sid or anything.

As my dad might have said: El Stinko.

[innerSpaceman]

I'm not sure what you mean by "contrived." It was the entire plot of the movie.

It's like saying that whole search for ancient artifacts crap was contrived in Raiders of the Lost Ark.

The daycare situation is what the movies was ABOUT (plotwise). You may not have liked it, but all screenplays are contrived in this way.

So, if you were trying to construct a paradise-turned-sour, prison-break movie with a cast of TOYS, where exactly would you set it?

[Gemini Cricket]

Speaking of Sid, did anyone notice that he was the garbage man? From what I remember, it was a quick shot. The moral, of course, is that if you're bad as a kid you will become a garbage man.

[Strangler Lewis]

The problem was that the problem was not worth caring about. And the fact that the problem was maintained by characters branded as evil did not make the problem any less trivial.

[innerSpaceman]

oooookay. I don't know how weighty of a situation you were hoping for in a Toy Story movie, insofar as its plot.


Meanwhile, it had the most adult and weighty themes of any film this year - - or this decade, perhaps.



Enough from me. Unless you're just trying to give me a taste of my own medicine, I simply don't grok your point of view.

[Strangler Lewis]

And I should know better not to argue with religious fanatics who come to my door bearing press releases and saying, "Have you heard the good news of the latest Pixar miracle?"

[Alex]

You're certainly free to not like it. Though I will say I simply disagree with your point #2, I'm not sure what you would want with #3, and #5 doesn't make any sense to me as a criticism of the film (though nothing I saw suggested she was well off).

But if you didn't like it, you didn't like it.

[scaeagles]

I could work myself into a lather comparable to my lather about Cars in that Toy Story 3 seems to imply that unless you have the perfect, creative job, your life is unfulfilled.

How so? Not sure I quite understand that. I didn't get that feeling at all. Unless you equate their imprisonment and lack of a choice as a lack of satisfaction in their "work".

Woody clearly placed his loyalty to Andy above being played with on a daily basis (prior to understanding that the Sunnyside was far from how originally portrayed), meaning he chose relationship above what looked like an idyllic life. Buzz was all about loyalty to his companions and sticking together no matter what. It is true that many of the characters wanted that perfect job, but it wasn't an imperfect job, it was torture.

I could spend a long time going through motivations of the characters and various plot points, which would serve no purpose, but I really am curious as to what it was that made you see it that way.

[Gemini Cricket]

I guess I didn't delve too deeply in the whole philosophical aspects of TS3. I was all like, 'Hey, look! Ha ha. A talking pink bear!'
:D

[scaeagles]

I guess I didn't delve too deeply in the whole philosophical aspects of TS3. I was all like, 'Hey, look! Ha ha. A talking pink bear!'
:D

Taking a cartoon at face value is so....so...shallow. I spend a great deal of time analyzing the deeper meaning of Sponge Bob and the Penguins of Madagascar (King Julien has issues, I tell you, and Mort is incredibly complex in his motivations).

[Gemini Cricket]

I'd totally live in a giant pineapple.

[Strangler Lewis]

If they were going to depict the idea of torture, setting up a world in which torture=being played with by unimaginative two-year-olds and not-torture=being played with by imaginative three-year-olds, they did not do a good job in setting up the dramatic conflict. I kept thinking, "suck it up, toys."

That this assignment was eminently suckupable is borne out by the concluding montage in which all the remaining toys share the load of playing with the smaller children.

As to the point about Bonnie, was she truly the only not-Andy who deserved to inherit all the toys? Giving Woody to her might have been a nice moment. Giving her the whole box seemed indulgent.

[innerSpaceman]

I don't think the denoument was designed from Bonnie's point of view. Clearly, a situation was sought where the toys could have their cake and eat it, too - and thus the audience who loves the toys could be happy. It was hammered repeatedly that the toys wanted to stay together, and that they wanted to be played with. Fulfilling both those desires was, I daresay, foremost in the screenwriters' minds - and I doubt a whiff of concern was felt that said result would imply that uppity Bonnie was getting more than her fair share of the finite quantity of loveable toys.

Sheesh, SL - really? I mean, really??

[Alex]

If they were going to depict the idea of torture, setting up a world in which torture=being played with by unimaginative two-year-olds and not-torture=being played with by imaginative three-year-olds, they did not do a good job in setting up the dramatic conflict. I kept thinking, "suck it up, toys."

That this assignment was eminently suckupable is borne out by the concluding montage in which all the remaining toys share the load of playing with the smaller children.

Except it wasn't just that they had to be played with by kids too young it was that they'd only be played with by kids to young and at the same time denied the respit and repair that would allow them to survive it. It wasn't that being stuck in that room meant years of hard play it was that being stuck in that room meant months of being destroyed until you were simply thrown in the trash.

I thought it did a fine job setting up why that was a situation that needed to be escaped, but if it didn't work for you, it didn't work.

[Alex]

As to the point about Bonnie, was she truly the only not-Andy who deserved to inherit all the toys?

Probably not. But how many other not-Andys does Woody know? Andy didn't pick her for donating the toys, Woody did. That's what was on the note, not just "give us away" but "Give us to Bonnie at Address X" (Woody knew the address from earlier when they use Google Maps).

[Ghoulish Delight]

We saw it and we loved it, not just because it was the first time we've been out of the house together alone in 6 months.

I don't have a whole lot more to add to what's already been said. Just loved the emotional notes it hit, with the usual Pixar skill. Definitely liked it more than TS2. Hard to compare it to the original because the original gets so much more credit for being the original. I haven't done the mental work to rank it in the Pixar pantheon.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Yay yay YAY.

This movie met and exceeded even my high expectations. How they do it I'll never know.

Nearly everything was perfect. It was way scary and heartbreaking and that's what made it so moving. Plenty of it will go way over children's heads and more of it would give them nightmares, and I leave it up to each parent to figure out if their kid would enjoy it. Just the idea of losing a toy might cause fits for some, never mind the idea of losing a toy which causes it to become evil!

Speaking of which, I thought they were going to bring up the point that if you're a toy that gets replaced with the exact same toy, that's proof that you were SO loved that the child couldn't live without you.

SL, if you can't feel for a toy that has its head bashed into hard surfaces and limbs torn off as opposed to being played with by gentle hands, then yeah, you're not going to get the film. Sorry.

I love all the old toys. I had so many of them. The Fisher Price phone, the Farmer Says spinner, all the toys in the background of the daycare...I kept gasping and gasping. It does make it hard to watch the film, but so rewarding to keep your eyes wandering.

All the new stuff was great - Lotso's story was just as rich as any of the other characters' prior history, Ken was a great character and not just fluff, etc, and yet the old characters were extremely well done by too. That balance is so important in a sequel.

The Big Baby was so completely disturbing yet had my complete empathy throughout, which was almost mentally exhausting. Baby's major emotional moments, when Lotso rips off the necklace and when the necklace is returned and crushed, were right up there with the imminent death by furnace scene in intensity and tears. Fvck, I'm crying right now just typing this.

It got me pondering the weirdness of baby dolls to begin with. Here is a child as "mommy", quite often loving her baby so much that it becomes damaged and a hideous version of itself as it is loved to death. I know this is the case for all toys but with a baby it's much more bizarre. It is SO weird being a parent.

Speaking of which, Andy's whole college thing and his mom's moment of reaction were also perfectly handled and strong emotional beats. How do you get a parent of a 6 month old to ponder what it will be like to send her child to college? Like that.

Funny how that lame movie reviewer said this was full of product placement - the only new characters in this film were either old toys no longer available, generalized toys, or fictional toys. I do think that the film is an ad in one way - it is a celebration of toys, and as such it's somewhat of a celebration of consumerist childhood, which I do not feel is a bad thing. It's who we are, it's where we're from. Even as such it celebrates the creative side of play with toys, which always could use encouragement. I found myself thinking of Theo's future toys and that I want to remember to encourage such thoughtful play.



Movie was great. All hail Pixar. :cool:

[Cadaverous Pallor]

I went back and read older posts - and GC, really? You really think Andy was being a jerk because he was 17 and didn't want to play with his toys anymore? That Emily from TS2 was an asshole because she went to college and gave her toys away? Where are the toys from your childhood? People grow up and the toys fall away, that's the nature of the world. If you want to demonize anyone for toy mistreatment, it would be children like Sid who destroy toys for fun.

[I Heart Disneyland!]

Personally, I loved TS3. It even made me cry!! Almost everyone I know who has been also said it made them cry.

Of course, I still have MY Chatty Cathy from the mid 1960's! ;) No, seriously, I do! (And, a box of other toys.) Now that I am nearly 50...I have no plan to give them away. My kids can donate them or trash them when I'm dead!

[Gemini Cricket]

You really think Andy was being a jerk because he was 17 and didn't want to play with his toys anymore? That Emily from TS2 was an asshole because she went to college and gave her toys away? Where are the toys from your childhood?

Yes. Yes. And, honestly, I still have a lot of my toys. They're in my attic so to speak. They're in a box in my apt. Some are on display. I have my Snoopy stuffed doll from '81, all my Star Wars action figures, a lot of stuffed animals and a truck load of PVC Donald Ducks and other Disney characters. The ones I threw out were the ones that literally fell apart. ie. My Millenium Falcon got all brittle and yellow from being in the sun from hanging from my ceiling in my assorted places of residences since the movie came out until like the end of the Ralphie days.
:)

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Yes. Yes. And, honestly, I still have a lot of my toys. Ok, I can dig that, but does that really mean that anyone that doesn't is a jerk or an asshole? (I'm beginning to feel that you were using hyperbole, but it did feel serious in the post.)

[innerSpaceman]

I have saved exactly ONE toy from my childhood. It's in a box, and I must look at it once every few years. I never play with it. It must be so damn happy.

But, I guess we all know what a jerk I am already. :iSm:

[Alex]

To confirm the sentiment. Not only do I own not a single toy from my childhood, I don't own a single toy (in the sense of childhood toys) from my adulthood. Unless you count my Wii, which I haven't used in about a year.

[scaeagles]

Yes. Yes. And, honestly, I still have a lot of my toys.

So I guess the question is are you a geek or is everyone callous? :)

[flippyshark]

I guess I'm really evil, because not only did I not keep my childhood toys, but during the late nineties, I replaced a great many of them via eBay in a several-years long fit of nostalgia. Then, throughout the early oughts, I re-sold all but a very few of them.

[Scrooge McSam]

Put me in the "Loved It!" column.

My minor disappointment was the Claw joke. It pulled me out of the story. How did the alien dolls get up there? Where did I lose track of them? Etc. How that all came to pass would make a nice little short for another feature.

Yeah, I was all lumpy throat and misty eyed from the dumpster scene on through the end. Almost lost it at Mom's reaction to Andy's nearly empty room. But the dam-buster for me was when Andy, after introducing Bonnie to all her new toys, noticed Woody in the bottom of the box. I'm always amazed how much these guys can communicate in 2 to 3 seconds of film.

Another winner for Pixar!

[Chernabog]

To confirm the sentiment. Not only do I own not a single toy from my childhood, I don't own a single toy (in the sense of childhood toys) from my adulthood. Unless you count my Wii, which I haven't used in about a year.

You'd better touch that Wiimote once in a blue moon, or one of these days you'll wake up to find they've moved on their own, into places where the sun don't shine, screaming "play with me! play with me!" out of their little speakers..... and that's when things will REALLY start to get wierd. :eek:

My minor disappointment was the Claw joke. It pulled me out of the story.

Yeah, a total deus ex machina, but could you imagine the ending if it DIDN'T show up. It would be like the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark. Stunned silence from the audience. Fade to....... YOU'VE GOT A FRIEND IN ME! YOU'VE GOT A FRIEND IN MEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!

[innerSpaceman]

I suppose it was a deus ex machina in the sense that the Millennium Falcon showing up at the end of Star Wars was. Corny, totally telegraphed in advance, and completely appreciated by a willing audience.


If it wasn't telegraphed to you, I would chalk that up to being caught up in the film - a good thing. But the aliens saw the claw from far off as soon as they arrived at the dump, and ambled off alone to commune with it.

Showing up at the perfect point to save the other toys may have been schmaltzy movie timing, but the bit had the requisite set-up.


Sorry if you missed it, Sam. Go see it again! I know I'm going to (among other things, I wanna spot Sid as a garbage man).

[Scrooge McSam]

If it wasn't telegraphed to you, I would chalk that up to being caught up in the film - a good thing. But the aliens saw the claw from far off as soon as they arrived at the dump, and ambled off alone to commune with it.

A-Ha! I'll definitely see it again, but this time alone. Not with someone who trots off to the bathroom at the most inopportune moment and then expects to be caught up on the story when he returns.

I DO remember hearing their reaction to the claw, but missed them waddling off.

[Ghoulish Delight]

A-Ha! I'll definitely see it again, but this time alone. Not with someone who trots off to the bathroom at the most inopportune moment and then expects to be caught up on the story when he returns.

I DO remember hearing their reaction to the claw, but missed them waddling off.
They waddled off toward it, and then got plowed by the bulldozer.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Yeah, plowed by the bulldozer and instantly forgotten as things ramp up.

I thought the claw rescue was perfect, in that the situation had gotten SO serious and scary and weepy with all the acceptance of imminent death...and then the claw shows up and saves them from nowhere with a lighthearted reference, completely breaking the tension, making audience members laugh not only at the gag but at themselves for getting so emotionally wrought by some toys at a garbage dump....and not in a "gotcha" or demeaning way, either. Just, perfect.

[Chernabog]

making audience members laugh not only at the gag but at themselves for getting so emotionally wrought by some toys at a garbage dump....and not in a "gotcha" or demeaning way, either. Just, perfect.

Still, I wonder if the Raiders of the Lost Ark ending will be a Blu-ray easter egg. :evil:

[flippyshark]

I'm missing something with the Raiders reference here. Was there some other ending?

[Chernabog]

I'm missing something with the Raiders reference here. Was there some other ending?

Oh I'm just picturing the "non-claw" ending:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/toht.jpg

[flippyshark]

Would that be one in which the ark takes everybody, including the two tied to a post? I'd pay extra to see that ending. The lid of the ark thumps down, roll credits.

[Chernabog]

Would that be one in which the ark takes everybody, including the two tied to a post? I'd pay extra to see that ending. The lid of the ark thumps down, roll credits.

That would be interesting too.... Andy and his mom finally exorcize their house of the creepy moving toys after discovering via camera the goings-on of Woody and the gang, so they have to tie themselves to a post in the front yard while the toy-ark takes everybody, which promptly gets sucked into the upstairs closet along with the rest of the house.

Seriously! Moving toys! Creepy!

If your childhood Buzz went all Talky-Tina on you, you'd whip out a blowtorch and go all wrath-of-God on his ass real quick.

[scaeagles]

That's why you will never catch your toys doing this. Think of how creeped out Sid was when the revealed themselves to him.

[flippyshark]

I know somebody (not a kid) who was seriously freaked out by that moment in the first movie.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Oh I'm just picturing the "non-claw" ending:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/toht.jpgYeah, I was thinking that by the point they were holding hands, Woody and the gang should be beginning to have some serious plastic melt issues.

[Strangler Lewis]

Well, heck, I cried, too, at all the emotional moments. I also yawned a great deal and scratched my head into a bald spot at the basic set-up, but differences of opinions make horse races.

I do question the suggestion that nailing the toys from our youth makes for good cinema. It's just another example of "getting the period right," something that Hollywood does very easily in many movies we would not hesitate to pan.

As for childhood toys I think I'm down to my old baseball bat, autographed by Bobby Murcer back when he was still the next Mickey Mantle. Now, well, he's dead. I kept my childhood baseball glove (Ted Sizemore) until it molded in the closet. I think I would still have my childhood baseball cards, except my mother threw them out one year in a cleaning fit. I still haven't forgiven her. I worked hard stealing those.

[Strangler Lewis]

Aaaaand another thing . . . . about the ending. In keeping all the toys together at Bonnie's house, they went for both the less realistic and less emotional ending. Why? Probably to make it easier to make Toy Story 4 if the mood strikes them.

The better and more realistic ending: the toys go to a toy drive, and each poor kid who participates gets a toy. The toys get separated, but to a good and necessary end.

One can imagine the Pixar crowd doing an animated Fiddler on the Roof but changing the ending so that instead of dispersing, the entire village of Anatevka goes to live with Eloise at the Plaza. The better to make Fiddler 2.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

The better and more realistic ending: the toys go to a toy drive, and each poor kid who participates gets a toy. The toys get separated, but to a good and necessary end.

One can imagine the Pixar crowd doing an animated Fiddler on the Roof but changing the ending so that instead of dispersing, the entire village of Anatevka goes to live with Eloise at the Plaza. The better to make Fiddler 2.You got me to laugh with the Fiddler joke but I'm still interested in your grudge against the "toys stay together" concept. Since the very beginning of the series they have harped on the concept of the toys being friends and helping each other through everything. "You've Got a Friend In Me" isn't just Andy and Woody, it's Woody and Buzz, and all the rest. No matter where they ended up, if they had been separated it would have been a sad ending.

I'm intrigued that you think it's "unfair" that Bonnie gets more toys when she already has some. "Andy learns of the plight of toyless children and is moved" doesn't sound like fun to me. Wall-E got bogged down in similar horrifically sad concepts. As I said before, the movie celebrates a certain type of consumerist childhood, one which millions of us grew up in, and we don't have to feel guilty about it.

In case you think I had a few too many toys myself - my first toys were cardboard oatmeal canisters and cereal boxes. My parents were not well off, and I remember those days clearly. Yes, I did end up accumulating quite the pile of plastic over the years, thanks in large part to yard sales and hand-me-downs, (augmented by birthdays and Hanukkah gifts of course) and only years after I was Bonnie's age. I do not begrudge her the toys at all. I'm glad she is living in that lovely house full of fun, even in the face of other children playing with whatever their parents can pull together for them.

[I Heart Disneyland!]

So I guess the question is are you a geek or is everyone callous? :)

Both! ;) :D

[SzczerbiakManiac]

I've been avoiding this thread until I saw TS3 but having just returned from the matinee, I can finally talk about it.

I liked it quite a lot. Going into the film I fully expected to have my heart strings tugged, but even though I thought I was girded against it, I definitely got choked up.

I agree with Strangler Lewis on one count: I also think Lotso is pretty much Stinky Pete in a furry costume.

Do you folks think Big Baby is creepy because of the Uncanny Valley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley) or some other reason?

What happened to Bo Peep? I don't recall her demise in TS2.

I loved Night and Day! I thought it was incredibly imaginative, original, and perfectly hybridized 2D and 3D animation styles.

Lots-O'-Huggin' Bear Commercial (Circa 1983) ("http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6dZtNYGlLM)So that was a real toy?!? I saw that commercial on actual broadcasts twice last month and just thought it was a sly promo for TS3.

[innerSpaceman]

I agree about Lotso being pretty much a Stinky Pete retread, too. But perhaps since I don't recall there being a Stinky backstory, Lotso struck me as different enough once his motivations were made clear.

I don't much care for TS2, so perhaps Stinky Pete did have a backstory ... but Lotso's added some pathos to his character that I don't recall feeling for Stinky Pete.



Ok, if Strangler Lewis wants a sad ending, that's his perogative. But the ending was one of the best movie endings I've ever seen, and I think the world pretty much agrees. For once (and it takes one to know one), I can point at someone else and scream, "CURMUDGEON!"

[Chernabog]

So that was a real toy?!? I saw that commercial on actual broadcasts twice last month and just thought it was a sly promo for TS3.

Lotso is not a real toy, he was made up for TS3. Disney/Pixar did those commercials for viral (as opposed to bacterial) marketing. The japanese one is the best. :)

Oh and they did mention something about Bo Peep getting sold at a yard sale or something.

[Chernabog]

I can point at someone else and scream, "CURMUDGEON!"

Pfffft. I can point at Brad and say "Queen!" but it don't make our conversations in Margo Channing-speak any less queenier ;)

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Do you folks think Big Baby is creepy because of the Uncanny Valley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley) or some other reason?I think Baby is creepy because I find those bedraggled baby dolls creepy IRL. I never really owned one, so maybe that's why. I had my share of loved-to-death toys but they weren't the soft-bodied, hard-limbed, blinky eye babies.

[I Heart Disneyland!]

I think Baby is creepy because I find those bedraggled baby dolls creepy IRL. I never really owned one, so maybe that's why. I had my share of loved-to-death toys but they weren't the soft-bodied, hard-limbed, blinky eye babies.

Same here!! (And, I do lump Chatty Cathy in that category--she too was creepy even though I still have her.) You described my baby doll nightmares in perfect detail! When I was little...my parents had to remove my doll bed out of my bedroom for me to fall asleep. I was scared of them at night! Maybe Pixar has something here! :blush:

[Strangler Lewis]

Ok, if Strangler Lewis wants a sad ending, that's his perogative. But the ending was one of the best movie endings I've ever seen, and I think the world pretty much agrees. For once (and it takes one to know one), I can point at someone else and scream, "CURMUDGEON!"

You've convinced me. Most emotionally satisfying ending since "Cocoon." And, here's the good news. Me, my wife and kids are all becoming Mormons, so we can dwell in heaven as an eternal family. You may wish to do the same.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

There's the weird thing with a cute, lovable toy being a villain.

You can meet Lotso (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjAfwmaHxDU&NR=1&feature=fvwp) and get a pic with him, not to mention that you can buy Lotso (http://www.toysrus.com/product/index.jsp?productId=3916215&CAWELAID=512293472) as a buddy, not a nemesis for Woody. He talks and does a million other things and costs 50 bucks...which sucks since it doesn't really match the Lotso from the film. In any case it makes me wonder what children think of the dynamic of Lotso. Perhaps since Lotso was replaced it's easier to think of the Lotso in your arms as being a good one? I mean, he did actually feed the heroes into a furnace. It's a lot to bounce back from.

Smelling like strawberries probably helps.

[scaeagles]

Well, I think it clear that mass manufactured toys have their own differing personalities. Space Ranger Buzz v. Buzz the Toy v. Spanish Buzz would seem to imply that just because you have a toy that might look the same as another toy doesn't mean they act the same.

Sounds like blatant toyism to me, CP.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Well, I think it clear that mass manufactured toys have their own differing personalities. Space Ranger Buzz v. Buzz the Toy v. Spanish Buzz would seem to imply that just because you have a toy that might look the same as another toy doesn't mean they act the same.

Sounds like blatant toyism to me, CP.I learned a lesson today in open-mindedness. :)