I kindly disagree. For a lot of people I know, that movie was so emotional, because it WAS humans. For many, seeing Ellie dying in a hospital bed was like looking back at situations of their sisters, grandmothers, mothers in that situation. It’s much more relatable.
I understand what you mean, but Pixar can make any type of character have family as well. For instance, if the whole movie was about dogs, they could probably do a spin where the dog is dying at the vet. Surely there’ll be a human, but they won’t be so involved.
I agree that movies about animals or machines are often just as good(or arguably better in many cases) than the ones about humans. But like EJE, with Up, it hit me harder because the characters were humans.
I doubt while watching Up one says to his or herself that the movie hit him or her hard because he or she was watching humans.
Well it’s a more natural and instinctive thing, not something you sit there and decide and go ‘hey, I am drawn more to this because I’m a human’. It paints a bigger image in ones mind if they’re of the same species.
I guess, but I still think you could have put any character in that movie and still cry your eyes out.
I can understand as to why people would feel that ABL is the weakest of Pixar films, because the story just hasn’t got the complexity and intelligence of the likes of WALL-E, UP and Ratatouille. But, why should it? It wasn’t made to be a mindscrew for filmgoers to work out and to ogle over how “clever” it is, it was made as a damn good film that the family- no, the Pixarians who sat down and spent endless hours making it- could sit and watch, and admire it’s art and the likeability and humanity of the charactetr, and the metaphors that are simple but effective. So, by no means do I consider ABL to be Pixar’s weakest, although in fairness it was clear that they were still polishing their storytelling skills at that stage; I feel that it was a very well done learning curve for the studio and just a wonderful movie which I got all excited over this morning when I saw it was going to be on the telly on Sunday 
.
definedancing: That was a really good and true post you just posted! 
e-j-e: Aw thankyou! The thought just occured to me that people are too focused on the details, when the little details don’t always make a great film.
The main reason I don’t like A Bug’s Life as much is because it just lacks everything other Pixar movies have (except Cars, I’ll get there in a second)
The story was too predictable, the instant all the characters were layed out I instantly knew where the story was going to go and how it would end. I mean, I knew Flik would get with the princess the instant she was introduced.
Cars was slightly better, that I didn’t predict everything correctly. I knew Mcqueen would lose at the end, but I was surprised that Chick won.
Also, the characters for both were just cliches, and uncreative. I mean, Pixar is the company that makes villains as pink bears, nerds, and a steering wheel, and has characters that, while they may seem simple at first, have deeper meanings inside them, (Like Russel, definetly Carl)
But in ABL, we get really only one main character, and he goes through no development whatsoever. And the rest of the cast? All just characters with one personality.
This is another reason why I hate Mater so much, as one would expect Pixar to make the towtruck character unique, not some dumb redneck. Surprisingly though, they actually went for the cliche
I take your points, but I’m going to respectfully disagree.
For a film with so many characters, I feel that most of the characters in ABL, namely Flik, Atta, Dot and the Circus Troupe, do go through a lot of development, and they do have a story arc. For example, Dot starts off wanting to be older, more grown up, and just like Flik, but over the course of the film, she discovers that it’s all not that great having responsibility, and that she needs to grow up in her own time. Flik himself, he learns that he needs to work with others to make things work, and, whilst his ideas are brilliant, they don’t work to begin with because simply put, theres no “I” in “team”. He comes to realise also that lying through his teeth about his mistakes is a recipe for disaster, but that he can still redeem himself through honesty and commitment, which is something a lot of people need to learn.
I also don’t buy the “one main character”. Yes, Flik is the driving force, and the film is from his POV, but the characters together act as an ensemble cast and they all give something to the film. They are all fundemental to the storyline.
I agree that the story was predictable, but thats not always a bad thing. It makes it easier to follow for one, especially as the film has a younger audience. Personal experiences into account, I absolutley adored this film when I was 5 (and obviously, I still do), and I dragged my folks to the cinema about 3 times to see it, and how easygoing and comprehendable the story is is likely to be one of the reasons I enjoyed it. On the whole though, I take that point.
I didn’t think the characters were cliches. In fact, I would argue that Flik and Hopper are two of the best characters that Pixar have ever come up with. Hopper is by and large the most sinister villian they’ve incorporated, more so than Muntz, Syndrome and Lotso imo. This is highlighted by his lack of backstory and just his general anger and hatred. Flik is awesome because he’s a flawed character, and somebody that the audience can relate to and root for. Both of those characters had brilliant voice actors, which obviously contributes to the performance, but I still feel on a whole that they’re far from cliches.
And, at the end of the day, you have to remember that this film was made at a time when Pixar were still honing their craft. They had to pitch something that was going to work; nowadays, they are in the position, both reputibly and financially, to make a film as ambitious as WALL-E or Ratatouille, but back then, they were still finding their feet. And to create something as brilliant as ABL, that went on ultimately to prove that they weren’t one trick ponies, I take my hats off to Pixar.
I understand, which is why I don’t hate the film, like I do for Cars, (I actually kinda like it), it’s just that I feel that it isn’t as good quality as the rest of Pixar’s films.
The Pixar still developing as a company is a fair point though
Every Pixar movie that comes out is better than the last, however I don’t think Cars 2 will be Toy Story 3, but I don’t think Brave will either.
I’ll tell you one thing, the fact that Pixar is putting “From the makers of Toy Story 3”, it’s definitely catching attention, and therefore making more people see it.
There’s no doubt that Pixar’s storytelling has gotten much better.
If A Bug’s Life came out with a sequel, there’s no doubt in my mind that it’ll do good!
Yep, Pixar are one of those companies who seem to top themselves with each film they release. They improve on what works, and change the things that don’t.
Okay, new list.
- Stuck between Toy Story and Toy Story 2.
- Darker Nature.
- Not attracting attention from the younger audience.
- Violence.
- Sudden New Step in filming.
- Confusion with Antz.
- Possible copycat of Seven Samurai.
^ Think you hit the nail on the head there
thanks!
For some reason, I was never a big fan of this movie myself.
I think it’s one of Pixar’s most forgotten films due to it being sandwitched between the first two Toy Story film.
^ I think that is the case.