Animation Studios: Pixar

  1. ElCochran90
  2. Edgar

The empire of CGI animation.

1.- Toy Story (1995)
2.- WALL·E (2008)
3.- Finding Nemo (2003)
4.- A Bug's Life (1998)
5.- Ratatouille (2007)
6.- The Incredibles (2004)
7.- Toy Story 2 (1999)
8.- Monsters Inc. (2001)
9.- Cars (2006)
10.- Up (2009)
11.- Toy Story 3 (2010)
12.- Brave (2012)

Page Views
  ElCochran90's Rating My Rating
Toy Story 1995,  G)
Toy Story
"To infinity, and beyond!" TOY STORY (1995) Director: John Lasseter Country: United States of America Genre: Animation / Adventure / Comedy / Fantasy Length: 81 minutes Pixar Animation Studios is one of the most respectable and admirable animation studios I've ever known alongside with Ghibli. Its enormous creativity, style and originality was noticeable since this studio started to make short films, some of them cool and admirable because of their visual aspect, and some others masterful because of all of the elements they had accompanied by a fantastic story. I particularly loved Tin Toy (1988) (which deservedly won an Academy Award for Best Short Film, Animated) and Knick Knack (1989). It may be something really interesting and odd, but I still remember when I was 5 years old (almost 6) and I got to see this on theaters. Although I wasn't fully aware of the fact that this was the first feature film that was computer animated (in fact, I still wasn't able to differentiate between types of animation), I remember that at some point I thought it was REAL, and I still loved it. I have grown up with Pixar since I was 5 and the magic of Toy Story came from the belief that everything was real. The concept itself was (and still is) magical: the toy world colliding with the real world. I was totally blown away. This film is talented from wherever you see it. The effort put in this film for creating a breathing and living world full of people, believable places and very different toys full of life will never be paralleled. The three-dimensional feeling it has was what astonished the world. John Lasseter is a genius. Whereas the first Pixar Animation Studios works focused on showing off their style of animation and amazing graphics, Toy Story literally had the enormous balls to try to make cinema in a whole new way, just like Disney did with its timeless classics. The good news is: it succeeded. The script is outstanding, and very careful with every single detail. The film does not only superbly create an outside world, but also a boy's room full of life, toys, and it is very Disney! The songs are amazing, being "You've Got a Friend" and "I Will Go Sailing No More" my personal favorites, in their respective Spanish versions. The characters, which most of them are actually toys, are perfectly defined characters, all of them being very different from each other. All of them have very distinguishable personalities and physical characteristics and designs. I personally prefer the Mexican dubbing for this film, as I do for almost any animated film ever created. I'm glad that the Mexican dubbing is officially considered as one of the best dubbings worldwide. Honestly I've never heard the Tom Hanks version, and I honestly don't plan to. I listened to it and didn't like it as much as I did with the Mexican one. Of course that the film has some pretty valuable lessons involving friendship, perseverance, self-acceptance and self-esteem. We should value ourselves out of what we are and what we have (emotionally speaking), and not out of what we don't have or what we are not. It is a film which can entertain people from all different ages and sizes, and has something special for each and every one of us. I saw this film 14 years ago for the first time and I still love it the same 14 years later. This film will definitely stand the test of time because of its charm, creativity, extreme originality, amazing dose of comedy and humor, unforgettable characters, astonishing animation and the valuable lessons that can be found throughout. Toy Story received 3 Oscar nominations for Best Music, Original Musical or Comedy Score, Best Music, Original Song (You've Got a Friend) and Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen, which had the help of Andrew Stanton. I even dare to say Toy Story is among the best films Disney ever created, and one of the most memorable. It is not only a timeless cute little masterpiece, but one of the must fun family films as well. A priceless treasure. FUN STUFF: Did you know that this film has several references of past Pixar short projects, such as The Adventures of André and Wally B. (1984), Luxo Jr. (1986), Red's Dream (1987), Tin Toy (1988) and Knick Knack (1989)? Most of them can be found on a bookshelf with some books that have those titles. Can you find the number A-113? 97/100
A Bug's Life 1998,  G)
A Bug's Life
Pixar's take on The Red Harvest and aimed for all ages under the argument: "What would happen if we turned the famous and iconic seven samurai into varied bugs?" Unpredictably, the film is converted into a stupendous fable of moral, loyalty and the power of union. Amazing, and ridiculously underrated.

Toy Story 2 1999,  G)
Toy Story 2
I was one of the few people that actually prefer this sequel over the original, but not anymore. John Lasseter and the whole Pixar crew are back and better than ever. Toy Story 2 has brand new lovable characters, top-notch comedy for all ages, unforgettable moments and dialogues and a whole new adventure. The animation has considerably improved since Toy Story (1995) and Bugs (1998), and the pace of the story is more energetic. When a mad toy collector who ends up being the owner of Al Toy's Barn which appeared in the first film steals Woody from a garage sale, it's up to all of Andy's toys and his new best friend Buzz Lightyear to save him. However, when Woody finds out about the reputation his character has had for generations, he will have to make a very difficult decision with the new friends he has found and an uncertain future that awaits him. The film received an Oscar nomination for Mest Music, Original Song, for the song "When She Loved Me", and I really loved it. It also won a Golden Globe for Best Motion Picture - Comedy/Musical. This film was definitely above my expectations. Disney sequels tend to suck big time, such as Tarzan & Jane (2002), Tarzan II (2005), The Lion King II: Simba's Pride (2002), Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has a Glitch (2005) and many others, which were enormous pieces of crap, and having Disney this kind of reputation with sequels, I went to see this to the theaters and I was blown away and pretty surprised of the fact that I liked it more than the first one. I know that it was the first film the one that introduced the original concept, the characters and some classic gags, but whereas the first film focused on the characters, this film focused on the plot. This sequel has several movie references to classic sci-fi films and earlier Pixar projects. From Metropolis (1927) to 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), from Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980) to the original Toy Story (1995), the film pays homage to several classics within the genre. This film in fact may be the best animated sequel of all time, since sequels used to have lame stories, an awful script, the same characters constructed worse, sometimes unadequate lengths and stupid and uninteresting situations. Toy Story 2 (1999) worked hard for avoiding any kind of the failures mentioned above, conforming an extraordinary final result. The characters we were familiar with are all back, participating in hilarious and extremely fun situations. The Mexican dubbing has still the same cast and did once again an extraordinary work filling the classic characters with life and unique personalities once again, and I'm pretty sure that Tom Hanks did a splendid job once again as well. The film has also some new fantastic songs throughout, besides the classic "You've Got A Friend". I love all of them, and the original musical score is utterly fabulous as well. The film has once again the most effective and adequate length and the perfect dose of drama and humor. I also want to point something out just for fun. This is the second Pixar film that features bloopers. I love those bloopers! Where did they go? They would've been awesome in Finding Nemo (2003) and The Incredibles (2004). They are totally hilarious. All in all, Toy Story 2 is a film above any expectation. Don't let yourself to be fooled just because of the fact that it is a sequel. Pixar has had an extraordinary filmography for more than 20 years and this film is no exception. A masterpiece in modern animation, Toy Story 2 will entertain all types of audiences arond the world, whether you are a cinema lover, a Toy Story fan, a Disney fan or just a guy/girl who watches some films once in a while. FUN STUFF: Did you know that this film references some past Pixar short projects, such as Luxo Jr. (1986), Red's Dream (1987), Tin Toy (1988) and Knick Knack (1989)? Those can be seen on a TV. The film has also a calendar of A Bug's Life (1998) in Andy's room and a game of A Bug's Life (1998) inside Al Toy's Barn. Remember the Eggman moving company in the first film? The truck also appears in this film. Can you find it? Can you also find the number A-113? 83/100
Monsters, Inc. 2001,  G)
Monsters, Inc.
Pixar is back with yet another timeless, unforgettable and unique animated classic masterpiece, aimed for both children and adults. In fact, Shrek (2001), which was released the same year, was the first winner for the inaugural Best Animated Feature Film category of the Academy Awards in 2002. Monsters, Inc. was nominated for such category as well along with Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius (2001). The reason why this last film was nominated is because there was no other animated film that year, so it received that honor. Sen to Chihiro no Kamikakushi (2001) was not nominated until the following year, deservedly winning the Oscar. Monsters, Inc. was nominated for 4 Academy Awards including Best Animated Feature, Best Music, Original Score, Best Sound Editing and Best Music, Original Song for the song "If I Didn't Have You", winning only the last one. In my opinion, it should have also won for Best Animated Feature since it was better and more clever and creative than Shrek (2001), which mainly relied in crude humor and endless classic fairy tales spoofs. This is the fourth entry in the Pixar filmography after Toy Story (1995), A Bug's Life (1998) and Toy Story 2 (1999). Monsters, Inc. has an improved animation and a monstrous creativity throughout. The story takes place in Monstropolis (name that came from the mother of sci-fi films, Metropolis (1927)), a city where the energy supply comes from the screaming of children when expressing an emotion. The protagonists, Mike Wazowski, a one-eyed round-shaped green little monster and James P. Sullivan, a big, strong horned monster with more than 2,000,000 hairs, work in the company that is in charge of distributing this energy to Monstropolis, but chaos and fun ensue when a tender little girl called Boo manages to enter the monster world, since children are believed to be deadly. The film manages a comical concept in a brilliant way. Since most of us go through that typical fobia/fear towards dark and monsters hidden in the closet or under the bed, the irony of the film comes from the fact that monsters are also afraid of children, perhaps even more than children are towards them. The film has an incredible and very detailed visual style and the story is brilliantly original. It effectively mixes science fiction with fantasy, since monsters of all sizes and colors have the ability of traveling to any part of the world thanks to the technology they have created. The previous Pixar films focused more on the character development and the fun of the situations all of the characters were put in, but this time, whereas the film has less depth and dramatic quality, the amazing new world this film creates with an unbelievable unique and creative style makes up for it. The monsters' design is extremelly well done and very different for each monster, not only creating variety, but also distinguishing both male and female monsters. The humans' design, being most of them practically children and young teens, improved a lot over the past years, which definitely got worse in Finding Nemo (2003) and The Incredibles (2004). This film also has one of the cuttest and most tender characters Pixar has ever created along with Nemo and WALL·E. Boo (whose real name is actually Mary) adds a lot of laughs and heartwarming moments to the film. It is a magical and very pure character, and the most amazing and wonderful thing about her is that she ends up defeating her own fear towards the monster that was assigned to her, who is the antagonist Randall. Monsters, Inc. is another successful entry to the wonderful Pixar series so far. It is very underrated in my opinion. It is definitely not their best work, but it is not the worse either. Worth watching for any kind of audience, since even adults are assured to have a couple of good laughs, since this brilliant piece of animation has also the same characteristic of past films which is the mix of different types of humor for all ages. FUN STUFF: Did you know that this film references some past Pixar short projects, such as Luxo Jr. (1986) and Red's Dream (1987)? It also references previous Pixar feature films such as Toy Story (1995), Toy Story 2 (1999) and a film which hadn't been released yet, Finding Nemo (2003)! The famous Luxo ball, a Jesse doll, a Nemo toy, a Pizza Planet Truck and the trailer from A Bug's Life (1998) are featured here. Can you find the number A-113? 81/100
Finding Nemo 2003,  G)
Finding Nemo
"P. Sherman, 42 Wallaby Way, Sydney."

Finding Nemo (2003)

Director: Andrew Stanton (co-directed by Lee Unkrich)
Country: United States of America
Genre: Animation / Adventure / Comedy
Length: 100 minutes


Pixar proves once again that it is one of the best modern animation studios nowadays. Finding Nemo was an extraordinary achievement and far superior than the past Pixar entries, which are Toy Story (1995), A Bug's Life (1998), Toy Story 2 (1999) and Monsters, Inc. (2001). This was the best Pixar project ever for the 2003... so far. The film received 4 Academy Award nominations including Best Animated Feature, Best Music, Original Score, Best Sound Editing and Best Writing, Original Screenplay, deservedly winning only the first one. This film had strong competition from the film Les Triplettes de Belleville (2003), which I consider an extraordinary achievement in modern animated filmmaking and perhaps the best French animated film I have ever seen. In my opinion, Finding Nemo was a much more complex project. Brother Bear (2003) was also nominated since they had nowhere else to choose from.

After a brutal predator attack that killed his wife and left him only one son (Nemo), the clown fish Marlin sets off on an endless quest in search of his lost son once he is stolen by a scuba diver, a journey that will finally lead him to Sydney's harbor and through endless types of dangers. He will be accompanied by one of the loveliest, funniest and nicest characters I have ever seen in an animated feature film ever: a blue tang with short-term memory loss.

Ok, I'm gonna say it: Finding Nemo is a masterpiece. I'm not crazy, it really is. Every single aspect and detail of the film is extraordinary and superbly developed, so let's review one by one. Andrew Stanton and the whole Pixar crew did a splendid job in sharing a common view that could create such a spectacular, new world in astonishingly good detail.

The sea is portrayed at its most creative, magical and original form possible, and above all, it is REALISTIC. We do not get crap similar to Shark Tale (2004), where it is shown as if we were in a New York City under the sea, with several buildings, electricity and such unrealistic garbage. We travel under the sea just as it is, but adapted to a way that is watchable even for kids. That's the most important aspect that makes this film work. The use of lightning is spellbinding and extraordinary, sometimes even beautiful, since it was so carefully put that we can easily distinguish if there is daylight or not, and if we are several hundreds of meters under the sea or we are near surface. The flora and fauna that the sea has is mostly portrayed in this film, offering a wide range of plants and animal species. The physical characteristics each species has are superbly developed and well made. These guys definitely made some research. Once the film starts we feel under the sea, which is the aspect that made Finding Nemo a film that mandatorily had to be seen in the big screen.

The characters are superb and truly unforgettable. Nemo is one of the cuttest and most tender characters (perhaps even inspiring for kids) Pixar ever created along with Boo from Monsters, Inc. (2001) and WALL·E. The chemistry and love that both Nemo and Marlin develop is so strong that it ends up being very heartwarming and inspiring, giving them both an incredible courage that they never thought they had, each of them confronting different obstacles, not only physical but also emotional. Dory is a hilarious character, and she having short-term memory loss is a very random but effective and peculiar characteristic in her, but it ends up having a very important meaning and through the film we get to see why she had to have that.

Something that considerably called my attention is the fact that there is not only one real antagonist in the film, but several. We have Bruce, a shark that funnily enough is going through therapy so he stops eating fish, since "fish are friends, not food", and the only thing he does is to cause trouble and annoy the main characters every time he makes an appearance. We have the several dangers the sea can offer, including a blue whale, a huge jellyfish forest and the rapid East Australian Current. We have some fisherman that constantly are taking fish out of the water. Oh, and we have Darla! OMG! That's what makes this film interesting, since the ending may be predictable, the film is constantly showing different challenges the characters have to go through.

This is actually the first original screenplay that I really admired from all of the previous Pixar films. It has a very well-done structure and was able to depict effectively both the underwater world and the world located on the surface, including the harbor. The characters are awesomely defined and the story is very creative. Pixar's talent can be found throughout its whole length. The water effect is also spectacular and the Mexican dubbing is the best version out there, which I enormously prefered over the original American version featuring Ellen DeGeneres, who perfectly gave life to my favorite character. Finding Nemo was the best film that Pixar had created so far and it would be for 5 more years. A spectacular achievement in modern animation filmmaking, Finding Nemo can be considered among the most complicated and ambitious projects Pixar has made even today. Priceless.

FUN STUFF: Did you know that this film references Pixar short films such as Knick Knack (1989) and For the Birds (2000)? The name "For the Birds" can be seen in one of the boats, and the mermaid shown in Knick Knack (1989) appears covered in scum when the fish tank is covered with dirt. A Pizza Planet Truck can be found on the street, referencing Toy Story (1995), and Buzz Lightyear and some other Andy's toys including Mr. Potato Head briefly appear. Can you find all of those? Just like Monsters, Inc. (2001) did with this film, Finding Nemo makes reference to future Pixar projects, which are The Incredibles (2004) and Cars (2006). A boy is reading a "Mr. Incredible" magazine, and Luigi the car is briefly seen passing from a window. Have you found them already? Remember Boo's fish mobile in Monsters, Inc. (2001)? It is hanging from the ceiling in the dentist's office as well. Can you find the number A-113?

The Incredibles 2004,  PG)
The Incredibles
The Incredibles is an outstanding animated film, and if we make a deep analysis, it is unique within its genre. It is definitely not our normal superhero movie, but it is a hilarious action-packed comedy with style. Brad Bird superbly directs his second feature film after The Iron Giant (1999) which was a spectacular animated movie, and notably succeeds. The Incredibles received 4 Academy Award nominations including Best Animated Feature Film of the Year, Best Achievement in Sound Editing, Best Achievement in Sound Mixing and Best Writing, Original Screenplay, winning the first two. It was certainly an easy year for The Incredibles since the other two films that got that nomination were Shrek 2 (2004) and the enormous Dreamworks sh!t called Shark Tale (2004). Hauru no Ugoku Shiro (2004) is one of the best movies I have ever seen, and although it got a nomination next year, it unfairly lost against Wallace & Gromit in The Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005). Yeah, I know... the Academy can make MORONIC choices sometimes.

This clever story deals with Bob Parr, (A.K.A. Mr. Incredible) who is the typical superhero that maintains justice on the streets and is the hero of the day, from fighting crime to saving a cat on the top of a tree. He later marries with his wife Helen (A.K.A. Elastigirl) and, just before they know it, endless lawsuits arise againts superheroes, forcing them to live normal and anonymous lives. They have three children: Dash, who runs at an incredible speed, Violet, who can create force fields and has the ability of being invisible, and little baby Jack Jack, whose abilities I won't dare to spoil. However, an old villain tries to destroy Mr. Incredible for the first time...

This film is unique and brilliant in several aspects. First of all, the animation quality has considerably improved over the last 9 years considering exclusively feature films. The handling of graphics and open spaces are extraordinary. Distances and angles are perfectly created and animated, and awesome special effects and sound effects accompain them. My only complaint with this film are the human designs. Just take a look at the cover... The design is less developed than the previous films. Remember Andy? Remember Boo? Remember the boys from Monsters, Inc. (2001)? Those were well made. Even The Polar Express (2004) is better in that aspect. Even so, the characters are classic, and will surely last for several decades to come.

This film is also a comedy, and a pretty funny one, since it offers a perspective we usually don't see in superhero movies, and that perspective is to be witnesses of a family trying to live a normal life while raising children, who also happen to own superpowers. Some domestic scenes and situations are completely hilarious and pretty much clever. How many things can you imagine that may happen when a family with superpowers is having an arguement during dinner? You'll find out. The film has also some "Secret Agent" stuff and some spoofs, and that's one of the reasons why the musical score plays a very important role in it. Whereas previous Pixar films focused more on character development and/or trying to create a new world, this film is more action-oriented and is set on a world we are more familiar with and that may exist under our very noses... supposedly. It works perfectly.

The Incredibles is certainly action-packed. Several action sequences can be found throughout the film, specially on the second half. In fact, this is the only Pixar film that has received a PG rating, on which I disagree. However, the MPAA is formed by moronic monkeys. I agree that some scenes may contain too much intense action for little kids, but they are not violent. A Bug's Life had more intense violence and scarier scenes and it received a G rating. Even so, the action is very fun and breathtaking. The crew did a splendid job with the sound effects and the pace of the story is superb. This is the longest film Pixar has ever made, but that doesn't distract the viewer from its entertainment quality and from the terrific animated film it is. The characters are unique, and although they may have common superhero stereotypes we were familiar with before, all of them have cool and interesting personalities, and all of them can be funny in their own particular way, and that's definitely not something easy to do. The screenplay is extraordinarily developed as well, which includes awesome dialogues and funny lines. It may be my favorite Pixar screenplay so far.

All in all, Brad Bird did a splendid job adding another classic and memorable animated masterpiece to Pixar's beautiful and highly respectable filmography. This is not among the best films Pixar has done, and certainly not the worst either. It is exactly in the middle, just like Toy Story 2 (1999) is. Definitely worth-watching for anyone who is a fan of Pixar, animation films, Disney, superheroes or cinema itself.

FUN STUFF: Did you know that this film actually references Toy Story (1999) with the classic Pizza Planet truck? It can be seen for less than half a second in a highway scene. Also, it references a future Pixar project, which would be Cars (2006), just after Frozone freezes the water and Dash goes out flying. Can you find the two references to the number A-113?

Cars 2006,  G)
Despite the injustice of Cars being robbed by tap-dancing penguins (give me a break...), it would have not taken too many years for audiences to forget about this high-speed flick. Seems like these predictions of mine were not wrong, since now Pixar is planning a sequel. Fun times, I accept, but I could not perceive it even as a road movie hommage. Nevertheless, full redemption came with Pixar's next feature.

Ratatouille 2007,  G)
A modern animated masterpiece with a fragant, European aroma of tasty delicacies! Pixar tries something new that everybody thought would fail. However, the main result was several movie theaters with audiences standing up and applausing (it happened to mine) just to be topped with an Academy Award. Bon appétit!

WALL-E 2008,  G)
Hauntingly approaching to cyberpunk epic measures, Wall-E is one of the best animated films of the new century, as well as Pixar's most ambitious CGI creation. A realistic fate of the Earth slowly approaching to become a future destiny mirrored with Wall-E's inert and charming personality, the film is a feast for the senses, an apocalyptic message, a message that promotes the health of the planet and PIXAR at its finest.

Up 2009,  PG)
Pixar's latest project surprises, and at the same time it disappoints. Whereas I was expecting a bad movie and the start of Pixar's steady downfall, I got a fun and decent experience; however, the typical fantasy touch that Pixar's films usually had turned into unrealism. I know this is an animated film and perhaps "realism" is the last thing I can talk about when referring to Pixar, but the film felt unusually different. The plot, although somehow decent, is dumb and senseless. The emotional touch the film received because of the death of Fredricksen's wife (don't worry, it is not a spoiler) was a plot element put randomly, and although it appropriately served the purpose of inspiration rather than depression in the audience, it was a little bit too forced. The highlights of the film are its great and accurate cinematography, some of the creativity present throughout and the typical (and occasionally clever) humor this animation company has shown in its films for almost 15 years. The characters are appealing as well, but even the 3D experience didn't save this project from being the second worst Pixar film so far, not only because of some of the dumb and childish events that take place, but also because of the non-solid script, an aspect in which Pixar had always been outstanding.

Toy Story 3 2010,  G)
Toy Story 3
Spectators will mostly be biased thanks to the greatness of the first two Toy Story gems. "It reminds me of my childhood." "I grew up with them." "How on Earth did Pixar made adults cry over toys??!" That last quote I just wrote is my favorite.

A third part in a Pixar line of movies sounded doubtful. "Another one?" However, when had Pixar fully disappointed before? Well, shortly speaking, Toy Story 3 recycles everything that was shown beforehand: same situations, same moral fights, same epiphanies for the plastic characters, same "Woody was right all the time", same fight between best pals Woody and Buzz... but it doesn't stop there. It is a rather cheap spoof of prison break films (something that, ironically, was done in a much better way in the first film, when the famous characters had to escape from Sid's house.) Some excitement here and there, but it is very forgettable, and a third part carrying the weight of two memorable projects was too much responsibility. The most painful aspect was the Dreamworks-humor parts, including Ken modelling for Barbie. Suddenly felt like a Shrek segment.

However, Totoro is a character of the movie! That's surely a way to recognize the work of past masters!

Cars 2 2011,  G)
Cars 2
Jesus Christ, it reminds me of Fay Grim (2006)...... What a bizarre turn of bizarre events that came straight out from Bizarro world. I saw Cars 2 for the first time exactly one week after watching Hal Hartley's sequel to Henry Fool, called Fay Grim. And it suffers from exactly the same f***ing syndrome: an illusion of international espionage parody. Wha.... Whhh What's the use? What's the logic behind such decision? In what book is it stated that making a film with thought-provoking reflections, either metaphysical, earthly or heartwarming, and continuing it with a "comedic" international espionage twist is supposed to contribute ANYTHING to the story? I would only justify such attempt with independent or renowned filmmakers, as was the case of Hal Hartley, but we are talking about Pixar here, a company focused at making trascendental 3D-animated films aimed at all types of audiences. This had no nostalgic quality, no logic in its continuity, no comprehensible character connections. No, it's just a parody. A bad one. I blame Pixar greatly because it hasn't been listening to the suggestions (let's not call them "demands") of fans: if there must be a sequel, it must be The Incredibles 2, not Cars 2, not Finding Dory, not Monsters University, no Toy Story 3 (an overrated sentimental mess). They are getting it all wrong. 90% of the times, sequels are signs of imminent scarcity in creativity. Pixar falls into that 90% of cases. How shameful. 54/100
Brave 2012,  PG)
It was meant to happen someday, even if you deny it. We are greateful enough towards Pixar by now; its legacy has already been established, not only as a golden source of creativity and imagination but as a successful enterprise that went through some red number cycles. For the record, this should be a lesson for Pixar that if Brenda Chapman is in the lead, her ideas should NOT be blocked or censored by G-rating concerns. Bad move. 56/100
Monsters, Inc. 2 2012,  Unrated)

Comments (2)

Post a comment

Recent Comments

  1. jannar85
    jannar85 posted 4 years ago

    This is a really great list. In order, even :) Up to date.. :)

  2. Dannyrovira
    Dannyrovira posted 3 years ago

    A totally awesome list my friend!