Archive for the ‘Pixar’ Category

Christopher’s Top Picks of the Decade (1/1/2000-1/1/2010)

January 28, 2010

It took all month but here are

Christopher’s Top 20 Picks (with 3 “Ties and an Honorable Mention) of the Decade


  1. Lord Of The Rings (1 movie in 3 parts)
  2. The Passion of the Christ
  3. Unbreakable
  4. tie – DISTRICT 9 Pride and Prejudice 
  5. The Exorcism of Emily Rose  
  6.  Signs
  7. To End All Wars
  8. The Village
  9. The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe 
  10. Lars and the Real Girl 
  11. Luther 
  12. B000JLTR8QM. Night Shyamalan’s Lady in the Water
  13. Napoleon Dynamite
  14. In The Bedroom
    Note: “The Bedroom” in the title refers to a compartment of a Lobster Trap
  15. Man On Fire
  16. I Am Legend
  17. The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra
  18. Phone Booth
  19. tie Nanny McPhee Up
  20. tie Danielson a Family Movie (or, Make A Joyful Noise HERE) Food Inc

Honorable Mention

Bella theatrical one sheet



This film was not the best done, or the most moving. Several films not on this list were better films. (The Spider Man films, Inglorious B——-s, Juno, Iron Man and even  Twilight, were all better films.) Still, a church got together and made a good film with a great message, and I think that should be applauded.

Pixar and the Hidden Bad Guy

January 27, 2010

Did you notice,

in the


    we think is good, until the end where he turns out to be the main antagonist?
    we think is good, until the end where he turns out to be the main antagonist?
    we think is good, until the end where he turns out to be the main antagonist?
    we think is good, until the end where he turns out to be the main antagonist?
    we think is good, until the end where he turns out to be the main antagonist?
    we think is good, until the end where he turns out to be the main antagonist?
    But in the movie there is Who is sort of the opposite.

#31 – Top Money Makers of the Decade – The Incredibles

December 21, 2009

We have taken the list of the Top Money Makers of the Decade and we are doing the “Question Entertainment Lightning Round”
I hope you like it. Let us know your thoughts.

See them all at

The Incredibles

#33 – Top Money Makers of the Decade – Ratatouille

December 19, 2009


We have taken the list of the Top Money Makers of the Decade and we are doing the “Question Entertainment Lightning Round”
I hope you like it. Let us know your thoughts.

See them all at

What Is It?

This is the second collaboration between Pixar and writer/director Brian Byrd. Their first outing, The Incredibles, lived up to it’s name. Now Ratatouille… um… does not easily lend itself to pithy comments.

It is the story of a rat (Patton Oswalt)who wants to be a gourmet cook, a boy (Lou Romano) who does not know how to cook, nor does he know that he is the heir to a restaurant dynasty, and finally the evil, short chef (Ian Holm)who wants to simply cash in on his late mentor’s reputation.

How Was It?

This was not the achievement that the Incredibles was, but it is much better than Byrd’s early film, The Iron Giant. The movie is altogether fun to watch with enjoyable characters, whimsical story twists, and great visuals. I especially liked Anton Ego’s (Peter O’Toole) house. To complement his corps like presents, his hall is coffin shaped and you can see the smile of a skull in his old typewriter. I also appreciate the fact that they have someone who they say is a great writer, and instead of just leaving it at that and showing people’s reaction to his writing, we actually hear his entire article. It is at the climax of the film, making it even more daring a move.

Is It Good For Kids?

There is no cussing (other than the line “welcome to hell” referring to work), violence in minimal and slapstick and no one is shown inappropriately. The rats occasionally “Steal” food, but every time the action is condemned in explicit terms with negative consequences following directly. There is also an Aladdin style racism, where they are in a foreign country, all the evil characters and comic relief people have thick accents and the two hero’s have the American TV “No-accent”

You can get a complete break down of what is on the screen at

What About Spiritual Issues?

Stealing is show throughout the film but, as I said, always with a verbal rebuke and eventually with negative consequences. This movie is very careful to explain itself at many points. Similarly, Remy the Rat (Patton Oswalt) talks with Gusteau (Brad Garrett) a dead chef. Gusteau has lots of lines pointing out that he is not a ghost but only imagined by Remy. He even goes so far to state that Gusteau only knows what Remy already knows himself, because Remy is making him up. I appreciated the distinction, because it is one distinction people often do not understand.

Gusteau is not the only brush with death we have. When we meet Linguini for the first time, his mother has just died. When explaining this, he tells the kitchen staff that she “believed in Heaven” so she is all set, as far as an afterlife is concerned. This line caught me off guard. On one hand, it was great to see the concept of heaven and that death is not to be looked at as an ending but a new beginning. Still the idea simply believing in the concept of heaven will ensure you go there is a frighteningly simplistic one. Jesus said, in John 14:6 “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.” Also look at James 2:19.

There is also an odd undercurrent of sexual immorality. Linguini’s mother had been the girlfriend of Gusteau when they were both alive. Linguini and Gusteau did not know it, but Gusteau was Linguini’s father. This concept is tossed around in those terms throughout the film, without moral comment. This is stands out, considering they go out of their way to explain other actions as being wrong.

What Is Your Recommendation?

It’s a fun and well made film, which is the norm for Pixar. Still, there are pitfalls within the plot. If you are going to enjoy this cinematic dish with your family, you will want to talk about ghosts, Heaven, true salvation, stealing, and “love”.

I would instead look to any other Pixar film free of fishy-automotives or the other CG rodent themed  film “Flushed Away

Flushed Away


December 5, 2009

What Is It?

Pixar‘s latest attempt to give inanimate objects a voice starts in the world of NASCAR, and moves on to Route 66. With a set up not unlike Michael J. Fox‘s “Doc Hollywood,” race car Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) has just been in a 3 way tie at the end of the Piston Cup. A second race has been scheduled in California, but on the way, Lightning has an accident. After destroying a road, he is sentenced to stay in a backward town, off Route 66, until he can repair his damage. As the week goes by, while he could be schmoozing big wigs in Cali and getting a better sponsor, instead he is trapped in “hillbilly hell” (his words) wondering if he will even make it in time for the race.

How Was It?

CG Giant Pixar, started the full length computer animated fad in 1996 with inventive Toy Story. After that they have put out 2 good films and 2 great films. With that kind of track record, I was very excited to see film number seven. This is the first move Pixar has done since being bought by former partner Disney, and I’m here to say the new parent company has not ruined them yet!

(But we have yet to see Toy Story 3).

This movie makes all the other cheesy CG garbage that we have been getting lately look even cheesier. The performances are fun with a lot of cameos. (I’m not a car guy, so it wasn’t until I checked out that I realized all the car guys in it. Just know if the car has a name that a sound like a celebrity, the voice is that celebrity, including the red number 8 car named Jr.)

I think kids are going to love it, and like “The Incredibles“, it wow’s you with a story instead of needing to blow stuff up or edit a billion times a minute to keep kids attention. There is still action, but it punctuates instead of becoming the visual white noise. The plot is not too obvious and things come out the you may not have been expecting. Still my favorite parts were things like the tires and the blimp over the stadium (Light Year) and the major sponsor being Dinoco (the gas station chain that shows up in the Toy Story films.) There is also a fantastic “in the credits” bit with John Ratzenberger , who has been in all seven Pixar films.

I liked it, though found it odd that one of the main themes was how we are supposed to enjoy the beauty and grandeur of nature, while all the visuals we have of such things are made on a computer.

Is It Good For Kids?

I think kids will be able to follow the story well and enjoy what they see. I think the construction of the film is great for kids. There are also some good morals to learn here. There are a couple of mildly bad words, but then there was also the Lord’s name as a cuss word (maybe twice). The other odd thing was the amount of “body” jokes. One car checks out another’s “rear end” and it is implied repeatedly that when they see the underside of a car they are seeing something equivalent to a person without there pants. It is even shot so that the audience knows where they are looking but can’t see it themselves. There is nothing here to insight lust (because it’s still just cars) but possibly a bad attitude toward those issues.

You can check out for a break down of what is on the screen, but they don’t seem to pick up as much of the “naughty parts on a car” that were in the film.

What about Spiritual Issues?

On one hand, there was a lot of good here. The idea that we should respect our elders (Proverbs 16:31) is something kids (and a lot of adults) need to hear today and are often told the opposite. The idea of learning from the past, and that simple things can be wonderful if you stop and look, are great things to have in your head. There is also a short message about slowing down and noticing the splendor of the natural world and wanting to be in a place where society has not just bulldozed it. Finally, it’s great to not just have the standard “racism” message, but the idea that you shouldn’t be elitist about your friends, but be willing to associate with people who you may consider lower than you. ( Romans 12:16 )

On the other hand, Despite what some may infer (like Dr. J.D.) I do not think salvation will be achieved by society returning to the 1950’s.

So, to the extent this is just extolling the virtues of friends and relationships, it’s a good thing. To the extent it’s telling us that the answer to life is friends and the 50’s, it’s an existential lie. Unfortunately, with it’s “I have everything, but life is still meaningless” story line, I think it errs on the side of the later.

What Is Your Recommendation?

It was a good movie, but it does have a couple of words you wouldn’t want your kids using and a message of “Redemption from the meaninglessness of life” without Jesus. I’m not sure it’s worth it. I will just be sticking with the Toy Story Series, The Incredibles, and the occasional Monsters Inc.