Monsters U

A movie that just sits there. Not bad, but definitely not good. At least it was better than the preceding Pixar short that missed on almost every level.

That’s disappointing to hear. I love the original Monsters Inc.

Is it going to tarnish my perfect memory of the original if I ever bother to watch it later?

No, Its not embarrassing. It’s just nothing special. It feels like it was made to fill a space on a list, to help sell 3D-re-release DVDs, get people back in to amusement parks, and sell a few toys.

I’ve waited (and waded) through the last four pixar movies looking for the kind of magic in Ratatouille, Wall-E and Up, and it has not returned.

They can do good sequels. Just not with this one. My personal feeling is Toy Story 3 > Toy Story 2 > Toy Story, though I can go either way with 2 vs. 1, and I know some people feel 3 is was a bit too obvious in places. I haven’t seen Monsters U, but the trailers look like a typical Disney cash-in sequel, the type they usually do as straight to video instead of a theatrical release. I’m reluctant to watch it even on DVD.

Wall-E, IMHO, was about 50% magic and 50% crap. It falls apart once it leaves Earth. The short live segments with Fred Willard are painfully unfunny, the absolute nadir of anything Pixar has ever done. I bought the Blu Ray sight unseen, and it’s the only Pixar disc I’ve sold after watching.

I was trying to remember the short, then I did, and yeah, it’s the weakest Pixar short there is, which is a shame (though it’s technically quite amazing).

The Blue Umbrella? Yeah, it looked awesome…but the story was just not there.

It didn’t help that it was basically a much less interesting retelling of The Paperman from last year, either.

I would have rather (seriously) enjoyed a story about an umbrella being “in love” with his owner and being dedicated to his job, but losing his way, only to find it again. Still would have echoed Paper Man, but it would not have felt like it was trying to do the same thing.

The Blue Umbrella story was weak, but I absolutely loved the anthropomorphic cityscape.

I’ve got to agree - quite a nice “tech demo,” so to speak. The story, however, was rather lame. Oddly enough my two nephews loved the short.

Well, in my opinion, the original Monsters Inc was not all that great either.

So what does this mean – if Pixar, who I think can be brilliant but gets wayyy too much credit for their near misses – if Cars 2 and Monsters Inc are both considered misses?

Although looking at the current tomatometer scores, 78% for MI seems pretty solid against the 39% of Cars 2.

I don’t know many people who consider Monsters, Inc. a miss. I know I sure don’t. Lumping it in with Cars 2 seems strange.

Yeah, I’d consider Monsters Inc by itself more entertaining than any amount of Cars movies combined.

I still need to see this once I get the chance.

I agree that Monsters U is not as good as the original but it’s still quite funny and worth recommending. Mike and Sully are a terrific odd couple duo and the campus comedy works most of the time. But the story lacks a Boo, or any real crossover with the human world, so it doesn’t reach the same heights of chaos or emotion.

I wasn’t wowed by Ratatouille or Wall-E, and generally agree with you on Monsters U, but I really liked Up. But anyway, everything can’t be perfect, even Miyazaki doesn’t hit a grand slam every time. Pixar, even if it succumbs to mediocrity (if you don’t believe that it already has) will find a way to keep going. The kids love their stuff. It would have to be shit of the highest order for it to really bring down Disney.

This is just revenge of the nerds but with cartoon characters.

…but Revenge Of The Nerds was way better and it had a theme song by the Rubinoos instead of Randy Newman.