Mar 12 2008Full-Length 'WALL-E' Trailer
Pixar has upped their effort to blanket any fading, hazy memories of Short Circuit with images of their smaller, cuter model, today releasing a third and final trailer to WALL-E. Unfortunately, this was also the preview that made me suddenly realize, wait a minute, this would be incredibly stupid if it weren't being acted out by an adorable droid.
How had I never before realized the wacky, slapstick humor over a shallow love story--that seems so charming when animated--is the same schlock that fills the scripts of Rob Schneider movies? And I'm pretty sure the joke where WALL-E is thrown to the back of the shuttle, only to be slammed to the ground when internal gravity is regained, was already done by Harland Williams in Rocketman. Would I still chuckle as WALL-E's hand is crushed by his stronger female companion if the robot were Jack Black, his fingers squeezed between the meaty paws of Gwenyth Paltrow in a robo-fat suit?
Have slick computer graphics tricked the public into falling for what's truthfully a pretty stupid script? Or is the point that these kind of jokes should be reserved for animation, and Pixar knows that? I don't know what to think anymore, but the film definitely got harder to enjoy once I started picturing Will Ferrell playing the part in the naive style of Elf.
'WALL-E' Trailer [Apple]


Reader Comments
1. martygras9 - March 12, 2008 3:10 PM
The film looks lousy. It's like they had no other films coming out until 2009's 'UP', so they said, "Can we do a film where we don't even need to employ voice actors?" Lasseter's lost his mind and is completely cutting out the human element of films. Those voices are going to be HORRIBLE to sit through for an hour and a half.
2. Me - March 12, 2008 3:12 PM
I've always found visual slap-stick to work MUCH better in animation, actually. Looney Tunes anyone?
3. Willravel - March 12, 2008 3:22 PM
It may be the airplane glue and absinthe (or "airsinthe") talking, but that doesn't look terrible. As a matter of fact, I actually chuckled at the slapstick at the end of the trailer. And I didn't even like Rattat....Ratuh... that last one with the rodent chef.
4. trickykel78 - March 12, 2008 3:28 PM
99.99% of the time i'm in full agreement with you. But this time me thinks maybe your being too cynical. I think this sucker looks great! Pixar has yet to truly 'jump the shark.' I don't like that expresssion. How bout 'shart there pants?'
5. Ramon M. - March 12, 2008 3:41 PM
Actually, the cynicism might be pretty spot on. However, after seeing the Ratatouille trailer and thinking...gross....accurate looking rats cooking...the movie came out one of the best animated experience ive had in recent memory. i have my doubts...but ill give Pixar the benefit of the doubt....they havent really really disappointed so far...
6. GiantDrunkenRobot - March 12, 2008 4:07 PM
Commentors 2-4 disgust me.
Finally, somebody is seeing the light regarding this rusty turd-box and all you've got to say is "If it's Pixar, it's got to be good!" (TM)
And for trickykel78: If you think Pixar has yet to jump the shark (or shart their pants, as the case may be) I refer you to Cars, a film which blatantly ripped it's plotline from the 1991 film Doc Hollywood. Cars also starred as one of it's main voice actors Larry the Cable Guy, and if his involvement doesn't SCREAM shark jumpage, then you misunderstand the term entirely.
Disney is founded on the premise of "cuteing" up old fables and fairytales, and WALL-E is just a modern example, cribbing from Schneider, Ferrell and Black instead of Aesop, Grimm and Goose. The reason people enjoy these films is because they cater to the lowest common entertainment denominator- they are pretty to look at, inoffensive in their humor and appeal to all age groups.
They are the filmic equivalent of Nilla wafers. Sure, they're great for babies and maybe as an occasional snack or served alongside banana pudding, but I'm tired of being handed box after box of vaguely sweet, mostly bland, easily digestible foodstuff.
At least The Incredibles looked to The Watchmen for inspiration....
7. speyshul ed - March 12, 2008 5:42 PM
YAYY!! nomber 6 is weenning tha inturrwebs argumenteeng likke weening speyshul limpiks!!! butt u isstill tarded
8. proteon - March 12, 2008 5:47 PM
You all sound so intelligent. Where's my "validated" stamp...
9. deweather - March 12, 2008 6:32 PM
#6. You have to be kidding right? You said, "They are pretty to look at, inoffensive in their humor and appeal to all age groups." Um...yeah, that's the point. The movie looks great. It's made for kids but with jokes that adults like too. Pixar is the best in the biz at making great animated movies.
I don't know if you are just a cynical person who hates life and wants to bring everyone down with you, but you have to learn to enjoy life. I have NO idea what you are expecting from an animated movie from disney and pixar, but this one looks like it'll be the best yet.
10. GiantDrunkenRobot - March 12, 2008 7:16 PM
What am I expecting?
It's a valid question.
I guess I'm expecting something that lives up to the praise lavished upon it. I'm expecting something that goes a little bit deeper, that uses the medium of animation and the technology available to do more than rehash the same tired old stories we've seen over and over again with glossier and glossier trappings.
I'd like to see a film that's actually worth watching once the techno-glamour wears off, that isn't just a vehicle for trite comedic voice-acting from celebrities who are already well-paid to act tritely comedic in live action films. I'd like to see something that makes me want to watch it again and again, and not just because it's shiny and pretty but because it has some depth to it. I'd like to see an American produced animated film that doesn't feel like it needs to cater to children first, then add in jokes for the grown-ups later.
And mostly, I'm tired of Pixar getting a free pass from fanboys, the very people who should be demanding more from their animation overlords.
I don't think it's pure hate that fuels these desires, it's more like regret. I regret that the opportunity to make a truly amazing (and maybe even profound) film is being squandered on kiddie drek.
11. Trøffelsvinet - March 12, 2008 8:11 PM
Why is the desire for something deeper than Hollywoods repackaging of trite offensive to some people? Is scorn and ridicule the only response you have to someone who is not eagerly awaiting yet another candy coloured shot in the arm?
GiantDrunkenRobot I salute thee!
12. deweather - March 12, 2008 8:12 PM
GDR- Look at the history of animation, it's almost always been a medium for children. So why do you act like it's a surprise that pixar and DISNEY make child friendly films? Pixar films have depth to them and they do have lessons in them, but are entertaining. What is the problem with making movies that children and adults like?
I would argue that you are seeing the technology being used in more diverse methods. Look at Beowulf. There is a french movie, I believe called resistance, that is animated (not in the same style as pixar, but animated). The Japanese make anime films that are often for adults (not just the porn versions either!). To me, I like the pixar movies MUCH more than the ones I just listed, but you or others may like them more. It's all subjective really.
I will see Wall.E, not because I'm a child or a simpleton. I will watch it cause it's good story telling and entertaining.
13. Matt - March 12, 2008 8:41 PM
drunk robot...you are dumb. If you want something with deepth and this and that then watch Ghost in the Shell or something of that nature. There are plenty of animated movies fused with cgi fused with ultra deep stories out there. Quit hatin you hater
14. Me - March 12, 2008 9:12 PM
"The reason people enjoy these films is because they cater to the lowest common entertainment denominator"
Perhaps the reason people enjoy these films is because they are well-crafted and feature entertaining stories and characters? I consider myself a relatively intelligent person; I can usually tell the difference between a piece of junk and something of good quality. If you think Happily N'Ever After and Ratatouille feature the same level of depth, then your taste is quite questionable.
"Commentors 2-4 disgust me."
So, stating something that is completely true about the medium we are discussing disgusts you? Splastick DOES work better in animation than in live-action. Ask any animator or fan of the medium. I'm not saying that's the ONLY thing animation is good for (far from it, actually!), I was just stating something that is obviously true.
"I'd like to see a film that's actually worth watching once the techno-glamour wears off, that isn't just a vehicle for trite comedic voice-acting from celebrities who are already well-paid to act tritely comedic in live action films"
Personally I've seen some great animated films worth watching over again - some of them from Pixar. Yes, I wish there were more of them, but your tone suggests you don't like a single animated film you've ever seen out of this country. And I find it ironic that you complain about big-celebrity voices when the movie we are discussing is almost entirely dialogue-free! (I will agree with you that this is something most animated movies do to death, though. I was recently sent a press release from DreamWorks concerning one of their upcoming films - about 2/3 of the E-mail was taken up by them bragging about the A-list stars that starred in the flick. Ugh!)
"I'd like to see an American produced animated film that doesn't feel like it needs to cater to children first, then add in jokes for the grown-ups later."
I STRONGLY agree with you on this point. Animation is NOT just for kids, and this is a concept every country seems to get but America. It's aggravating as hell, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy movies aimed a younger age demographic. Yes, I would love to see more variety in our animated films, but I can still enjoy what we have anyway.
I'm sorry if I came off as sounding too rude, but with crud like Shrek The Third and Chicken Little and whatever being released, I’m usually very grateful for a Pixar film every once in a while. Sure, they're not rated R and don’t question the purpose of life and the existence of mankind, but they’re fun, well-thought out, and expertly crafted. You’ve got to be pretty cynical not to at least slightly appreciate the creative talent and care that go into their films.
(And I don’t really consider myself a rabid Pixar fangirl, by the way…I haven’t liked EVERYTHING they’ve done but overall I think they have an impressive track record.)
15. Anonymous - March 12, 2008 10:27 PM
Someone here needs to have some, unbiased, honest rational opinion on this movie.
Allow me to fill the void.
ANYONE WHO DOESN'T LIKE THIS MOVIE CAN DIE!!!
IT'S GOING TO BE SO AWESOME!!!
16. trickykel78 - March 14, 2008 3:14 AM
Maybe it's too late for me and i've crossed the void to that place Jason Hughes so eloquantly noted was inhabited by 'clown shoes.' But if not i'll reserve my true feelings about this debate incase I can return one day, and just offer a group hug. It's ok cyber friend, let it out. Hollywood has scorned me to. There there.
17. cynicalmastermind - May 9, 2008 7:36 AM
I'm pretty about 99.9% of what you say is absolute giberish. In a mere few paragraphs of what could've been explaning another great pixar film. You feel the compulsion need to reference rob schneider movies, elf, rocketman and..how one scene in Wall-E trigger you to remember shallow hal simular hand crushing scene?(I vaguely even recall that scene or that crappy movie) Wow what the hell are you smoking?
18. cynicalmastermind - May 9, 2008 7:39 AM
I'm pretty about 99.9% of what you say is absolute giberish. In a mere few paragraphs of what could've been explaning another great pixar film. You feel the compulsion need to reference rob schneider movies, elf, rocketman and..how one scene in Wall-E trigger you to remember shallow hal simular hand crushing scene?(I vaguely even recall that scene or even the movie) Wow what the hell are you smoking? (...no it's got to be acid or something)