Pixar's Soul

[Waggo]

Lovely film.  Thoroughly enjoyed every moment of it.

[Harsin]

Real return to form for Pixar.

 

Is Graham Norton in every version or is this one of those cases where they stick a local celeb in different countries' versions, like Jeremy Clarson in Cars or Jonathan Ross in Shrek 2.

 

 

[SteveG]

43 minutes ago, Harsin said:

Real return to form for Pixar.

 

Is Graham Norton in every version or is this one of those cases where they stick a local celeb in different countries' versions, like Jeremy Clarson in Cars or Jonathan Ross in Shrek 2.

 

 

He’s in all versions. Pete Docter was interviewed for the Total Film podcast and he confirmed that they are very much aware of his work, I think his chat show does Ok figures in the US. Probably helps him bag the big name guests as well. 

[yakumo]

This film hits a bit too hard, the idea of feeling very lost. Which makes me wonder if the number 22 was chosen very intentionally to reflect the kind of pressure that’s thrust upon you - the pressure to make something of yourself (esp. that mentor seminar scene), when it’s perfectly fine to just exist.

[Isaac]

I loved this but I did think (ending spoilers)

 

Spoiler

That they did cop out a bit at the end. I was expecting it to end with him coming to terms with and accepting his own death, the fact they gave him another chance last minute felt a bit cheap.

 

[Mogster]

14 minutes ago, Isaac said:

I loved this but I did think (ending spoilers)

 

  Hide contents

That they did cop out a bit at the end. I was expecting it to end with him coming to terms with and accepting his own death, the fact they gave him another chance last minute felt a bit cheap.

 

 

Spoiler

I didn't think think the film was about accepting death, quite the opposite! It was about giving Joe (and 22) a new perspective on life. Killing him off after learning that lesson would have been pretty dark.

 

[Stanley]

Well that was just beautiful.

[superfunk]

Not only is Soul the best Pixar movie in ages, the mastery of CG animation demonstrated by Pixar is simply phenomenal. The scenes in the jazz club were so ‘real’ and yet so stylised. And the switches between the ‘live action’ and the abstract stuff was masterful. Just top notch on every conceivable level. 

[PK]

What a really lovely film. Beautiful animation and a beautiful message.

[Stanley]

1 hour ago, superfunk said:

Not only is Soul the best Pixar movie in ages, the mastery of CG animation demonstrated by Pixar is simply phenomenal. The scenes in the jazz club were so ‘real’ and yet so stylised. And the switches between the ‘live action’ and the abstract stuff was masterful. Just top notch on every conceivable level. 

Yeah I thought that straight away - the juxtaposition of the two styles was so striking and the abstract stuff just incredible, combined with the soundtrack, stunning. 
 

After I’d finished I switched to Shrek 3 which was on telly and OMG you couldn’t get more different! 

[Festoon]

9 hours ago, Isaac said:

I loved this but I did think (ending spoilers)

 

  Reveal hidden contents

That they did cop out a bit at the end. I was expecting it to end with him coming to terms with and accepting his own death, the fact they gave him another chance last minute felt a bit cheap.

 

 

Yep, cheap and a bad idea.

[Made of Ghosts]

Enjoyed it a lot - the 22 arc worked fine but I can’t quite pin down what the message/lesson was for Joe... don’t chase your dreams? Do, but do other stuff as well? It was a bit too frantic in places as well, I wanted to slow down and contemplate things a bit more sometimes. Comfortably one of their best recent films though. 

 

Richard Ayoade stuck out as being a bit too “recognisable”,  you could say the same about Graham Norton but actually he was surprisingly good.

[watusi]

My kid is going through a lot of anxiety about death and dying at the moment, xmas day he cried a lot before going to bed.

 

He's keen to watch this - the plot seems a little close to the bone to dying/afterlife though. What's folks thought on how much this is focused on? 

[Mike S]

Well, this was great. Really great in fact and definitely the best Pixar movie in a very long time time.

 

It felt like the most 'adult' film Pixar have made in a while too. 

 

Great! 

 

 

[Twinbee]

27 minutes ago, watusi said:

My kid is going through a lot of anxiety about death and dying at the moment, xmas day he cried a lot before going to bed.

 

He's keen to watch this - the plot seems a little close to the bone to dying/afterlife though. What's folks thought on how much this is focused on? 

Sorry to hear this. I’m not sure, so I’d recommend watching it yourself first. You don’t know what tiny thing might trigger him. 
 

The message is mainly about making sure you stop and smell the flowers rather than thinking your life is meaningless if you don’t achieve some kind of big hairy goal you’ve set yourself. 

[Hemzoozlefluff*]

I thought it was really lovely. Gorgeous animation, chucklesome AND full of heart. 

[PK]

52 minutes ago, watusi said:

My kid is going through a lot of anxiety about death and dying at the moment, xmas day he cried a lot before going to bed.

 

He's keen to watch this - the plot seems a little close to the bone to dying/afterlife though. What's folks thought on how much this is focused on? 

 

I am not a therapist, but anecdotally - I started having that type of death-focused anxiety at age 5 or 6, and I wish I'd had somebody talk to me about life in the way this film does. The message is very much...

 

Spoiler

...there's beauty all around us, and you shouldn't worry so much about what you make of life as much as just enjoying the experience of living.

 

There are some scenes where the protagonist is presented with the inevitability of death - in the form of a pathway into a bright 'great beyond' that they are expected to move into - and they respond with a panicky "Not yet! I'm not ready!" sort of reaction. Those scenes might be triggering for your kid.

 

Overall, it's a very positive film.

 

But generally, given how distressing that type of anxiety can be as a child, I'd definitely recommend you watch the film yourself first to gauge how you think they will respond to it, just in case.

[JPL]

Great film and Pixar have once again shown why they’re the best. The animation was on another level.

[Timbuktu]

14 hours ago, Isaac said:

I loved this but I did think (ending spoilers)

 

  Hide contents

That they did cop out a bit at the end. I was expecting it to end with him coming to terms with and accepting his own death, the fact they gave him another chance last minute felt a bit cheap.

 

Spoiler

I think there is probably a better way they could have got brought him back to the living, but if Joe really died, I would feel so bad for his mom.  I spent a lot of the movie hung up on if they killed the cat too.

I love this.  It is probably one of the gentlest Pixar movies, not about big moments of triumph and with no real villains.  I think the message not being summed up in one line is fine too, there are too many ways people do and do not find satisfaction in life.  The last movie I saw in theatre was Onwards, I liked that too, this feels

quite special.

[Loik V credern]

7 hours ago, Made of Ghosts said:

Enjoyed it a lot - the 22 arc worked fine but I can’t quite pin down what the message/lesson was for Joe... don’t chase your dreams? Do, but do other stuff as well? It was a bit too frantic in places as well, I wanted to slow down and contemplate things a bit more sometimes. Comfortably one of their best recent films though. 

 

Richard Ayoade stuck out as being a bit too “recognisable”,  you could say the same about Graham Norton but actually he was surprisingly good.

 

Spoiler

The film is just about unhealthy obsession isn't it, it makes no distinction between artists who chase their dream -but only the final moment attainment of it (he felt no different after performing in the band like he expected to) so miss the mundane joys life brings- and those like the hedge fund manager who are similarly chasing deals, wins, success, losing their soul in the process. In Joe's case, just not appreciate the simple things. 

I didn't think the ending was a cop out and it was worth it for the joke on Terry tbh*. It wanted for the main character to say; I'm going to enjoy every second. We're told his obsession was so strong he neglected to cherish every moment - if that's not true for all artists chasing dreams, Pixar thinks it is. Instead of 'this gives me the reason to live', try 'this is the essence of who I am'..to family. Or scream it. Or 'if I don't make the most of this it will eat away at me'. 

 

*All the stuff with Terry was the funniest, I loved all that. 

Like Inside Out, I recognise it's obviously far more introspective, personal and deep than other cg animations. You think of Over The Hedge and it's like an entirely different art form that Pixar are playing with. Over The Hedge is neither art nor has much form. 

 

But I still don't love it. Like Inside Out its playing with emotions is fun and inventive, but it's attached to a derivative and formulaic chasing around in a rush scenario. Nearly everything Pixar does is characters in a rush isn't it. That nearly always takes place over a day or two. It doesn't seem Luca will be much different so even though Pixar have reached this current perceived high point I'm still not feeling it. Wall E represented a change in tone, no wise cracking high on life larger than life characters on screen, something quiet and sombre instead. The silent comedy was enough, and while I like the depiction of future humans as overweight slouches passively devouring entertainment I wished it was darker, Wall E wouldn't become relegated and...yeah. It was still overall good though. 

 

The logic in Soul is harder to grasp. I didn't understand why if Joe is in a coma and not yet dead why he's in the queue to enter heaven and not in some kind of limbo place, some temporary waiting room that might drive a person insane through lack of stimulation. And I'm not as on board with Pixar's souls yet to given to people on Earth, unless I don't get that.

I didn't actually notice Richard Ayoade, and might not have noticed Graham Norton had I not read it I here first. He has a recognisable voice but I would never have expected him to turn up.

The actor who plays Terry might be someone famous, every scene he was in were the funniest. That Australian accent. ..okay, just checked, New Zealand, cop from Hunt For The Wilderpeople.

Art is weird. This whole thing comes up in the comedians comedian podcast all the time. The sense of being unfulfilled, chasing something better at the detriment of your own happiness. For many on it, the chase might be more mainstream popularity or an hour's material so good it's timeless. The James Acaster podcasts recently cover it, really worth listening to. He's like; I played in bands so still have this fixed idea of a proper brilliant release that endures. Then the host is like; but what does it matter! None of this will be remembered in 500 years! Even statues collapse! Also James, you have fostered such devotion that fans have your phrases and jokes tattooed on their body.

The takeaway from all that might as well be; yeah chasing perfection might be ultimately pointless, but producing something with care and passion that ignites such love from people is meaningful. It's difficult and weird for artists to make sense of that and accept it; they still see the flaws, still maybe see something so personal to them how could anyone possibly connect as deeply to it. From the outside I'm thinking that connection is the goal. Imagine being in a band or being a comedian and having your stuff travel so much that you can fill theatre and arenas in countries around the world. I think that's extraordinary. I get the impression musicians and comedians don't think much of it though which I can't understand. Is it just more faces, all interchangeable, a total absence of ego to even dwell on it.

 

I'm thinking of Bill Burr being asked about performing in say Iceland, and him just replying 'yeah' like it's nothing when I'm thinking; that's amazing surely. You're from Boston, you swear and shout a lot as normal mode of communication, comedy is universal sure but..still. He's more just generally in awe of people paying money specifically to see him tell his jokes, after decades of sharing the stage with other comedians at comedy nights, or playing in theatres where legendary bands played, rather than feeling wowed that genuinely there are people who might say his podcast gets them through the day* 

 

Also more confusing for art is how derivative and formulaic a lot of it is, not comedians so much but bands if you think; 'well I'm just making particular music that slots in to genres that teenagers have always gravitated towards, so in that sense...they're not really loving *my* music are they?' If you genuinely do something unique to you (rare sure I know) or at least enough of a difference then the attraction from fans, however few means more. Another way to say; rather have hundreds love it than thousands, but not exactly. There's plenty of the most blandest formulaic bands that people do genuinely love. I don't listen to specific genres, I don't separate like that. It's like the genre exists, always has, new bands come and fill the space. That's how it feels like a lot of the time. 

*Like when Ricky Gervais was saying to Karl Pilkington; I keep telling you the letters and emails we get from people who say they were in hospital having a tough time and listening to you meant so much to them. Then Gervais says; and you just delete them! Karl is like; nahh.

Anyway, thinking more about the film, you reach a point where you're unsure what its message is; does he realise the single minded fairly ego driven desire of personal art fulfillment which reached its pinnacle felt ultimately empty somewhat, as opposed to the selfless generosity of teaching? It seems like it'd make more sense going that way; he becomes a mentor, doesn't go back to Earth. Going with obsession with art it doesn't show how apparently healthy it was for him. It could have set up his character as living in a messy apartment, he gets voicemails/texts/calls from friends he doesn't reply to, letters he doesn't open, he doesn't get enough sleep for his job because he's up late practising the piano. 

Unless I am misinterpreting Pixar's intention and so they didn't want to go full on even if they re write their films to death. There's one instance where getting his haircut before he leaves he says; why didn't you tell me all this life stuff before and the barber says; oh you always just talked about jazz so much.

 

I don't think it did a good job of transmitting his obsession with jazz at all really beyond him mentioning it. He doesn't walk down the street hearing jazz in his head, doesn't get distracted by his own day dreaming when he's speaking to people, tapping his fingers on wood rhythmically when in class, or hearing rhythm from the chaos of New York noise. There could have been instances of mundane every day life being elevated to art to him, bin men banging trash cans, and whatever else, which would further confuse the film's message because seeing the beauty in the ordinary like that seems healthy to me. 

 

I didn't register in the moment the line up of items on the piano were meant to represent the little moments in life he didn't appreciate. The helicopter seed was it, I don't recall any realisation scene from him really emphasising that. 22 tasting the joy of the pizza...in the moment you're just thinking of her character, not Joe. I can't remember the others now. I think the film could do it better. 

 

I think films that reach higher and dig deeper than the average film of its type are reacted to differently, but in terms of what it's trying to do I still think it could have been far better. Joe isn't really shaped and defined by art other than telling you he loves jazz, he doesn't express it naturally. It's 22 actually that is the more shaped by all the prominent people throughout history she's met. Quoting George Orwell was so unexpected that the part of my brain that recognises humour wasn't activated by it fully to actually laugh. tbh, only the Mother Teressa one made me laugh, probably because it was simple. 

 

Pixar uses those people more as a comedy device but 22 is the more interesting, developed character as a result. 

 

I still liked it of course. The body swap is a little played out now, and however you describe what Onward was doing. 2019's Spies In Disguise is another, a cg animation that went a bit overlooked it seems but which is funny and worth a watch for anyone who missed it. Also has a visual sequence I thought was the funniest thing I'd seen in ages, as obvious a joke it is the escalation of it is so rapid and well done. ...My sales tactic ends there, everyone must want to watch it now. 

 

[Loik V credern]

Also, I liked the score. 

[womblingfree]

Lovely movie and a great score. I’d actually have liked to have seen this at the cinema as some of the visuals are pretty spectacular.

 

What’s the deal with Disney+, have they given up charging for new feature-film releases now?

[JohnC]

6 minutes ago, womblingfree said:

What’s the deal with Disney+, have they given up charging for new feature-film releases now?

They intend to charge for Raya and the Last Dragon.

[Timbuktu]

7 hours ago, Loik V credern said:

 

I think films that reach higher and dig deeper than the average film of its type are reacted to differently, but in terms of what it's trying to do I still think it could have been far better. Joe isn't really shaped and defined by art other than telling you he loves jazz, he doesn't express it naturally.

I think a lot of people are like this though, in that they find something to give themselves purpose but are not really obsessed with the art anymore.  

Spoiler

Joe was focused on getting his ‘break’ but it was pretty open ended what he really wants and what to do with it now that he’s got it.  Soul wasn’t about obsession like Damien Chazelle‘s films are, where you have to sacrifice to be great, when more often than not you would make that sacrifice and not get anywhere close.  At some point people move on and Joe seems to be pretty much at that stage before he got that chance through his student.  He wasn’t obsessed, otherwise he would have been stuck in that place like the hedge fund manager.   I don’t see it as Joe having it all figured out at the end and I quite like it being more vague and open ended.  

 

[womblingfree]

I thought at times that this was channeling Inside Out rather closely, what with the existential reflection and different animation styles representing different human conditions. Not a bad thing, as that’s God-tier Pixar IMO.

[JPL]

One thing I noticed in it was...

 

Spoiler

 

How Joe came across as pretty selfish. He cared more about getting his body back so he could do the gig, instead of appreciating how he’d helped 22 to find her way. All the times he’d been to the barbers, he’d only ever spoken about himself and it took 22 to find out about Dez. He always brushed off his mum’s concerns about building a stable life in favour of chasing his dream and he obviously had a failed relationship with Lisa because of his obsession.

 

But, they didn’t seem to dwell on that too much. I thought he would have given his soul to 22 once he’d realised that he gained more from helping her than chasing his dream.

 

I also wanted to know what happened to 22 at the end.

 

 

[Uncle Mike]

I think much of what you're pointing out about Joe's attitude is exactly what the film is pointing out to you. 

[Uncle Mike]

Anyway, we watched it yesterday. I thought it was pretty good, and affecting, and very much enjoyed watching it. I do wonder a little if the editing process was impacted by presumably difficult Corona conditions - a few bits I thought were poorly paced or skipped over or overly-expositioned.

 

But overall, I thought it was a good time. My wife was also lacking closure at the end, like JPL said.

[Majora]

I don't think you need to know anything about what happened to 22 at the end.

 

Spoiler

She gets her spark and finally gets to partake in real life. Any further details about how her life turns out are completely unnecessary and irrelevant. Might be a great life, might not, it's besides the point. The point is that she got to start her journey in the first place and experience all the good and bad that comes with it.

 

[PeteJ]

I thought this was outstanding, definitely one of their best for me. The soundtrack, visuals and characters were all brilliant and it felt like a real showcase of Pixar's talent. 

 

(Though the last film we watched was Barnyard on Netflix, so my current standard of animated films was particularly low!)

 

Look forward to a rewatch. 

 

Only negative from a family point of view was that the kids struggled at times. The concept and visuals are quite complex at times and this especially confused the hell out of our five year old. She loved the middle portion of the film but the stuff at either end was lost on her. 

 

Our nine year old seemed engaged throughout but difficult to know if he enjoyed it, or if some the messages were understood. Unfortunately he's a bit of a closed book at the moment so it's not as simple as just asking!