“Toy Story 3″ wins Golden Globe

By
on

Congrats to all my friends at Pixar for winning the Golden Globe Award for Best Animated Feature. For those of you who missed the Globes telecast, the highlight of the entire event (Lee Unkrich’s speech) is embedded below:

Also in Cartoon Brew...

  • Mel Brooks Talks
    About Ernest
    Pintoff’s “The

    melbrooks-critic

  • Scooby-Doo Performs
    on Fox News

    scoobyfox

  • “Dorothy Of Oz”
    trailer

  • Jm

    Yes Lee Unkrich,he was around.for some people 1994 was a bad year for music, Kurt Cobain killed himself and Justin Bieber was born.

    • NC

      Kurt Cobain killed himself and Justin Bieber was born.

      That has to be in Revelations somewhere.

  • http://yowpyowp.blogspot.com Yowp

    Kid presenters = “We still think animation is only for children.”

    • Deaniac

      Which explains why Paul McCartney presented the Best Animated Feature award in 2010 for Up.

    • Jm

      then again….ALL THE ANIMATED FILMS that were nomminated WERE aimed to Kids ,except illusionist(a film that my mainstream friend watching the Globes with me had no idea about)

    • Matt

      Not to mention that within 2 seconds of the clip, the girl mentions that animated films “are not just kids stuff”.

      Enough with the snarkiness already, people.

  • http://underseriousdaydreaming Tony Claar

    My wife is not an animator. She is very bright. She noticed The Illusionist in the clips at the Globes and commented,”that is really beautiful”. When Pixar won, I was disappointed. Again. And again. You know, they do excellent work. But they’ve taken over all of our pocket books and our brains. People seem hypnotized by them now, as if there’s only one way, their way. Many of the artists themselves say they want to see new ideas and new styles. Many of them are traditional animators.
    Lip service is given to the great Miyazaki. But really, there is nothing wrong with drawn animation, NOTHING. On the contrary, it has a charm and a feeling directly from the human hand that cgi, computer generated imagery, cannot create. The BEST part of the Pixar art show in Oakland was the art itself; drawings, paintings, etc. We all must not allow the shallow “perfection” and shine of cgi to cloud our intuitions; we already all know what a great art drawn animation is; we CANNOT let it perish.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/VujadeEntertainment#p/u/0/3HaupcJwAdk Steve Schnier

    An animated film is showcased to a worldwide audience and the ‘haters’ are at it again… That said –

    Congrats to the gang at Pixar! And to ALL the nominees. Great work, everyone!

    • http://www.inkandpixelclub.com Sara

      I’m hesitant to lay all of the blame for this at Pixar’s feet, but I totally share your dismay at computer animation becoming the only option for theatrical animation. Again, I’m not sure Pixar is solely responsible. They are very good at what they do and have a lot of critical and commercial clout right now, but even so, I don’t know if they could use that to sell the public on hand-drawn animation by releasing a traditionally animated film. “The Princess and the Frog” is about the closest thing we’ve had to that thus far and that wasn’t exactly a box office smash.

      I’m happy to hear that your wife can still see the beauty in a film like “The Illusionist.” Sadly, I’m not sure that the majority of filmgoers can. I’ve talked to people – people who I would also consider very bright but not artists – who seem to share the view espoused by lazy entertainment writers: that hand-drawn animation is now a quaint throwback, that computer animation is not an alternative way to make an animated film but an evolutionary step, and that studios are no more likely to make a hand-drawn animated film than they are to put out a black and white movie or a silent movie. It still happens, but only on “arty” projects. If, as Glen Keane noted in that interview a few posts back, trained artists can be seduced by the impressive surface qualities that computer animation has to offer, how much easier must it be for the mainstream public to pass over a traditionally animated film in favor of “OMG Shiny”?

      I don’t want to see hand-drawn animation perish either. I love it and I firmly believe it has just as much of a place in theaters as computer animated movies. What I’m hoping will happen is that someone have both the will and the resources to make a hand-drawn feature that gets out to the mainstream public and completely blows their minds. Something (like, say, the Glen Keane animated short I suggested in the comments on the interview with him) that says to the entire world “drawn animation is so much more than you ever thought it could be.”

      On a unrelated note, can anyone read lips well enough to tell what Tom Hanks is saying?

      • Toonio

        Tom Hanks: “Yeah, wonderful baby, wonderful”

      • http://www.inkandpixelclub.com Sara

        Must have clicked the wrong link; this should have been in response to Tony Claar’s post.

        Thanks for the Hanks translation, Toonio.

      • Dario

        I don’t think Pixar is somehow “responsible” for the current interest in cgi animation. Producers are.

        Once they see a hit, everyone is running after it, trying to imitate and just see if they can succeed. The art of Pixar is amazing because is made by some of the most talented artists and unfortunately this is something you can only see in books titled “The Art of…”

        I study animation and I have watched hand-drawn animated movies many, many times because I want to know how the artist did it. How they made that move? How it looks like when I pause it. Oh, I didn’t see that! and then you keep on discovering things as you play it again and again. But with cgi animation that doesn’t happen in my case. I lost the wonder as I know a computer did some tricks and everything looks a little empty and artificial for me.

        For me, traditional animation is the best animation. cgi animation is like “digital puppets”, I don’t know..

  • Kyle Maloney

    I Loved Lee’s Jab at the presenters ages. haha

    • http://www.bishopanimation.com FloydBishop

      I thought that only helped drive home the point that the film itself was a rehash and revisit of old stories and old characters just to make money.

      How fair is it that an original, small film like “The Illusionist” has to try and compete with such large theatrical releases and deep studio pockets? It’s not fair, but that’s why it’s “show business” and not “show art”.

      I wish Pixar (and all the studios) would get back to making original stories and wolrd, and leave all the sequels to the movies where they belong: in minds of the children who watch the films.

      That’s not going to happen though. Best of luck to whomever goes up against “Cars 2″ and “Kung Fu Panda 2″ at future Golden Globes.

      • http://belfrydotinfo.blogspot.com Martin

        ‘How fair is it that an original, small film like “The Illusionist” has to try and compete with such large theatrical releases and deep studio pockets? It’s not fair, but that’s why it’s “show business” and not “show art”.’

        Floyd, y’know I had the same quandry recently while attending a screening of Mary & Max in London (I haven’t yet seen The Illusionist, so forgive me a tenuous link while I make the point). A good film, it is – and I respect it so much. That it got made, that it’s funny, that it’s well animated and designed. But it didn’t move me. Not in the slightest, except for one tiny part where it did – in the slightest. It was trying it’s hardest to. It did make me chuckle a few times, mind.

        Toy Story 3 moved me. Dragon did. Up did.

        So I wondered to myself, does the fact that Mary & Max (or The Illusionist, to bring this point back to relevance) didn’t have the same budget as a Pixar or Dreamworks movie mean I should cut it slack because, while it’s not as good a movie, it was made by people with a passion, and it took ages, and there was no money, and… the list goes on.

        But the simple fact is, no. A film’s a film, and a story’s a story, and Mary & Max was not as accomplished in those departments – forgetting the shiny CGI and beautiful rendering and all that – as TS3 or Dragon.

        As I said, I haven’t seen the Illusionist yet. But my point is, you asked is it fair? I think it’s fair, for what it’s worth.

        And, while we’re on the subject, a recent podcast (Speaking of Animation) had a discussion on why CGI is so popular amongst animators. And I think this speaks to my previous point too. According to the interviewee (John Hill I think it was?), CGI can provide the kind of subtleties required to achieve a higher level of animated acting performance (don’t shoot the messenger, I didn’t say it).

        Also, I think audiences (adult audiences at least) are drawn to it because CGI *looks* less like the cartoons they used to watch as a kid, and more like overlong special effects – therefore it’s okay. And of course, since Toy Story, these are films peppered with jokes for adults as well as for kids – much more so than you find in your average 2D film.

        Case in point, my parents like animated films, so I lent my dad my copy of my favourite movie ever, The Iron Giant. He hated it. “Kid’s stuff.” I guarantee you if it looked like The Incredibles, he’d have liked it more. If it had had talking animals, both he and my mum would’ve liked it.

        Sorry – I rambled a bit there :)

      • Chelsea

        Thank you for bringing this up!

        While I always admire the independent/ more ‘artsy’ films, I get very frustrated when people say they are inherently ‘better’ and ‘more quality’ than the ‘Hollywood’ animated features simply because they are not studio-funded or crafted.

        Yes, studio films always have a bit of a ‘rehashed’ quality to them, but that’s because they are being told to fit a broader audience than any small artsy film. The art films can tell any story they want and so they tend to be more intricate stories with subtleties that not everyone will (or will be able to) appreciate. Does this make them better? No, I really don’t think so- it just makes them different. Different movies for different folks.

        I never care about the independent movies nearly as much as I care about the ‘mainstream’ films like- yes, Toy Story. Does that mean I think they’re better? No, again- neither is better. But the Disney films, the Pixar films, etc… they speak to everyone, they tell broad stories that always resonate with me. I admit I’m more of a mainstream animation fan but I still believe I am able to see this fairly objectively because I love all animation. It just so happens my story preference is for tales that speak to a more general audience.

        People keep complaining about how Pixar is doing sequels and how they wish Pixar would return to their process of making more ‘soulful’ pieces. I don’t know where these people confused Pixar with an independent art studio but they clearly fail to recognize that Pixar was ALWAYS about being mainstream. It’s just that they make GOOD mainstream stories rather than bad. And now with the prospect of them doing more sequels, people immediately assume they’ll just be making bad movies. “They’ve sold out!” people cry. Er… excuse me? Have we been watching the same movies? And I’d love to hear someone tell me there was no soul in Toy Story 3. It will only prove that they completely missed the message of the movie and went into the theater determined to dislike it. I don’t mind if they want to argue over the story needing help- but if they fail to recognize the genuine effort put into the film by it’s artists… if they want to just throw that away simply because the film was made in a Disney-affiliated 3D studio… then they are not seeing the film for what it is. They are only seeing what they want.

        I adore every Pixar film but I can’t even count how many people I’ve heard complaining about A Bug’s Life or Cars. Now people want to say Toy Story 3 has made Pixar a sell-out, and they want Pixar to go back to the ‘good ol days’ of making beautiful artsy movies… I want to say- Did you forget that Pixar’s third film was a sequel?!

        People will be skeptical of the big studios no matter what they do, but I just wanted to point out how particularly ridiculous I find most people’s complaints about Pixar to be. Complain about 3D, complain about studio methods… that’s all fine. But complaining about Pixar being nothing than everything it ALWAYS has been makes absolutely no sense to me.

      • http://www.daryl-rhystaylor.co.uk Daryl T

        Here Here.

  • Iritscen

    Unkrich: “I want to thank Ed Catmull (camera cuts to someone who isn’t Catmull) and especially John Lasseter (cuts to… Judi Dench?!)… my amazing screenwriter Michael Arndt (cuts to Matt Damon).” It’s like they’ve cast the crew of Pixar with Hollywood actors!

    • Jm

      cracked me up with the Judi Dench gag.
      You should animate all this, real quick.

  • Well…

    I would’ve picked Dragon myself. Part of TS3′s awards sweep is simply goodwill from the first two movies and nostalgia. Tony, Disney is working on a 2D movie right now (forgot the name of it). It won’t die, but with how much 3D films are grossing 2D will unfortunately probably be something you only see infrequently in the theater. 2D’s stronghold these days is in TV and in some international industries, especially Japan (though they’re having problems of their own now too).

    • Scarabim

      I agree about Dragon. I watched it again last night – makes my 4th time renting it (from Boxee)- and I enjoyed it immensely. For some reason that movie just gets more fun the more I watch it. On the other hand, “Princess and the Frog” didn’t hold up, nor did “Toy Story 3″, which was even maudlin and depressing now that I knew what was going to happen.

      Not to take anything from Pixar, but I hope their next movies will have a little more fun in them. Oh, and patching up the plot holes would be nice…

    • Chris Sobieniak

      Still, some of us wished it was the other way around.

  • Toonio

    Despicable Me had better moments than TS3. And using the sad ending for the clip? really? I was considering my position against Pixar and the guilt trips but after this I’m not changing my mind, at least for a while.

  • http://www.base14.com Tyler

    Wow, spoiler alert much?

  • http://2dwannabe.blogspot.com robcat2075

    If you’re ever disappointed with who won a Golden Globe, take comfort in the knowledge that they are as close to meaningless as any award can be:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-j-elisberg/the-precurse-of-the-golde_b_808512.html

  • Anthony D.

    Congrats Disney and Pixar! You’ve done it again! :)

  • top cat james

    This clip clarifies the only reason I still watch awards shows-

    Cleavage. Lots and lots of cleavage.

  • Laser

    Congrats to PIXAR!

    The bigger and more inbred PIXAR gets, the better the chance of rebellion and something amazing & different cropping up out of it. Just like John Lasseter cropping up out of Disney, when it got too big and inbred.

  • http://www.stringstornasunder.blogspot.com Chris Powell

    Am I the only one who is REALLY Dissapointed that TS3 didn’t take home the best picture award? It was truly the best film of the year, not because it was CG but because it was the best film of the year! I really think it deserves it, animated or not…here’s hoping….

    • http://www.daryl-rhystaylor.co.uk Daryl T

      I am.

  • Zach Bellissimo

    Could the audience look a little more enthusiastic when he delivers his speech? Damn Hollywood types, not respecting animation…

    • Iritscen

      Most everyone was watching attentively. They’ve all done important things, so they’re not inclined to fawn on others. Plus they’ve been through this song and dance a thousand times.

      True, Mr. Pitt and Ms. Jolie seemed more interested in their snuggle fest, although I think I detected some amusement from Brad at Unkrich’s verbal stumbling, so at least he was paying a little attention. But in all fairness — what would YOU be paying the most attention to in his situation?

  • Matt Sullivan

    How to train your dragon was better. Sorry.

  • http://chippyandloopus.com/ John Sanford

    Anyone else catch this:
    “you guys deserved this alongside..uh…me”.
    Yes yes. You’re Pixar. You’re great. You deserve everything. Yawn.
    Dragon was better.

  • Lindsay

    I insist on echoing a common sentiment here and say that Dragon was better. Maybe there will be an upset at the Oscars. Likely not, but maybe. As good as the PIXAR guys are, their monopolizing of all critical acclaim and industry awards is getting pretty tiresome.

  • Chelsea

    2D or 3D, I feel the best storytelling won. Congrats to all the films that were nominated. Excellent group of films this year!

    Now about the Golden Globes themselves- I really hated how they cut up his acceptance speech by showing celebrity after celebrity (none which were involved in the film, minus Tom Hanks)- they didn’t do that to anyone else. And Beiber… come on.

  • erin

    I wanted tangled to win so badly. No offense to anyone, I just think TS3 is overrated. Its way to ‘Brave Little Toaster’ for me. I saw Tangled 5 times because I thought it was so stunning and moving. I even thought dragon was better. They kept me way more involved in the films then TS3. If Cars 2 wins next year then we’ve just lost all hope for animation. I am seeing The Illusionist tonight, I will probably like that better then TS3 also. :-/

    • Jonah

      “I will probably like that better than TS3 also. :-/”
      Well that right there says you’re going into it biased, so of course you’ll “probably” like it better.

      If Cars 2 wins next year, maybe hope for YOUR idea of animation is lost, but not animation itself.

  • Mike Russo

    “If Cars 2 wins next year then we’ve just lost all hope for animation.”

    Why exactly? How does films winning awards make or break what anyone thinks about animation? “Lost all hope for animation”? Come on, that’s just silly.

  • http://adreamer49.wordpress.com/ Jacob

    Congrats to Pixar!

    Truthfully I think Pixar winning the Critics Choice award for best Animated Feature a few days ago was a bigger deal. But non-the-less, Pixar’s dedication to story has payed off yet again. Well Done!

  • whippersnapper

    Wow, lots of bitterness in this here comment thread.

    Can’t you sad, strange little men just be happy for all the artists that worked on TS3?

    The attitude should be “Kudos to the artists at Pixar for winning again, and congrats to the artists on Tangled, Despicable Me, HTTYD, and The Illusionist on their films getting nominated. You guys all worked really hard and we loved your movies.”

    This bullsh*t infighting between all of us animation enthusiasts is holding the medium back. Stop fighting over the mac and cheese at the kiddie table and instead help fight our way to the grown ups’ table. If we’re ever going to have an animated feature win a Best Picture Oscar, we’ve got to throw all of our support at one feature. Do I think that feature is any of the ones up for Best Animated this year? No. But when that feature does come along, we’ve got to rally around it like never before. Beauty and the Beast came pretty damn close, and if we just take that kind of enthusiasm and excitement and buzz a step further, we can win it.

  • http://urvybalboa.deviantart.com/ Urvy

    While TS 3 did deserve this win, it’ll face stiff competition from movies about dragons and mutated chicken nuggets.

    I doubt that HTTYD will win Best Animated Film because of the stigma placed on Dreamworks due to the fact that Dreamworks films, up until 2008, were filled with pop culture jokes and bathroom jokes, making them the Family Guy of Animated films. I think it’s the stigma that jinxed DWA.

  • Matt

    I love all these people coming here simply to STATE that “Dragon was BETTER.” and just leaving it at that. Please take your sour grapes elsewhere.

    Yes, How To Train Your Dragon had some fantastic ‘moments’ in it. Particularly the quiet moments between the two main characters, like when Hiccup first frees toothless and the dragon turns and pounces on Hiccup and you stare into the dragons catlike eye. As well as the quiet palm nuzzle moment.

    It was a good movie with a handful of great moments, no doubt. But it was not a great movie overall. I liked it, but I really felt that there where huge missed opportunities, particularly around having a downed and flightless dragon in a lake pit, and a boy who finds, befriends and helps him to recover. That alone could’ve been a great story in itself, but I felt that whole section of the film was really rushed along. And for what? More awkward moments between Hiccup and his father? More screen-time for all of the other obnoxious secondary characters and their badly written dialogue?

    If “Dragon was BETTER.” it would’ve won. But it wasn’t, and it didn’t. Sorry.
    Get over it and applauded, grow up, go study, work hard and try to make something better than ANY of the films that were nominated.

  • http://MrFun'sBlog Floyd Norman

    Dream on. Animation will never be allowed at the “grownup’s table.” Way too many intrenched interests to let that happen.

    Yep, the infighting continues, but I fail to see how fanboy ramblings will “hold back” the medium. Animation will always be around as long as it makes money.

    We’re in show BUSINESS, people.

  • James E. Parten

    I would not have been surprised had “The Illusionist” won the gilded orb, which instead went to “Toy Story 3″. After all, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association has always struck me as closer to the film critics than they are to the people. (Remember that the New York Film Critics praised “The Illusionist”.)

    The congregation of under-employed and frustrated pen-and-ink animators may scoff, but the General Public will continue to speak. If a hand-drawn picture catches out fancy, we will go to see it. If not, we won’t! It’s as simple as that!

    Nor will we go to a CGI picture that smells to high heaven. “Nine” did poorly at the turnstiles, and we won’t even detail what happened to “Delgo”.

  • Jack

    DW will have its year next year. Whatever they make will be up against Cars 2.

    • Chelsea

      Because Pixar sequels are inherently awful, as this award to Toy Story 3 clearly shows.

    • http://urvybalboa.deviantart.com/ Urvy

      If they can escape the jinx they suffered, meaning their movies have pop culture jokes and bathroom humor (Up until 3 years ago, if I may add).

      • Kevin Vassey

        Let’s go over some of the sophisticated, non pop culture/poop jokes in TS3:

        “Nice ass-cot”
        “oooOOOooo, dreeeamweaver”
        “And a couple of Lincoln Logs…Um, those weren’t Lincoln Logs”

        Two poops and a pop song. And that’s without combing through the movie. Not to mention the fact that a lot of the appeal of the franchise in general is them showing toys some of us used to have. Of course we feel sentimental when we see a Rock’em Sock’em Robot set in TS2, or a Mister Potato Head, because it brings back fond memories. It’s still a direct pop-culture reference.

        As for the jokes, is there a certain count you have to avoid to make the animation community happy? Is three or four pop/poop jokes OK? If there are five or more, does that mean the movie sucks?

        Also, I am trying hard to remember any pop/poop jokes in HTTYD. Anyone??

        Thanks!

  • http://belfrydotinfo.blogspot.com Martin

    Toy Story 3 is a huge step toward animation being allowed to the grown-up’s table. Often I wonder whether it might’ve done us good had Avatar been in Best Animated Feature last year. Even though I didn’t care for it, it might have elevated our status among the masses.

    What does not elevate our status are CG SONG AND DANCE ROUTINES. If I have to sit through one more half-baked, nonsensical group of characters dancing to pop songs I’m going to scream.

    Yes, I’m looking at you, Despicable Me…

  • Lawrence

    Just announced 2011 Bafta nominations

    ANIMATED FILM

    DESPICABLE ME – Chris Renaud, Pierre Coffin

    HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON – Chris Sanders, Dean DeBlois

    TOY STORY 3 – Lee Unkrich

  • Levi

    wow…

    Take it from a dude who grew up on Toy Story. I was 7 when the first came out, 11 when the 2nd came out and finally 22 when the 3rd came out. I don’t know if my tastes have changed or what, but i could see right through the fluff. If anything, Toy Story 3 was the kiddier film compared to How to Train Your Dragon. How to Train Your Dragon had one thing that all the rest of these main stream western movies did not have this year…the filmakers simply treated HTTYD like a movie. Not an animated movie. A movie. Enough said.

    But hey, what can you do. I have my opinion and the big checkbooks can persuade other opinions.

  • So Very Tired

    “QUICKLY! Everybody jump on the anti Pixar pro DWA bandwagon before it’s completely full! This is the post to do it!
    Don’t let those crazed, ignorant, mainstream masses dictate the awards or direction American animation might take.
    No one else has the capacity to make discerning or intelligent judgments on what movies they enjoy or why! EXCEPT for US of course!”
    —
    Oh, I forget that you can’t convey *SARCASM* that effectively over the internet.
    Aaaah… the Cartoon Brew comments section, the ‘Fox News’ of opinions for the animation industry.

  • Some girl

    Loved TS3, but what is the point of getting other films noticed? Might as well sign Pixar up for the award years to come. I was one of those people who wanted HTTYD to win. :/

  • Blues

    Just because characters weren’t fighting with swords or flying around on fantasy creatures doesn’t mean that TS3 was any less adult or insightful. Those who are bemoaning this decision better prepare themselves for the Oscars. TS3 is taking that one home too.

  • Milo Thatch

    I feel like a minority in this TS3 vs. Dragon thread, but I thought Tangled was the best of them all. Talk about subtle animation, superb physicality, and a great mix of sincere emotional acting with cartoony animation not usually found in CG? Tangled had it all! Where it lacked in truly “original” material, I felt it was a breath of fresh air after so many years of pop-culture jokes and needlessly irreverant characters.

    But let’s just be happy that we had 3 truly great films (4 even, if you count The Illusionist which I have not yet seen) that are WORTH debating about which is better. Dragon was indeed AMAZING, but let’s be honest… DWA usually gets one award nod each year and flicks like Shark Tale or most of the Shrek series are hardly deserving of much adulation beyond the McD’s Happy Meal tie-ins…

    Pixar has earned their throne over the years. Will it last? Who knows. It’s nice to see Dreamworks finally begin to emerge from the cheap-joke playpen they’ve built for themselves. And here’s hoping that Tangled really does signal a strong return to form for Disney, the cart that went off the tracks for so long we almost forget to consider it a contender anymore…