PIXAR's The Good Dinosaur

Why did Inside Out have to take place in an alt timeline? It's just in people's heads. It just has regular humans, which the Pixar theory already had plenty of.

Though I was about to come here and say that Boo time travelled and altered the trajectory of the asteroid. But the Good Dinosaur needs an alt timeline to make sense. Inside Out doesn't.

Does anyone know how long this film has been in the works? I read a review suggesting that it was rushed out to cash in on Jurassic World's success.

According to Wikipedia, the film has been in production since 2009 and was intended to be released in late 2013. So, no... it was not intended to cash in on Jurassic World. That reviewer was incredibly wrong.

By the way, this is the review I was talking about. I hope that link works.

edited 25th Nov '15 1:56:23 PM by Spinosegnosaurus77

"Page not found".

I was afraid of that. How's this?

If that doesn't work, you can access it on RT.

edited 25th Nov '15 3:33:55 PM by Spinosegnosaurus77

I just saw this movie. The plot isn't that complex, but that's not bad. My favorite part is the T. Rex Cowboys

edited 25th Nov '15 4:22:12 PM by Xopher001

T-Rex Cowboys were definitely the best part.

I was a bit disappointed their role was as limited as it was.

Just came back from seeing it. It was like I expected it would be: good, but not great.

For starters, did they HAVE to use the dead parent cliche? There was really no reason for them to do so.

There was also a strange scene where Arlo and Spot ate some fermented berries and started hallucinating.

But there were still some genuinely touching and heartfelt scenes. I really liked the part when the Sam Elliot tyrannosaur (don't remember his name) explains to Arlo that fear is a natural emotion, and that we can't survive without it. You just need to overcome it to do stuff.

Also, did anyone else cringe when Spot tore out Thunderclap's wing membrane with his teeth?

Oddly enough, I did not hear John Ratzenberger anywhere. He was credited as a character named "Earl". I'm gonna assume it was one of the velociraptors.

Once again, not a masterpiece (at least, when compared to Inside Out), but I'm glad I saw it.

edited 29th Nov '15 4:32:19 PM by MrMediaGuy2

It's actually getting worse reviews than Brave.

Yikes. I guess it's pretty unfortunate that it came out in the same year as Inside Out.

This is movie is actually pretty peculiar. From the moment its trailer came out, I had this feeling that Pixar had little faith in it and they were only releasing it to wash their hands of it. Not sure if that's true or not, but the fact that I'm in Disney World right now and I haven't seen any promotion for a movie that just came out doesn't inspire confidence.

Which park are you at? It seems like the kind of movie they'd promote at Animal Kingdom.

I was just at Animal Kingdom yesterday and there was a small section for toys from the movie in one of the gift shops in the dinosaur area, but that was it.

Disney Channel Latin America keeps on running ads over and over. But then again Latin America loved Brave....UGH.

I haven't seen the movie but reading a few reviews makes me wonder something. Isn't the "characters have to find their way home" plot kind of played out by now? It doesn't happen in every Pixar movie, but it's happened enough that I've begun to notice it.

Not to mention Inside Out has what is basically the same plot.

I saw this a few days ago. It was...okay. Its biggest problem is one that also plagued Cars to a slightly lesser extent—namely, it does not matter very much to the dinosaurs' lives that they are dinosaurs and not humans. For huge swaths of the movie, if you had only the audio to go by, you would never guess that it was not an entirely conventional "boy's wilderness adventure" movie featuring human characters. The only ones whose species really informs their lifestyle are the pterosaurs.

Since a huge part of the movie's interest supposedly hangs on the conceit of the K-T extinction never occurring and dinosaurs consequently developing intelligence and culture, this lack of distinction is a huge problem.

I liked Brave...

Anyways, this guy has a better explanation of TGD and the Pixar theory.

https://youtu.be/K7JbS2pINwA

I liked Brave too.

I knew that would be a SCB link before I clicked it. Love them.

Just got back from seeing it for the first time. Good watch (even in 3D) with Disney's usual sincere charm, but nothing new, daring, or surprising story-wise. I consider that a big mark against it because Disney gave us this premise of "what would happen if the dinosaurs never died out". Other than the whole agriculture and animal husbandry angle, Disney failed to do anything clever with that premise in mind. An opportunity squandered if you ask me. Loved the visuals (of course) and creative camera work. The characters were good in that they did their job of getting us invested, but I think the side characters were a little too come-and-go and not really expanded on, though that's probably appropriate since this is a story of a two-man journey through the country. But anyways, not a bad film at all. Now that I think about it, they could've made this a non-speaking film (letting the characters' expressions and actions speak instead) and it totally would've worked.

"What would happen if the dinosaurs ever died out?" We have to find the answers? ... oh you mean, uh.... literally everything we saw in all the trailers and TV promos??? Maybe there were no surprises once we even stepped into the theater?? Maybe that had something to do with it!

Problem is, animals with human-like behavior/speech is so prevalent in Disney animated films that I cant tell if this is this is supposed to be just taken for granted by the audience or should be treated as an unprecedented in-universe anomaly that's a direct consequence of the dinosaurs being spared.

edited 8th Dec '15 10:22:50 AM by nervmeister