Wreck-It Ralph

Because they had the rights/permissions to use Sonic. They don’t have the rights to use Mario, likely - as said - because of the deal with Universal this year.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Oct 26th 2018 at 3:08:42 AM

So why didn't he just say "we can't use Mario because Universal got the rights to the movie"?

O right because transparency/bad PR.

Because then it would like he's saying Nintendo is at fault which could harm their bussiness relationship so to stay in their good graces they have to be polite about things like rights

Can't they be polite AND transparent? Are these really mutually exclsuive ideas?

Besides, I would assume the Universal deal is the obvious answer and people could see through the PR bs easily so wouldn't they be blamed ANYWAY?

I don't understand what's impolite about the excerpt.

You don't talk about someone else's business deals

Press Conference for the film

How come it took me til today to see the TV clip with Sonic explaining to Ralph what WIFI means?

Looking at a 92% rating on RT so far. Interestingly, that's currently higher than the first movie's 87%.

Even so, Ralph Breaks the Internet might end up being an Acclaimed Flop.

How so?

Sequels dont' always succeed where the original film did,the first film was a huge gamble with video references but they pulled it off,this time it's even more of a gamble because it's internet they've built their plot around

It comes out tomorrow (basically today), and I'm sure there are a ton of new developments from people who have seen it! Be sure to use spoiler tags though.

Today, Facebook and Instagram were down for a lot of users, so of course Disney jumped at the opportunity to blame Ralph. Any publicity is good publicity.

Creative marketing.

Saw it with friends. The film was very bright, colorful and had some clever images but is actually quite an appropriate film about the internet because it is similarly distracted, unclear of what it is trying to say and ends up not really amounting to much. I saw it with a friend and we both had the exact same impression, it was basically taking the premise of "Ralph and Vanellope travel to the internet" and trying to integrate all the ideas and jokes that they could come up with in a round table meeting. There are about a half dozen ideas that very well could have been the focus of the movie but end up as a footnote among all the other gags.

The main problem really goes back to an underlying issue with the first film, and that is sloppy world building. It was trying to take characters who exist in a two-dimensional space on a video screen and reveal that they live three dimensional lives underneath, but then it affirms that they are always living three dimensional lives (with one plot point literally requiring Ralph get a better vantage point of the real world arcade). I always felt that was weak, but I otherwise adored the film because I'm a sucker for stories that have characters learning to embrace their perceived flaws and turn them into strengths, rather than merely eliminating their flaws outright. It was basically a matter of accepting the premise before you can enjoy the story.

With this film, it doubles down on the contradictory world building and in turn it means the story doesn't make much sense. It doesn't bother re-establishing the rules of their premise and that becomes a problem with understanding the new rules as related to the internet. It took me some time to figure if Shank was an NPC like the main characters or something else. And all the additional characters like the search engine Knowsmore, algorithm Yesss, Pop Up spammer and dark web virus maker are introduced as personalities that just exist a la ReBoot, which had a completely different set of rules. This reaches a head as the virus identifies Vanellope's code glitch and Ralph's emotional insecurity as functionally the exact same thing, when that goes in the face of even the basest understanding of the world.

Indeed it does seem like you don't get a good handle on what these new characters actually stand for. I'm not sure every kid knows what an "algorithm" is, though this film is sure to make them find out for themselves. As said...

..... Dammit Yesss you're responsible for animators dying on Youtube!

I just got back from it and I LOVED it. I liked that there wasn't really a big bad, it was the character's faults and conflicts that drove the climax, and that it was a really... hard to swallow message for Disney. Friends/Family vs. Dreams? That's a hard one. Especially since it ultimately suggests that you should persue your dreams and family/friends will understand.

So at the premiere London event, this happened.

Well, its the second Stinger of the film. There are two stingers.

The song itself isn't really a spoiler. It's featured so heavily in the trailers, it's even remixed to go along with the pacing! But how it's used in the movie IS a spoiler.

Saw it. I liked the first film quite a lot, but didn't care for this one much. It seemed a bit manic and scattered. The quest that takes up most of the film ends up being mostly useless, and I wanted Ralph to frickin' GET something for his pains in the end. The message of the original and the sequel seems to be, from Ralph's perspective anyhow, accept your lot in life, and help other people achieve their dreams.

The bit with the Princesses was amusing at times, but ultimately felt a bit forced. I liked no one's being able to understand Merida, with the given explanation being "she's from the other studio." I thought it was funny seeing a Geo-Cities and Dial-up banner down among the wreckage at the bottom of the Internet (I was looking around for AOL, too). Most of the inclusions, though, felt like unapologetic product placement rather than anything that added to the story.

I've seen a lot of fan arts, fanfics, and general anger over the ending, specifically Vanellope leaving Sugar Rush for Slaughter Race as it contradicts the first movie's ending/message and also makes Vanellope unsympathetic to many people.

I get that they were trying to do a move away to follow your dreams and find your happiness thing but in the context of the aracde world it comes with a lot of Fridge Horror.

I was dwelling on that point and realized. Vanellope doesn't owe Sugar Rush anything. She was poorly treated there, her goal was to be a racer, not to be a part of Sugar Rush. Slaughter Race fits her personality better and doesn't carry bad memories of mistreatment.

A counterpoint I've seen to that is that everyone who bullied her was brainwashed and she forgave them. Going by just the first movie she was happy to be in Sugar Rush as the best racer, especially when the girl gave her a fist-bump.

I think it's a bit of a worldbuilduing problem like the other poster said, where we don't really get a sense of what her duties as ruler entailed or what the reformed Sugar Rush is like outside the game.

Speaking of which, one part didn't quite add up.

Belle & Rapunzel: Kidnapped or enslaved?

Hey wait a minute, Belle was neither of those. She voluntarily gave up her own freedom so her dad could go free. I think the writers were just reaching for it.