The Summer of 2010 has so far been rather tepid in the movie department…until now; nothing has motivated us to hit the theaters with much urgency, even Iron Man 2. Originally, I was disappointed when Pixar decided to release its films during Summer instead of Thanksgiving week because Toy Story 1 & 2, A Bug’s Life, The Incredibles and Monsters, Inc. are always synonymous in my brain as pleasant holiday memories. Now I wait with anticipation after the snoozer Cars proved to be the rare exception and not the trend Dreamworks has earned. Toy Story 3 assures the universe that Pixar’s Midas touch continues in what will be the closing chapter of the beloved characters who helped Pixar keep Disney Animation relevant.
I won’t spoil the plot which is my way of passing on the favor I demanded of others who saw this before I did. The ongoing assault of advertising has probably done enough to everybody by now. What I love is the story’s economic approach. Normally with sequels, especially with superhero flicks, I hate how additional characters are tacked on to the point of drowning out the plot and why I enjoyed the original. For example, in Spider-Man, there’s just him against the Green Goblin. By Spider-Man 3 he’s up against the New Goblin, Venom and the Sandman so the character and plot elements get pushed aside to accommodate the rock ’em-sock ’em scenes. Three still introduces new characters (or toys) but leverages them effectively toward moving the story forward without feeling like dead weight to exclusively sell merchandise. If any other studio made this, Stinky Pete and Al would be present in Three too. Sorry if that statement appeared to be a spoiler, it wasn’t, it was stated to make my point on how Pixar didn’t keep “accumulating.”
It was amazing how far technology has come with rendering “real life” human beings in Three. In 1995, the kids Sid and Andy weren’t very fluid and the dog Scud was outright rigid like most computer-generated cartoons of the previous 15 years. Two demonstrated some improvements through the wiener dog and Al yet the unrealistic anatomy of toys remained the focus. Of course other movies beat Pixar to the punch on “accuracy,” but they couldn’t overcome the creepiness factor. By The Incredibles, I think Pixar found the right balance between cartoonish traits and realism then knew when to adjust in either direction as their future stories needed them: WALL-E just outright didn’t bother in some live-action scenes involving Fred Willard.
Worth Seeing? The question for Three really should be shifted to, “Worth seeing in 3-D?” There I give it a resounding yes, namely for the climatic ending which made me well up a bit and I’m not ashamed to admit it. The follow-up question for Austin residents involves the Alamo Drafthouse and Three being seen there is mandatory. I regret that my friends who live elsewhere cannot enjoy moviegoing at the same level as we experience. Meanwhile, Three joins the elite club of movies I can’t wait to buy on DVD in a era when Netflix streaming is sufficient. Hell, I might go again if it’s still around when we’re in Vegas.