|
|
Post by pitbulllady on May 15, 2011 21:33:14 GMT -5
"Expect the Worst, Hope for Nothing" eh? One thing to take into consideration is that this is Pixar's first prequel...their track-record with sequels is well...hmm...unsure really...but I think they've done pretty well for them. Now that begs the question...would this spur Pixar to make this a best-first-work? After All if this first prequel sucks, then others could say any future prequels they do will suck. So would this encourage them to refine the story and make something unique out of it? Maybe so, considering they pushed back the release date (Morely the first time, where it was originally to be in 2012 and now 2013. The second move was mainly for competitiveness with Twilight). As far as Randall's concern...who knows. *shrugs* Steve Buscemi at least understands Randall...and since he's being invited BACK...hopefully concession or two will be made. Sure with all the buzz about Randall coming up about the sequel, he'll hopefully look on with interest. Either in the "Ok...does anybody even REMEMBER this?" way or "Ok...lets see what people are saying about it". *rubs temple* A good I can see coming from this is a virtual understanding on Randall's part. While there is a grand possibility of multiple canon follies here...I'm hoping Randall's there merely on loan as...I dunno...temp or something? But anyways...hopefully they WON'T portray him as a bully or anything, because that would be wrong on so many levels. For one, Randall's a dedicate and a hard worker. There's PLENTY of cheaters in any educational system, so yeah we probably WOULD see his distaste for that, but wouldn't make him a bad guy. I mean to portray him as a bully (who generally don't do their work and cheat), would just be...well...plain stupid. What I'm hoping is that at least SOMETHING portrays to how he acts......well strip away the fact that the Scream Extractor certainly isn't going on at the time...and you'd have Randall as he regularly was. Perhaps, hopefully, they'll show SOMETHING that lends to his past. Afterall, he's the only person that DOESN'T have any past info. Roz...in a beauty pageant? What kind of info is THAT to state? 0_0 Still, info. Waternoose? Well his father/grandfather Floyd and when he took over the company. Sullivan? Armchair and high simulator scores, not to mention family traits. Wazowski? His mom. Celia? Well...her and Waozwski's relationship and that her mother doesn't exactly..."like men" Randall? Zip. I can't really be judgmental myself, too many unknowns at this time. Can only wait and see. Yes, there ARE a LOT of unknowns with this, and with the release date having been moved up from 2012 to 2013, that will at least give them a bit more time to "tweak" plots and such, to see what works, and what doesn't. I'm still not holding out much hope for a good portrayal of Randall, though. The question is, does Pixar see him the way WE see him, or do they insist that he is just another flat, 2-dimensional "villain" who exists only to make Sullivan and Wazowski look good? Given that "cheating" is so deeply associated with Randall due to Wazowski's error in the first movie, it's logical that Pixar will try to show him as someone who cheated through college to get his job, even though logic says otherwise. Pixar knows that they can throw logic out the door and people will STILL flock to see their movie and rave about how great it is, simply because they're Pixar. The Emperor. Naturally the Emperor's new clothes MUST look great, because he's wearing them, right? They have the attitude that they can do anything and people will still love it and won't question its sensibilities. Pixar is obviously aware that Randall is a popular character, otherwise they wouldn't bother bringing him back for another movie, prequel or not. We already know what happened to him, more or less, from the original, and as has been pointed out, they've never reused antagonists, ever. BUT, as you yourself pointed out, they've never done a prequel, either, so it's kinda like new territory with no prior precedence to compare to. They've acknowledged that Randall has a lot of fans, but the thing is, do they want to cater to the "I want Randall to be evil" fans, or the "I want Randall to show his good side" fans? Are they simply bringing him back, perhaps just a brief cameo, to say, "OK, here he is-happy now?" or perhaps, as I said earlier, to show him as completely awful as a way of rubbing our noses in it, figuring they can just finally write us off for good and be done with our begging and whining? I'd love to think that Pixar to too good for that, that they're above that, but honestly, given the total lack of communication from them, in spite of our numerous letters, petitions, etc., I don't know. And I'm not going to put a lot of optimism into this. Given how they react to anyone posting anything remotely critical or questioning on their Facebook site, I really think that they've gotten such a case of the "big head" that they really do believe they don't need us, or any group of fans, for that matter. pitbulllady |
|
|
|
Post by lizardgirl on May 16, 2011 12:25:28 GMT -5
I'm with you pretty much on everything there, pitbulllady. There was a part of me that was initially excited by the confirmation of Randall's return- and I think that's reasonable, considering the fact that we only 'get' fifteen or so minutes of Randall in the original, and that's enough for us to perceive a character more than what is portrayed on screen.
I know that Randall was treated badly in the original, but there are those glimpses, those hints that there is something more there. After all, that's what we've all picked up on, right? The little things he says or does that makes us all think, "well, perhaps it isn't so straightforward". Like, for example, you pointed out the whole cheating thing- I absolutely LOVE that moment. That insulted look on his face, as though he was saying, "you're accusing ME of cheating? ME? I'd NEVER cheat!" like it's completely against his moral compass. And yet such clues aren't obvious to everyone.
My point is, I don't think it's necessarily the case of Randall either being portrayed as good or bad. I'd be satisfied with a Randall who might be a bit of a git, but that, as in the original, hints towards something more. If they could achieve that balance again (and with a less harsh comeuppance), I could live with that. Of course, in an ideal world, Pixar would go one step further, but I really can't see that happening at this rate.
And, you know, I think Randall might mean more to us than to those at Pixar. I mean, we've had so long, so so long, to speculate and form ideas and simply wonder what might have happened, and what his life was- all of the stuff that we don't see in Monsters, Inc. He's like an old friend of ours now. We know him inside out, even though we don't KNOW we know him. A film that portrays Randall as being different to 'our Randall' would be heartbreaking. I just hope they manage to get that balance again, otherwise I'm sure I speak on behalf of a lot of people that we'll be devastated.
Sorry for the splurge of writing and thoughts; I don't think it's really sunk in yet, to be honest, so I'm still trying to get my head around the idea of there being more Randall...Like, more Randall! Yes, yes I'd rather Randall not be in it if he's literally going to be portrayed as the villain or the dumb bad guy who's there for comedy value. But...more Randall! I'm so torn. And confused.
I guess time will only tell what will happen to our old friend.
|
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on May 16, 2011 18:07:39 GMT -5
I'm with you pretty much on everything there, pitbulllady. There was a part of me that was initially excited by the confirmation of Randall's return- and I think that's reasonable, considering the fact that we only 'get' fifteen or so minutes of Randall in the original, and that's enough for us to perceive a character more than what is portrayed on screen. I know that Randall was treated badly in the original, but there are those glimpses, those hints that there is something more there. After all, that's what we've all picked up on, right? The little things he says or does that makes us all think, "well, perhaps it isn't so straightforward". Like, for example, you pointed out the whole cheating thing- I absolutely LOVE that moment. That insulted look on his face, as though he was saying, "you're accusing ME of cheating? ME? I'd NEVER cheat!" like it's completely against his moral compass. And yet such clues aren't obvious to everyone. My point is, I don't think it's necessarily the case of Randall either being portrayed as good or bad. I'd be satisfied with a Randall who might be a bit of a git, but that, as in the original, hints towards something more. If they could achieve that balance again (and with a less harsh comeuppance), I could live with that. Of course, in an ideal world, Pixar would go one step further, but I really can't see that happening at this rate. And, you know, I think Randall might mean more to us than to those at Pixar. I mean, we've had so long, so so long, to speculate and form ideas and simply wonder what might have happened, and what his life was- all of the stuff that we don't see in Monsters, Inc. He's like an old friend of ours now. We know him inside out, even though we don't KNOW we know him. A film that portrays Randall as being different to 'our Randall' would be heartbreaking. I just hope they manage to get that balance again, otherwise I'm sure I speak on behalf of a lot of people that we'll be devastated. Sorry for the splurge of writing and thoughts; I don't think it's really sunk in yet, to be honest, so I'm still trying to get my head around the idea of there being more Randall...Like, more Randall! Yes, yes I'd rather Randall not be in it if he's literally going to be portrayed as the villain or the dumb bad guy who's there for comedy value. But...more Randall! I'm so torn. And confused. I guess time will only tell what will happen to our old friend. I couldn't have put it better! I want to see Randall again as much as anyone, but not if Pixar just shows him as someone who is inately mean and dishonest from the start, since it really would not only be unrealistic, but wouldn't make any sense in light of him eventually landing a high-risk job! Clearly, Randall didn't get that position because of his status or connections to someone "higher-up", since Waternoose's dislike of him was pretty obvious. Even if Pixar does go the route of having him start out as a fairly nice guy, who gradually goes "downhill" in terms of his attitude and behavior due to something that happens to him in the "prequel", though, what would be the point in doing that if the situation is not rectified? If we just see Randall's downfall, which we know leads up to him being involved with the Scream Extractor and being thrown into the Human World and brutally beaten, that would almost make it seem worse, unless, as I am hoping, there are "cuts" between the past and the present and both Randall and Sulley are given a chance to realize their mistakes and try to do something to fix them. I'm hoping that maybe with the director having been involved with Cars that he will explore the theme of "if Sulley and Mike can get to be friends after such a bad start, then why can't Sulley and Randall become friends?" The whole thing about overcoming past differences is something that Pixar really hasn't taken on in-depth, and it would be a very positive one. pitbulllady |
|
|
|
Post by RandallBoggs on May 16, 2011 18:22:17 GMT -5
I doubt there will be cuts in this prequel...
Not to say that such a thing wouldn't work. I've been tinkering the idea myself through a...ahem..."project on hiatus". It certainly is do-able, and given the time it would happen (future-wise), it's...well...the right time.
Randall's gone, Sullivan's got his regrets, and Wazowski's got commitment to worry about. It's a time of reflection.
What I had was Sullivan thinking on "better times", because right now...it's not easy for him. He's in a job that he was NOT trained for, something he never expected to get, but he's "locked in". The C.D.A. know his dirty little secret, and his feelings are manipulated. He CAN'T let another person like Waternoose take over or something like that, so he forces himself to stay in the CEO position. He uses this "private time" to escape to easier moments. And with what he did to Randall, hopefully, weighing over his mind, thoughts go to moments that involved him.
This, of course, would lead Sullivan to "connect the dots", breaking down his once-image of Randall and starting to think straight.
Wazowski...lets face it. The guy can't commit to much. But Celia...well she might push things for him. *rubs temple* Dang...I WISH I could find that document...involves Celia picking out some snazzy looking outfits at the mall with Wazowski essentially being the "coat holder", effectively describing Celia's shopping venture as some sort of "medical condition that women have".
Anyways. He's at a brick wall with committing to such a thing as marriage or perhaps something smaller such as the "move in together" or "meet my parents" bit.
Actually the former seems like something as well. Sullivan and Wazowski's relationship also would take blows. While the later has Celia and essentially might have a good life later, Sullivan has not the time to involve himself in any sort of stable relationship, so he counts Wazowski as lucky in that respect. But when the green orb starts spouting simple problems, Sullivan would probably go all ape-$(@$.
I am SO glad that at least ONE thing those BOOM! comics did is show Sullivan realizing that Wazowski used him to stroke his own ego. And with all the stress and regrets the behemoth is under, he'll realize that.
They'd have a falling out, definitely.
As for Randall....*prods head with pencil* He actually didn't come in "physically" too much in what I was making. Do recall Sullivan aiming to get Boo a present for Christmas and entering her room to find a gift already there. It was..erm...some sort of uhh..."drawing packet", which essentially was inspired that Boo likes drawing apparently. The words "I'm Sorry" was written on one page. So whomever left it...
But yes, back and forths are definitely possible...but I doubt Pixar would do it. Would they be able to handle BOTH a "prequel/sequel" without ever having to have done the former?
|
|
brimmel
Randall's Skivvy (0-299)
Posts: 1
|
Post by brimmel on Jun 3, 2011 22:31:47 GMT -5
Hey all - I haven't been on this forum for years. I used to be plummyandslam - maybe some of you remember me. I can't access that account cause it's associated with an email address I don't use anymore.  Anyways, the prequel has been on my mind a lot and I thought I'd share my thoughts and speculations regarding the whole thing. When the prequel got the green light, my stomach did a lurch. Randall is still the character I hold most dear to my heart. He's almost real to me, like a comforting invisible friend or something. The fact that there is going to be more canon is terrifying. I can't imagine how I'll be able to handle seeing new Randall on screen...I'll probably have a minor anxiety attack in the theater, haha. I have mixed feelings on what they've released so far. I agree with you all in that I'm both excited to have more Randall, but scared and anxious about what they might do to his character. I'm going to assume he will once again be a sort of "bully", antagonist character (sigh), but seeing as the theme of the film is friendship, I'm hoping they will mix it with sympathy and offer us a multi-dimensional view of his character. More than the original film did, anyways. Pixar's films have a tendency to be pretty black and white when it comes to "good guys" and "bad guys". The fact that they snagged Buscemi so early on tells me that Randall will likely have a larger role in the film, as opposed to a brief cameo. Steve Buscemi is a pretty big name, and I don't think they'd include him again unless he had a significant role. (just my thoughts). According to IMDB, Fungus is in it too, so I assume the film will explore the relationship between him and Randall. Should be interesting... I'm already forming theories about how their...er..."friendship" may have started out. And I wouldn't put it past Pixar to disregard areas of canon they think most people won't notice - such as Randall's age. Monster's Inc. was intended to be a stand alone film, so they'll probably have to make some subtle tweaks in order to accommodate the additional canon. I just have a gut feeling the whole gang will be in university together, regardless of age. But who knows...Pixar can be surprising. A random thought poked into my head the other day. What if Randall was dating or had a crush on Celia before she met Mike? That might help to explain Mike and Randall's extreme, unwarranted dislike towards each other. I'm not sure I'd like to see that in the film (probably not), it's just a crazy idea I had. I'm so anxious for them to release more information. I'll be checking all the news/media sites daily, reading interviews, etc. daily. I can't even imagine what I'll think when the trailer eventually comes out - I feel overwhelmed just thinking about it. I really want to be excited, but I can't be until I know for sure they aren't going to screw up Randall's character. I really wish I knew someone who worked at Pixar so I could speak with them and have my peace of mind! |
|
|
|
Post by mentalguru on Jun 14, 2011 14:28:09 GMT -5
Been a long time since I've been here really, but I went on wikipedia (I am pretty out of the loop with the prequel, my enthusiasm isn't that high for it- in terms of Pixar I'm mostly looking forward to Brave myself) so I HOPE it's reliable but apparently Docter IS one of the main writers: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Pixar_films#In_productionHowever Stanton is too it seems is a major writer (who has Finding Nemo and WALL-E to his credit of course). The DIRECTOR however is Dan Scanlon... I clicked on his name and he was a story board artist an (awful) Little Mermaid sequel A Little Mermaid 2: Return to the Sea (you know the one where Ursula's sister came back for RAVAAANGE even though... there wasn't even a mention of Ursula HAVING a sister in the original?) ... Well if you haven't it's crap and don't bother. Melody (Ariel's daughter) was okay as a character (and I liked the idea of the daughter wanting to know the sea) but almost everything was awful in the sense that it made me internally cry ' my eyes, my eyes, the reaper is coming for me, oh god how could anyone have thought this was a good story idea?!'. The only other one where he worked on story-boards for a movie on wikipedia is the sequel to 101 dalmations (the animated one). I've seen it and it's not... awful but it's not great either. He did however work as an animator on Dreamwork's version of the biblical story Joseph though which actually was pretty good from what I remember. (Dreamworks did something movie makers in terms of the bible hardly ever do with both this story and the story of Moses- it made the people in the story... feel like real people we could properly relate to and love, which 99% of the time NEVER happens in bible story movies because they're usually awful- Prince of Egypt was better than their Joseph movie for Dreamworks but meh still it's good from what I remember). Overall a... mixed bag. Plus I don't see anything about him working on actual writing with a simple pen and paper (or well computer typing)- he helped in storyboarding one AWFUL movie and one mediocre one (which hopefully is not the same as putting the original story ideas...though it is certainly involved) and was an animator on a pretty underrated but good movie. He was also the animator for the 'Indiscribable Nth' which sounds kind of odd as a concept so I can't draw any conclusions on that. |
|
