Post by pitbulllady on Apr 2, 2013 22:48:46 GMT -5
As y'all know, I've had some very interesting and rather-deep discussions on Randall, MU/MI, and Pixar in general, with my friend "Brian" on DA. He's the one, if you recall, who brought up the possibility of Randall, and his younger version in particular, having been at least inspired by Steve Jobs, something that makes more and more sense the more I have thought about it, right down to the round glasses.
Well, he brought up something else today, that I feel compelled to share. We'd been discussing Andrew Stanton as a head writer of MU, and his techniques, philosophies, etc., and how those might show up in MU, especially where Randall is concerned. I'd told him about the first trailer, of how we're misled/misdirected to believe that SULLEY is Mike's first roommate, that other Scaring major that the clerk tells Mike about in the trailer, when it is in fact RANDALL, and how we VERY briefly glimpse Randall silhouetted against the window when Mike opens the door to his dorm room. Well, Brian went and watched the trailer frame-by-frame, to see what I had told him about, and came back with this:
Andrew Stanton is well known for using symbolism in his movies, especially in WALL-E, where he uses so many images to represent loneliness and isolation.
Traditionally, in both theater and movies, shadows/silhouettes represent mystery, something unknown, and when a character is shown as a silhouette, it generally means that there is a big "unknown" about that character, a lot more than what meets the eye. It says basically to the audience, "you might THINK you know this guy, but you really don't".
Now, if THAT is the case with Randall in MU, with them choosing to have him first show up as a silhouette against a bright background, I have to ask myself, to WHOM are they giving that information? To whom are they saying, "you might THINK you know this guy, but you really don't"-US, the fans who have always maintained that Randall isn't completely evil, but was acting out of his circumstances in MI and still has the capacity to do good, OR the people who still insist that he IS evil, beyond redemption? ONE of those groups must be wrong, and the other right, in the long run.
We've already discussed the likely symbolism of Randall's "embarrassing disappearing habit", and how it possibly represents how the rest of the world "sees" him, or rather, how they DON'T see him, but how everyone chooses to ignore him instead. I'm going out a bit on a limb here, and suggesting that the writers and Dan Scanlon(more on him in a moment) are going into this knowing that the general audience, die-hard Randall fans aside, is mostly going to remember Randall from MI for the bad things he did, for his role as the antagonist, if not the main "villain", you know, the people still writing about MU saying things like Randall being the "slimy nemesis" of Sulley and "...returning as bad guy Randall Boggs",and "that creepy Chameleon", etc. The filmmakers are trying to say to THOSE people, "no, he's not what you think he is". Anyone else agree with me?
Now, onto Scanlon. Brian linked me to an interview with Scanlon, done back in August 2011, over two years ago, which you can see HERE: collider.com/dan-scanlon-monsters-university-interview/
Two things interesting about this-one, Scanlon actually does mention Steve Buscemi returning as "a young RANDY Boggs", this being the first time I suppose anyone referred to him as "Randy", not "Randall". I honestly had not been aware that he'd be called "Randy" in this movie until this past February, I think, when the first groups of toys were previewed and that name was shown on the toys. Prior to that, I'd assumed he'd be called the same name he was in MI. I had not seen this interview before today, so it is interesting that Scanlon was already referring to the character as "Randy". The second interesting thing is...well, watch the interview, and pay attention to Scanlon's facial expression when he specifically talks about that "young Randy Boggs", and see what you think.
pitbulllady
Well, he brought up something else today, that I feel compelled to share. We'd been discussing Andrew Stanton as a head writer of MU, and his techniques, philosophies, etc., and how those might show up in MU, especially where Randall is concerned. I'd told him about the first trailer, of how we're misled/misdirected to believe that SULLEY is Mike's first roommate, that other Scaring major that the clerk tells Mike about in the trailer, when it is in fact RANDALL, and how we VERY briefly glimpse Randall silhouetted against the window when Mike opens the door to his dorm room. Well, Brian went and watched the trailer frame-by-frame, to see what I had told him about, and came back with this:
Andrew Stanton is well known for using symbolism in his movies, especially in WALL-E, where he uses so many images to represent loneliness and isolation.
Traditionally, in both theater and movies, shadows/silhouettes represent mystery, something unknown, and when a character is shown as a silhouette, it generally means that there is a big "unknown" about that character, a lot more than what meets the eye. It says basically to the audience, "you might THINK you know this guy, but you really don't".
Now, if THAT is the case with Randall in MU, with them choosing to have him first show up as a silhouette against a bright background, I have to ask myself, to WHOM are they giving that information? To whom are they saying, "you might THINK you know this guy, but you really don't"-US, the fans who have always maintained that Randall isn't completely evil, but was acting out of his circumstances in MI and still has the capacity to do good, OR the people who still insist that he IS evil, beyond redemption? ONE of those groups must be wrong, and the other right, in the long run.
We've already discussed the likely symbolism of Randall's "embarrassing disappearing habit", and how it possibly represents how the rest of the world "sees" him, or rather, how they DON'T see him, but how everyone chooses to ignore him instead. I'm going out a bit on a limb here, and suggesting that the writers and Dan Scanlon(more on him in a moment) are going into this knowing that the general audience, die-hard Randall fans aside, is mostly going to remember Randall from MI for the bad things he did, for his role as the antagonist, if not the main "villain", you know, the people still writing about MU saying things like Randall being the "slimy nemesis" of Sulley and "...returning as bad guy Randall Boggs",and "that creepy Chameleon", etc. The filmmakers are trying to say to THOSE people, "no, he's not what you think he is". Anyone else agree with me?
Now, onto Scanlon. Brian linked me to an interview with Scanlon, done back in August 2011, over two years ago, which you can see HERE: collider.com/dan-scanlon-monsters-university-interview/
Two things interesting about this-one, Scanlon actually does mention Steve Buscemi returning as "a young RANDY Boggs", this being the first time I suppose anyone referred to him as "Randy", not "Randall". I honestly had not been aware that he'd be called "Randy" in this movie until this past February, I think, when the first groups of toys were previewed and that name was shown on the toys. Prior to that, I'd assumed he'd be called the same name he was in MI. I had not seen this interview before today, so it is interesting that Scanlon was already referring to the character as "Randy". The second interesting thing is...well, watch the interview, and pay attention to Scanlon's facial expression when he specifically talks about that "young Randy Boggs", and see what you think.
pitbulllady
