Fan Rant: Why 'Wall-E' Isn't "Hypocritical"

When is saying that people shouldn't be all-consuming thoughtless animals, a "conservative" or "liberal" message?

It's a cautionary tale about the direction of our culture. I think it looks negative for the conservatives who are, in a slight way, supporting the opposite viewpoint...that we don't need to worry or be scared of this type of society.

And as far as I know, artists and writers are not really the "fat cats, and are still able to take their movie in whatever direction they want, regardless of their massive distributor.

Reply

I think the controversy about this film is largely silly. The story is basically a boy meets girl with a Silent Running type eco-theme as the back drop. It's easy to pick apart the logic if you want to. I mean, its 500 years in the future but the earth is covered wth mostly 20th century style garbage like VHS tapes? I could go on, but it's a cartoon!. It's just meant to entertain.

As a story and an adventure it works very well.

The controversy will only help the film, not hurt it in the long run because it will get more people to check it out.

Reply

Amen.

Reply

This is nothing new... it's always been easier to attack the person(s) putting forth the idea rather than the idea itself.

Reply

When did 'Left-Wing' and 'Liberal' become bad words?

Let's name some Libertarians(or at least people who advocate a liberal lifestyle). Hmmm Gandhi, Albert Einstein, and the Dalai Lama for starters.

Now some conservatives: George Bush (Sr & Jr) and let's go straight to Hitler. Heck if you want to be technical communism is a form of conservatism in its highest form.

To be referred to as left-wing should be a comment of praise.

Another Amen to Oneiroi. Pixar is not Disney(though obviously a part of it). I would go so far as to say Pixar actually is the great company that I thought Disney 'was' when I grew up.

Reply

I agree that I hope the controversy does not deter people from seeing the film. It really was a great, great movie that I will be seeing again and again. Pixar and Stanton are filmmakers. They, like most artists, create in a vacuum, just trying to tell a good story. As easy as it would be to criticize their naïveté, it is what allows them to make great films.

But I also disagree with you. There are hypocrites here. Plenty. As you touch on, there are hypocrites at Disney who distribute a film that decries gluttony while creating an empire solely based upon the trait.

Your argument that Disney's business tactics aren't surprising or unexpected is hardly a rebuttal nor an excuse. The outrage is based upon seeing the duplicity - not at the shock of the discovery. We're not surprised, we're disgusted. Don't confuse the two. But you claim we should all shrug to the camera, break the forth wall and lament, "It's a living." Many of us can't do that without becoming hypocrits ourselves and I admire those who put money in Disney's pocket by seeing the film and are still brave enough to call them out in the face of backlash such as your own.

Second in the line of hypocrites (and I'm being careful not to be coy or ambiguous) are those who bear an uncanny resemblance to the humans in the film. Those who watched the film surrounded with popcorn and chocolate, those who each have even-numbered chins, those who may have missed key elements of the film while getting their free popcorn and Slushie refill. My family had to trudge through their remains as we left the theater after they had completely missed the point of the film and instead used the opportunity to leave a trail of consumerism in their wake. And none of them knew the film was about them. You should have seen the face on the kids who had to clean the theater. They understood.

Then there are the licensing entities. The one bearing most of my ire being the theater owner who decided the film represented to him, a fantastic opportunity to hand out free, crappily made children's watches to everyone who entered as a promotion item. Seeing a theater full of people sporting their new "limited edition collector's watch" while the human characters on the screen changed their jumpsuit color because "Blue is the new Red" had my wife and I chuckling uncomfortably. But the film's not even about that right? Of course.

I honestly fail to see how you can congradulate Disney on this manipulation, citing some supposed risk at releasing the film. Sure, just as any other film, they bear the risk that it will be a flop, but you're saying they had something MORE at risk here? Somehow their corporate integrity could be compromised and everyone will reject them as ingenuous? Seriously?!? You can say that with a straight face even after you argue the point that no one should be surprised a corporation would do this? Really? Obviously you've convinced yourself (or else they're holding your son), but I seriously see no risk here and nor do any Disney shareholders. Do you have any more insight to this risk you see?

To your point and to try and be fair (after all I did pay to see the film and are therefore complicit in their manipulation), I actually don't know if the viewers or the studio are actual hypocrites or just simply missed the point of the film so drastically or were so blinded by dollar signs, that they thought the movie set a goal, rather than gave a warning. But you should know better than to buy into it and assume Disney's best intentions, as knowledgable of business as you sound.

Oh and I hope you get your son back.

Reply

The mood in the theater as they started to show what humans have become in the future was palpable. People shifted uncomfortably and stopped shoving popcorn in their face for a few minutes. I was struck by how the soda I was sucking down was mirrored by the equally large soda on the screen. I heard more than a few instructions from parents for their kids to haul out their trash rather than leaving it in the aisles.

If the purpose of art it is to engage people, to promote self reflection, to at times even make people uncomfortable, to start a conversation, then I believe WALL-E is a success.

Reply

I find the hypocrisy argument regarding this film funny beyond words.

Smith has provided a mostly useless stab at Disney, while providing not much else. Faraci at leasts gives you something to think about.

I can't get in Pixar's heads, but it isn't that strange to think of them working backward from an idea to arrive at "well, we will have to destroy the planet to get to our story objective" and not really concern themselves much about what that might mean to certain people. I see Faraci as being mostly angry that someone won't own the environmental stance openly.

It doesn't really matter to a lot of us.

Reply

I don't blame Pixar. They are an artist-driven studio. Creativity drives the animators, not the money. In this case, Stanton decided to put an anti-consumerism theme to the movie. So be it. That's his decision, not Disney's.

Now why did Disney decide to distribute the movie as it was without going to Stanton and saying "we don't like your movie because it sounds anti-Disney. Change it and add dialog." Well, ever since Eisner left and Bob Iger took over, Disney has been relying on Pixar to make them money. Disney knows that, even though they don't like Pixar's work ethic, their movies make the money. Basically, Iger told Pixar "We don't know how you guys do it. Whatever you do, we want it. We won't touch your movies or else we will mess them up and your movies will flop." (He didn't really say it like that, but it was similar.) This happened during Disney's acquisition of Pixar.

Reply

Conservatives accusing others of hypocrisy. That's rich. Pot, meet kettle, blah blah.

Reply

Another thing I'd like to add. RATATOUILLE had a similar theme and so did PIRATES OF THE CARRIBEAN 3, to an extent.

Pixar may as well be biting the hand that feeds them.

Reply

I'm really glad to read about what it was like to see this movie with people glutting out on vat-sized sodas. That stuff is poison, man. When I was writing this film up, I thought about pointing out the obvious dichotomy between the futuristic world of waste and the kind of monumental crap-production that the ancilliary merchandise requires. And then I thought, ah, why go there; it's pretty obvious and besides we're discussing a condition that's ancillary to this really top-drawer movie. Plus, it's hypocrisy. I'd be glad to have a Wally-E toy myself for the desk-side robot colleciton.
I would have been disappointed if the commentators didn't moan about the political content. Shows they were intelligent enough to get it...This film only seems sure fire this morning after the totals came in--surely, people saw the risk in this kind of movie? It's not harmless and cute like Finding Nemo, is it?
By the way, the new Futurama was made under carbon-neutral conditions...maybe if Pixar had gone in for that it would have defanged the issue a little.

Reply

If the main message of the story was to avoid consumerism, then I might be able to see the argument.

But the main message of "WALL*E" is that love is a great thing. The movie is a love story.

And perhaps the greatest love story EVER.

Here's my take on it:

http://slowclapchildren.blogspot.com/2008/06/category-five-my-5-favorite-films-of.html

Reply

Ok, I just saw Wall*E and now I can't wait till it comes out on DVD where I have that awkward moment at the local B&L I mean Wal-Mart.

Reply

I would also just like to point out that the rampant marketing of film-associated products that so much goes hand in hand with Disney actually seems to be less so for WALL-E, or at least it has been so far.

I actually went to the Disney store this weekend looking for WALL-E stuff because I really loved the movie, but there was only a tiny display with a few kids shirts, a few adult shirts, some notebooks, and some cups. There were no toys, no plushes (which is what I was really hoping for), no umbrellas, shoes, hats, snowglobes, towels, knick-knacks... I was actually quite surprised. I don't know if they were waiting to see how the film did or if the store I went to missed a shipment or what, but I was hoping for much more than I found...

Reply

Earth to Pixar: Think before you market

On July 5th I took my sister (age 7), brother (age 6) and son (age 3) to see Wall-E this weekend and was floored by the imagery of garbage skyscrapers and by the blatant environmental message, which wouldn't have made it to the mainstream movie theaters a few years ago. It had the socially-conscious feel of an independent movie.

The movie was so powerful that I became incredibly self-aware of my own actions within the first few minutes and before long I felt guilty to be drinking a bottle of water, eating popcorn from a large paper bag, and snacking on a box of Snowcaps. Multiply that by the hundreds of thousands of theater-goers and think about all of that trash produced by the movie industry.

I do marketing for a book publishing company, Quadrille, that is publishing a green home decoration book, Urban Eco Chic by Oliver Heath. We went to great lengths to get the book printed on FSC certified paper, both to underscore the credibility of the book and because it's the right thing to do. Most of my marketing will be done online, saving paper and shipping.

I think a better Wall-E promotion, rather than cheap plastic toys, would be to sell environmentally-friendly water bottles and snack packaging at the theaters. These would have prompted discussions between parents and their children far more than toys.

Reply