Why do you think it is that "Inside Out" is so highly rated? The plot structure is ridiculously simplistic, the concepts presented are also very simple in nature and ultimately much of the conflict of the plot comes from contrived occurrences or circumstances that appear out of thin air.
Take Pixar's film, Monsters, Inc., which is similar to Inside Out in that it takes a simple concept that's native to most of us and then expands upon it.
With Inside Out, it's 'what would our emotions look like in action?', with Monsters, Inc. 'what if there were monsters under our bed'. Neither concept is inherently high-brow, it's just simple kid stuff. The difference however is how the plot points are laid out. Monsters Inc. sets up the premise, and then explains that there are repercussions, in the case of the film, for letting humans come into contact with the "Monster world". When it occurs, there is a clear conflict. With "Inside Out", the 'core memories' of the girl are lost. We are made to assume this is bad but aren't told why, and the consequences are not clear in the slightest.
Moreover, who are the characters in Inside Out that are supposed to be important? It's not the girl Riley, because we don't learn anything about her as a character and all of her actions are shown to be byproducts of the 'emotions', just like the other characters. The 'emotions' also can't be important, because they represent ideals, so they can't grow in any way. 'Joy' has to represent 'joy', and the same for the rest. So the initial premise makes it impossible for any of the characters to change over the film. Even then, that's not necessarily a problem. For a film like 'Ferris Bueller' or 'Indiana Jones', it's not always the characters changing but rather the structure of the plot that can be interesting.
However the film is structured around nothing. There are no stakes, nothing at risk, and none of the characters have any reason to be motivated. What a mess. Why do people like this?
hype train and stupid fucking idiot people who think it's deep.
Good Dinosaur was 100x better than Inside Out, the only worse pixar was Brave
>>63560278
Every point you tried to make is extremely sophomoric. Did all of the metaphors in Inside Out really go over your head? Characters that represent ideals can't be important? lol what
>>63560527
>Did all of the metaphors in Inside Out really go over your head?
This is one of the more useless kinds of post.
If there are metaphors which are so deep or important to the plot structure, name them.
> Characters that represent ideals can't be important? lol what
If you think that isn't true, explain why.
Simply posting
>wow you dont get it lmao
doesn't really mean anything. If you really believe that there are issues, point them out with a counter-argument, not just saying 'I disagree'. If you don't explain why you do, it's pointless to say so.
>Why do you think it is that "Inside Out" is so highly rated? The plot structure is ridiculously simplistic, the concepts presented are also very simple in nature
Sorry for not including Kant's trascendental ego on a children's movie
>The difference however is how the plot points are laid out. With "Inside Out", the 'core memories' of the girl are lost. We are made to assume this is bad but aren't told why, and the consequences are not clear in the slightest.
Riley has an emotional breakdown if the memories get lost and the consequences are her getting on the sketchy ass rape bus back to Minessota
>Moreover, who are the characters in Inside Out that are supposed to be important?
They're on the fucking poster Jeez how dense are you
>'Joy' has to represent 'joy', and the same for the rest.
The emotions can either be themselves or their opposites depending on the situation, you can see this on the movie like when Joy loses the memory cores. Yes it's simplistic but like I said that's how it's supposed to be and it works because really, we aren't as complicated as we pretend to be.
>So the initial premise makes it impossible for any of the characters to change over the film. Even then, that's not necessarily a problem. For a film like 'Ferris Bueller' or 'Indiana Jones', it's not always the characters changing but rather the structure of the plot that can be interesting.
wtf does this have to do with anything
>However the film is structured around nothing. There are no stakes, nothing at risk, and none of the characters have any reason to be motivated.
Riley's emotional breakdown makes her do things like taking the rape bus, we already established that. She's prolly gonna kill herself at some point after this or what have you. It's pretty clear for the emotions that Riley is in danger, ffs.
>What a mess. Why do people like this?
you're an autistic mess m8
>>63560278
>Why do you think it is that "Inside Out" is so highly rated?
It's good
>The plot structure is ridiculously simplistic, the concepts presented are also very simple in nature and ultimately much of the conflict of the plot comes from contrived occurrences or circumstances that appear out of thin air.
Complexity =/= quality
Every problem was related to Riley's shutting down of her emotions
>When it occurs, there is a clear conflict. With "Inside Out", the 'core memories' of the girl are lost. We are made to assume this is bad but aren't told why, and the consequences are not clear in the slightest
They're simple to understand once you reach the age of 10. Forgetting stuff is something we unconsciously do but regret later on. But it's ultimately part of growing up.
>Moreover, who are the characters in Inside Out that are supposed to be important? It's not the girl Riley, because we don't learn anything about her as a character and all of her actions are shown to be byproducts of the 'emotions', just like the other characters. The 'emotions' also can't be important, because they represent ideals, so they can't grow in any way. 'Joy' has to represent 'joy', and the same for the rest. So the initial premise makes it impossible for any of the characters to change over the film.
Wrong. Joy has a character arch. Notice how she rejects Sadness from doing her job but eventually learns that sadness is nessisary for emotional health.
Riley learns that she has to express her feelings because bottling them up only hurts more. She also learns that not all memories are supposed to happy.
>However the film is structured around nothing. There are no stakes, nothing at risk, and none of the characters have any reason to be motivated
they are part of Riley's mind and must do their job to keep her functioning. Riley is an everyday person and her story is one that many kids go through when moving.
Nice job missing the point of a Pixar film.
>>63560320
>The Good Dinosaur
>Good
What the fuck are you smoking?
The entire movie was White People Angst. There were no serious emotions beside what some sheltered middle class white kid with hipster young parents would go through, without a care in the world or pain in their life so they make up stupid stuff to feel bad about, like moving to a new town is somehow ultra-trauma. No, it's not.
If there had been an element like sexual abuse or serious trauma, like her seeing a friend die, I might have liked the movie more. I was hoping they'd do more with the parents and show them getting broke, going evicted, or becoming homeless, but no such luck. There looked like opportunities to build up to that too.
The only attempt at real "feels" was some goofy elephant prick dying. The worst part was at first I was hoping elephant man would be like the artful dodger or Fagan, all sneaky and manipulative out of desperation to get what he wants, but instead he's just a friendly goofball. Boring af.
>>63561239
hello nigger.
>>63560983
>It's pretty clear for the emotions that Riley is in danger, ffs.
boo-fucking-hoo, I miss home, let's make an entire movie about it
Americans are pussies desu
>>63561239
It's a movie for kids, it's not going to be about a girl coping with being molested.
>White people angst
Sounds more like first world angst.
>>63561304
>>63561358
it's pasta
>>63561372
Delete this.
I just don't understand what people were crying about.
There's been a lot worse that could happen to a girl other than moving, I'm not going to baww over that.
Not trying to act tough, I cried during up. I'm also not saying you can't be sad by leaving all of your friends, but I'm not going to be vicariously sad for you
>>63560278
It's one of Pixar less popular movies. Everyone forgot it existed a month after it came out.
>>63560278
>because they represent ideals, so they can't grow
That seems awfully portentous, what, your idea of happiness can't become complicated?
>>63560983
>Riley's emotional breakdown makes her do things like taking the rape bus
This might be my biggest gripe with the movie, that really doesn't seem like a big deal, I failed to get impacted by the stakes and it only served as an artificial timer to add suspense. She would have been fine on the bus, if she did come to her senses she would just call here parents from a police station or something.
Honestly the walk to the bus station seemed way more dangerous. But I don't know, I've only ridden school buses I guess
the lego movie made me cry but inside out was just an all around piece of shit
>>63560278
My biggest problem with the movie is the setting.
Holy Fuck was it boring as fuck
