Dinosaur in charge
You can see that “Dinosaurs in Charge” grew out of an original idea: what would have happened if the dinosaurs hadn’t gone extinct. But the idea developed a setup that embarrassed art as much as science.
It must be said that there is something wrong with someone who seeks truth in fiction. But to use this as an excuse to avoid science is to be a good apprentice to Mr. Cui, given that Pixar has managed the whole scene to this level of special effects, and given that the director and others have talked in behind-the-scenes interviews about how much effort they have put into making the world feel real.
We don’t have to say how reasonable it was that dinosaurs developed into a herding society, but the lack of flexible and liberated upper limbs, and the ability to build huts and plow fields with just one mouth, have wiped out the evolutionary significance of humans and primates as a whole. Let’s not talk about Tyrannosaurus Rex’s grotesque and completely irrational running posture, adapted to suit the cowboy style, but for a large cold-blooded thermo herm that doesn’t even need to wear clothes or grow hair, it’s amazing enough that it needs a fire to keep warm at night, let alone how it gets started. We don’t say how the Earth in the universe can match the brightness of the sun, or how half of the planet can be cloudless, but the strong hostility to hunting for meat, the ideological tendency of blind and unbalanced vegetarianism is already evident.
Is the same meat, farmed ugly can be killed to eat, wild cute cannot swallow?
Call it nitpicking, but this is Pixar, and a Pixar with a habit of driving itself into dead ends.
Even if the majority of the audience is not scientifically literate, it is clear that the solution has not been found for how this gummy human device can blend in with the scene-like background without offending.
“Dinosaur in Charge” is already pretty bare bones in terms of characters.
Let’s not mention that the main characters can be counted on two hands. From the perspective of the main characters, the recognition degree of the image is very low, and the utilization rate of the characters is even low. We can even say that it is a total failure of image design that leads to the sheer number and utilization of characters.
The whole pale and young story can be roughly divided into six paragraphs, and except for the parents and the villain, other characters only appear in their own paragraphs, and do not have any sublimation or enhancement function to the whole story except as passers-by.
You could say that everyone in life is just passing through. But in the movies, that’s what fucking bullshit is.
The powerlessness of the characters is followed by the powerlessness of the dramatic conflict. This similar vacuity of character is similar to that of After Earth, the scientology god of the Emperor’s exaltation of his son, and even surprisingly consistent in its spiritual core. The lack of nutrition and depth of the plot and character relationship, forcing Disney to release directly to DVD “Planes
The movie even parodies parts of The Lion King.
But the difference between “The Dinosaur” and “The Lion King” is 100 “Ice Age
Now that we’re talking about “Ice Age,” a little comparison between the two makes the gap even starker. “Ice Age” is Blue Sky Studios’ first blockbuster in a series. The modeling of the first episode in 2002 was rudimentary, with few polygons for characters and scenes and hard lines. Admittedly, it has been updated repeatedly in subsequent installments, but the general art style is well established and well integrated. On the other hand, in “The Dinosaurs,” Pixar’s famous hair effects don’t work, and as a result, the Tyrannosaurus Rex is almost a clone of “Ice Age 3.” “Ice Age” has a unique setting and in-depth exploration both in the design of lines and the relationship between characters. Similarly, when sending children home, the audience can easily feel the emotional connection established between the protagonist and the audience. On the other hand, “Taking Charge of the Dinosaur” scores almost zero in this regard. The setting of the dinosaur protagonist and the human pet is nothing more than the setting, and the human child is like a dog in human skin (Wolf) without any character — and Doug in “Up”, who is really a dog, has more character than this man.
This feeling of wringing, as well as the overall style of pleasant chat with different painting styles, fills every picture of the film.
And the plot，Is there a plot to this Pussycat story?
But look at “The Cat” in the character growth of the effort, in the story and ideological significance of the effort, and look at “The Cat” in the production of restrictions, “the Dinosaur” not feels ashamed?
Here.
As a Pixar film, “Dinosaur in Charge” is a major disappointment. The topic of death is inappropriate for children, the story is sketchy and inappropriate for adults, the storyline is weak to none, the characters lack credibility, and the perfunctory ending is downright gruesome. Disney and Pixar’s low profile in promoting the film may also be recognition of its own lack of quality.
Compared to the equally disastrous “The Hunger Games: Part 2,” which was released the previous week, “The Dinosaurs” and “The Hunger Games: Part 3” received surprisingly similar ratings across the media, and the scores included were surprisingly similar.
“Their children, the back of the palm is meat, then bear also reluctant to beat” mentality has been at a glance.
Oh, and one of them is as aesthetically awful as the hallucinogenic footage in “The Monk Comes down the Mountain,” and a potentially bad incentive for teenage drug use. It makes you wonder if the rating and censorship authorities have turned a blind eye.
But perhaps the MPAA has already closed its eyes and gone to sleep.
