Directed by Lee Unkrich.
In recent times the words Disney and Pixar has been synonymous with animated perfection. There is rarely any doubt that when you go to see the latest Pixar offering, you will be delighted by an original concept, instantly loveable characters and a tear for every laugh. It is therefore odd that with the long-awaited Toy Story threequel, the studio that made flying balloon houses and Michelin-starred rats work on screen has churned their most predictable and undaring film to date, proving once and for all that it’s time for Woody, Buzz and the gang to get back in their toy box and stay there.
The once loved cowboy and space ranger duo have been gathering dust for the past few years as owner Andy has grown up and lost interest in his childhood favourites. If this wasn’t depressing enough for our heroes, Andy is going to college and must decide which toys to keep and which to chuck. Desperate to avoid the trash, the toys escape to Sunnyside Daycare Centre to be loved once more by the children. However, under the protective rule of a host of new playthings, the toys discover that getting back to Andy would be a more favourable future.
The main flaw with the film is a very un-Pixar one: the storyline. The shenanigans at Sunnyside separate Buzz and Woody for too much of the film, a mistake that was also present in Toy Story 2, while new toys Lots-O’-Huggin’ Bear and Ken only serve to move along the unoriginal, Great Escape-inspired plot. It seems that somewhere along the way, Pixar have forgotten the running joke that made the first two films such a joy – that our protagonists are not action heroes. The hilarity of the Toy Story franchise comes when Buzz Lightyear wrongly believes he can fly, or when crossing a busy road becomes an epic challenge, and by giving the toys a grand adventure like the escape from Sunnyside, the writers are taking out the innocence and naivety that is the essential foundation of Toy Story.
This is a shame, because the opening five minutes are so promising, and maintain a focus on the childlike imagination which gives toys their life and soul. Developments in technology since the last Toy Story film mean that the action scenes can be exhilarating, for example when Woody and Bullseye chase down a runaway train, or when Buzz escapes an explosion of plastic monkeys. However, be warned that the 3D is largely unnoticeable. From this point on, the film nonchalantly ticks boxes until the credits roll. Boring new characters unforgivably shunt out originals like Rex, Hamm and Slinky, while cuddly bear Lotso couldn’t be a more obvious villain if he were voiced by Max Von Sydow.
The reason that Toy Story 3 is so immediately forgettable is because it lacks anything resembling balls. Recent films like Up and How To Train Your Dragon contained ambitious themes like bereavement and amputation, and when Toy Story 3 should be reaching for the skies, it barely gets to infinity, let alone beyond it. There is rarely a moment when the toys are in peril, and their escape from the day care centre seems too easy to be worth our time.
Some critics have noted that the film should come with a choking up hazard, and there is one scene towards the end of the film which not only highlights the bond between the toys, but also their acceptance that they have become redundant. It is a poignant moment, but like most of the good things about Toy Story 3, it is quickly shoved to one side to make way for an uninspiring happily-ever-after climax and self-indulgent, curtain call style denouement. The opening short, Day & Night, may be worth the ticket price alone, but Toy Story 3 never matches this standard, and is unchallenging to the point of being dull. Don’t believe the Buzz.
Mr Hudson’s quirky band were brilliant too, backing singer Jo had a beautiful and powerful voice and flawless drummer who didn’t slow down all night! The final song sung was a new single entitled Forever Young. Every one knew the words and the audience sung louder than him. It was an amazing feeling to be singing with so many other people; it was like a huge choir reciting a chant that they all believed in.
It was one of the most fantastic gigs I had ever been to and I was thoroughly taken aback by the intensity of it. I would recommend anyone who enjoys music to go to one of his concerts. Mr Hudson writes careful and profound lyrics to his songs making them easy to relate to. The songs have catchy tunes and are good to dance to. Despite a rather uninspiring start it was an evening I would defiantly recommend.
oh god what the fuck is wrong with you, you have NO SOUL.
I think pretty much the whole world is against you on that view, and for good reason. It was a good movie. Cut the bull**** such as "doesn't contain ambitious scenes" – you've obviously been studying an arts subject for a bit too long and forgotten how to just enjoy a film.
No no no. I absolutely loved this film. So many classic moments. 5*. You've gone to the cinema expecting some Nouvelle Vague and watched a Disney film. Of course its not ground breaking, arty or full of deeper meanings. Its a children's film, but a bloody good one. Remember to think about what you're watching when you're writing!
Obviously reviews are subjective, but it's surprising this one has so altered from what seems the mainstream reaction (even amongst critics), which is glowing praise. I thought the film was great and would be surprised if most people (not least those our age) didn't share this conclusion.
It seems to me that the reviewer is taking this point of view just to try and be different – maybe because he left it so late and so didn't want to just echo all the other reviews that were out 2 weeks ago?
What a terrible review. This just proves that its not just Cambridge Uni students who are snobby in this town. This was one of the LEAST predictable Pixar films I have seen. What the reviewer is clearly too dim to contemplate is that being DISNEY, the outcome is obviously very likely (if not definitely) going to be crowd pleasing. Still, I did not know how the film would end, or what it would include. The newer Pixar movies mentioned have adjusted along with the times, and the sensitiviy of younger viewers compared to 10 years ago (Even though both the movies mentioned also had happy endings). Clearly the Pixar animators wanted to keep Toy Story in the same believable context of the first and second movies. As for not being in peril, the toys were in danger several times, and several children in the audience were very upset at one particular moment mentioned above. Some people I have spoken to truly believed in that moment that it would not all end okay.
In conclusion, I have to agree with Andrew – given the fact that this review is so contrasting with the mainstream and critical reaction, it is clear that the reviewer is desperately trying to pick faults with an excellent movie. This is probably in order to recieve some sort of recognition or attention for being negative about an overwhelmingly well rated film. Well, hats off to you.
I just realised that this newspaper is for Cambridge students. In which case I take back the before statement, as obviously its the Cambridge students who are snobby and not the town in general.
Let's not generalize though – this article is the opinion (which he is entitled to) of one "snobby" Cambridge student. The 2 first comments clearly show 2 university people who do not agree, therefore the evidence is against you in saying the students are snobby.
why do you want toys to have balls you unutterable pervert?
I definitely enjoyed the film more than the reviewer did, but I don't think he's criticising the film for the sake of it. The laughter count wasn't as consistently high as the previous two films (more a case of laughing because you already know the main characters and what they're like.) Also, I did find the ending rather predictable – at the most perilous moment in the film, it was clear who was missing and therefore how they'd be saving the day.
I think the point that Toy Story is best when focusing on innocence and naivete is a very fair one – the scenes where the toys have to be ingenious and imaginative in order to escape feel far more satisfying than the film's oddly epic climax.
So I would've rated it higher than three stars, but definitely think the other Toy Story films are better.
Let me explain to you why you're wrong…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf6NvcUor-w
You or Mark Kermode?
There are in fact two whole posters on this page which say "The breakout comedy of the summer", so I find it odd you chose not to write a single sentence on the quality of the jokes. Did you not find it funny? I thought the movie was at least up to par with the last two in terms of dialogue, visual gags and just general frequency of humour, which is probably the most important factor.
Can't agree with any of your criticisms of the movie really. I think the story is strongest of the three and all because the themes are not as obvious or strong as in Up, doesn't mean they are worse and it doesn't make Toy Story 3 any worse of a film. I'm very impressed with the universe that Pixar created and how they are able to flesh out the idea of animate toys while keeping it consistent, and I think they took it the themes they've been setting up to its natural conclusion in the 3rd film, and did it almost perfectly.
The point isn't that they're redundant. The reason that part is shoved aside is because that's not the point they were trying to make; it was a fake ending, just another cinematic tool, and quite frankly it worked because many people, myself included, believe that they could have died right there and then.
Even though it would have somewhat made sense that they just got incinerated, it wouldn't have at all been consistent with the rest of the film. The idea is not that they become redundant after the child outgrows them; it's that they DON'T become redundant, even though that was their biggest fear throughout the movie, and the poignant moments come in the last 5 minutes not the 5 minutes before that. If anyone thinks the ending was there just to please kids, then they probably didn't understand the point of the Toy Story movies, and I thought it was the perfect ending to the trilogy. In fact, I think any unhappy ending would only have been done for the sake of it, for shock and controversy, and that would have been far worse.
As for innocence and naivety, the joke that they are not action heroes, that was definitely true for the first Toy Story but it was definitely not in the second one (See: the ending at the airport, which was just about as grand as anything in Toy Story 3) and there is no reason why you should have expected this for the 3rd movie. The films had grown beyond that already and I know some people who think that's why the sequels are not as good, fair enough, but to blast Toy Story 3 so much based on that is unfounded. I don't really believe the hilarity of Toy Story just comes from stuff like Buzz thinking he could fly either, or even mainly comes from that. I think it was something that was dropped after the first one, and probably for the wiser because they wouldn't be able to expand the storylines if they kept the toys as they were in the first one.
All valid points, but I think I should point out that I would never rate a film badly just 'to recieve some sort of recognition or attention for being negative about an overwhelmingly well rated film'.
Bottom line is, I've seen better films. There were a couple of funny moments (I particularly liked Chuckles the clown) but on the whole I found the film unengaging. I can't help it that other critics are bumming it, and my guess is that with repeated viewings people will realise that the film isn't the masterpiece it has been made out to be.
3 stars isn't a bad rating – it's a nice film, just nothing special. It is weird that I am the only person on earth (apart from my brother) who believes this, but hey, I think Rush Hour 2 is the best film ever made. What do I know?
While I didn't absolutely hate the film, I maintain that is was nowhere near as good as it's two predecessors.
Except for a handful of titters – mainly coming from Spanish Buzz – TS3 just didn't deliver on the comedy front. Equally, I thought the opening scene was fantastic, but the rest of the film, particularly the middle act, sagged and I became uninterested very quickly.
I understand that it's still a kids film at heart, but the last ten years have shown us that kids films don't have to be simple and predictable. TS3 seemed to tick all the expected boxes and didn't dare to try anything challenging or against the ordinary. With the exception of the scene where the toys were about to get incinerated (a truly touching moment thwarted by a ridiculous cop-out resolution), nothing else resonated with me.
Of course, if it ain't broke don't fix it. But look at animated masterpieces such as Monsters Inc, Up or How To Train Your Dragon: they don't feel forced or pushing for tears and laughter. They are geniunely funny and emotional, daring to go beyond the realms of what is expected. In comparison TS3 is child's play.
All in all, it's not a bad film, and it is admittedly an enjoyable watch. But is it the best of the 3? Certainly not. And I'm absolutely amazed that it's found itself in the Top 10 of IMDb's 250 Best Films. Decent review, nice to see someone of the same opinion of me but unfortunate that the majority just shout down those who oppose them and affirm they MUST be wrong!
Clearly this "Rob Young" character should not be writing movie reviews as he has absolutely no clue whatsoever. Toy Story 3 is a masterpiece and has been applauded worldwide as the pinnacle of Pixar's imagination and creativity. The storyline is immersive, the characters are engaging and the animation is breathtaking. The emotional and timeless ending rounds off this classic perfectly.
Fair enough, you're entitled to your opinion, but I agree with the other posters who comment that you're probably just trying to go against the mainstream views. All the big guns have unanimously awarded this film five stars/ten out of ten, as it rightly deserves.
well to be honest reviews are generally considered to reflect the *mainstream* opinion, so that other people know whether its worth seeing a film or not. for example, i absolutely *hated* kick ass and thought it was the worst movie ive ever seen, but boys obviously love it. i would therefore look at it subjectively even though i didnt like the movie myself. i get that this is the reviewers own opinion but just because they are too mature or something to enjoy this movie for what it is, a KIDS movie, is not anyone elses problem. u need to be realistic about how a kids film is going to be played out? get real. *obviously* its going to be predictable and have a happy lovey dovey ending…and so did toy storys one and two!!??! this was just a pretty bad review imo. it was the perfect ending to the trilogy and enjoyed by all, so to be fair that guy had a point when he said this is a bit attnetion seeking for shock value >.<
I agree with you Rob.
I don't think the film was very funny – there were very few "laugh out loud" moments, most of them coming from the hedgehog.
I think the film is only carried by a warm wave of nostalgia; you spend most of them film just enjoying the company of the characters that you remember from years gone by. The filmmakers used this warm recollection in place of a great story and funny dialogue, unfortunately.
Without the first two films to support it, that is to say viewing Toy Story 3 on its own, it's only OK.
Finally! You've hit the nail on the head. People are going to see this film attaching too much sentimental value to the fact that the series is one that they have grown up with. On it's own, Toy Story 3 just doesn't cut it.
And the point made earlier about kids movies being inherently predictable is beyond ridiculous. What about The Lion King? Bambi? Even The Princess and the Frog had moments which went against the grain of a 'normal' fairy tale. Toy Story 3 failed to do this.
Just to get the final word on the unwarranted abuse I'm getting (occupational hazard I suppose), if I wanted to write a review to shock and attention seek I would have given the film 1 star and moaned about how it is a tribute to consumerism. So there.
Very interesting point, Nick.
As a stand alone film, Toy Story 3 actually lacks the comedy and thrill of the first two movies and I agree, it does seem to rely on the emotional bond that the viewer has with the well-established characters.
Undoubtedly, Pixar have created an incredible world and there is a reason why people have fallen in love with Woody, Buzz and Co. But you can't call it a five star masterpiece because of that! In fact, I found the movie uninspiring, merely an average viewing and a film that I definitely don't need to see again any time soon.
It seems to me that the movie has a very loyal fanbase and they take offense to anyone that doesn't think it's perfect because, in a way, the viewer has grown up with the series. They feel almost too attached to it, and thus are very protective of any negative criticism.
As a side note, I think it's absolutely pathetic that some people are personally attacking the reviewer and his motives simply because they disagree. Looking back at his previous reviews, Rob is on the whole very accurate and entertaining with his writing. I'm sure The Tab are loving this much attention to one page!
Ok, I personally think Rob under sold the film slightly in terms of rating. Easily a four star film in my book and it pulled all the right heart strings for me to love it.
But still he is entitled to his opinion as a reviewer and he isn't being unfair in his criticism. I don't think he is swimming that heavily against the tide of public opinion as some say: 3 stars is still 60%, in pure numerical terms better than "half decent", and the review isn't built on a series of unfounded accusations but his own personal take on events. So why are many of the comments being so overwhelmingly negative towards him?
Ultimately, I feel that Rob is being damned by readers for two reasons that are independent of his article. First, putting a numerical rating on a review leads to inevitable disagreement because what constitutes "good" is subjective. When a review is written most people jump on the rating without a balanced approach to what is written, leading to misdirected outrage. Second, the people reading the review who are criticising Rob personally or saying he is trying to be "shocking" are too insecure in their own opinions to accept a legitimately built critique. Disagreeing with a reviewer over a film, despite what some people think, is still the same as disagreeeing with a friend over whether you like a film or not. If you like something, who cares what reviewers or other people say? Be confident in your own opinions enough to understand that you can like whatever you want to, without seeking other peoples approval. You needn't be offended by what one person says as long as you have enough self belief to like something on the basis of your own opinions.
I guess what I'm saying is lighten up and think a bit before you comment: just because someone says something you don't want to hear is not enough reason to have a go.
I think the problem is that the review failed to touch on any of the films redeemable qualities, and even though it's given 3 stars the actual review writes like it is a bad film. And even though we are all entitled to our opinions there is a difference between telling your friends in a pub what you think about the film and writing a review. Reviews are meant to be more than just opinion.
I don't think Rob is trying to be shocking; I think he is genuinely writing his own opinion, but I still think the review is unfair in that it writes like a list of all the things that he found wrong with the film. Ultimately a lot of the accusations are not why the film is bad, but why he personally did not like it, and there should be a clear distinction between the two. For example, Rob seems to have a problem that this film is not as good as Up, at least that it has less balls and ambition. That is probably true, but Up is one of the best films of all time (and written by different writers might I add) and I can see why that bothers Rob personally because he was probably expecting it to surpass Up, but it ultimately has little relevance to why Toy Story 3 is a bad film and I think he gives too much weight to that fact – I don't think films need to always be groundbreaking and surpass the films that came out the year before.
As for nostalgia, sentimental value, yes, people are emotionally attached to the Toy Story franchise, but that doesn't mean we should ignore that fact in our reviews. It's impossible to take a completely cold approach and judge Toy Story 3 "on its own" and the fact that it only works if you love the characters doesn't make it any less of a film. We definitely should be judging this sequel with the trilogy in mind way more than we should be judging it based on what this particular studio produced last year.
As cynical as it sounds, more new characters in the movie means more merchandise opportunities for Di$ney!
Most of the new characters were completely pointless. The film needed to give more screentime to the classics like Rex, Slinky and Ham. I was pleased to see more Mr. Potato Head, but come on, would Andy really have kept a Mrs. Potato Head after all these years? He must be a complete fruit.
The reviewer needs to go steady and put some lemonade in it from now on. Quality film.
A perfect comment. Mr. Tortilla Head? So funny – Rob Young needs to swivel
I'm sorry but Toy Story 3 was great. It continued with the development of the characters and really brought the story to a good and natural conclusion. It does what a lot of animated films and children films fail to do and deals with the subject of mortality, bringing it home in a profound and understandable way.
This film is great, and if your only complaint is that the characters have been used before, maybe you shouldn't be reviewing films, quite a few are sequels.
Absolutely brilliant film. Reviewer needs a film class if he thinks this is two stars worse than Inception, which was very overrated. Agree with Ken, you are of course entitled to your own opinion but the reviewer should mention the humour more, even if he doesn't share it.
Hey guys, I grew up watching and loving Toy Story. This film connected with me on so many levels, the main reason is that I'm 17, like the character Andy. This film actually made me feel guilty about stuffing my toys into the garage! I went with a few friends and they obviously didn't like the Toy Story films as much as I did, I couldn't stop myself from crying! such a great film and I'm glad I waited to see it at the cinema!
Are you literally an imbecile?