Mediocre Movie Club Movie Reviews

Big Hero 6

3/16/2015

B+
3.21

Baymax is a worthy creation, and for a $165 million budget, it appears all the money is on the screen. - Jon
I loved the blend of cultures in San Fransoyko. - Blair
It's one of the best-looking animated features we've seen to date, and is a pleasure to watch just on the visuals alone. - Bobby

Initial Review by Bryan

Big Hero 6 is another Disney animated feature done the right way... mostly. The opening robot fight scene set the stage for a fun adventure. The animation in this movie was incredibly fluid, colorful, and vibrant. There wasn't motion blur and each scene contained an incredible amount of detail.

As a teacher, I love that in the future Hiro still gets out a pencil and paper to brainstorm ideas. God bless you pencil and paper! Disney setup the future well in this movie. There is some creative future-tech involving robots and wind turbines, but daily surroundings are still the same; Aunt Cass still watches TV.

Disney always seems to throw in some adult humor, and low-battery drunk Baymax (I first thought it was Betamax) was great! Baymax's constant literalism injected some timely humor. I watched this one undistracted and I caught Stan Lee in the family portrait the first time it was shown. Did I miss anything else?

Baymax stole the show for me. Hiro and the supporting characters were all done well, but I can't remember much about them individually. I'm assuming it was supposed to be that way.

I did have a couple of gripes. The flow of the story was incredibly predictable. I appreciated a few of the plot twists with the characters, but it was easy to see what was coming next. Also, the writers created an incredibly vibrant, colorful city yet during the car chase it's abandoned. How is Disney not over this girls with big eyes thing? Maybe it's from seeing Frozen a dozen times, but why do they do this?

Grade: B+. Above average story with possibly the best animation I've seen. I wouldn't show this to a three year old, but it's already in the queue for Jane's 5th birthday.

PS: Why does Disney "Fast Play" involve watching more previews?

-Bryan

102 Comments

Phil

3/16/2015 06:47:08 am

"The flow of the story was incredibly predictable. I appreciated a few of the plot twists with the characters, but it was easy to see what was coming next."

I don't know if I agree with this gripe. If we were talking about a thriller that revels in the reveal a la The Game, that's fine. However, this is a movie targeted to kids. Is a predictable plot really a negative? I'm posting my review later (well, whenever I can connect to the internet on my work computer), but I thought the plot construction was the movie's second biggest strength.

Bryan

3/16/2015 09:23:17 am

Script...
Setup, fun, tragedy, sadness, fight back/adventure, defeat, regroup, fight back/win, feel good.

Phil

3/16/2015 10:16:16 am

You just answered my question with a rephrasing of your point that it was predictable. My point was that it's a movie for kids, and predictability is fine in a movie like that. We never realistically expected the Big Hero 6 to lose, and I'm assuming 80% of us surmised that Callaghan was the villain. I ask again - why is this a negative?

Bryan

3/16/2015 02:33:46 pm

Wrong reply box.

I didn't see him as the bad guy for a long time. My anti earnings per share attitude was shining bright.

Predictability is fine, but it is a slight letter downgrade regardless. There is predictability then there is the same token script we see repeatedly. The directors were artistically creative and did well with the script, but it's still the same Disney story again.

Jon

3/16/2015 03:33:48 pm

I'm putting this comment in the Mediocrities page for Best Line in a Comment.

I reject the 'movie targeted at kids' premise. A more accurate statement would be 'movie that treats its audience like idiots, or like how most people treat kids.' Just because a movie is rated PG or is aimed at families isn't an excuse to make a simplistic story. Wall-E and The Nut Job are aiming for the same viewers, but one is treating them like people and the other has bright colors.

Phil

3/17/2015 02:27:13 am

LOL at "anti earnings per share." Yes, great comment... even if earnings per share is becoming a more and more antiquated way to measure a company's performance.

As for it being a "simplistic story," I'm fine with it if it's executed well. In this case, I think it was. There are plenty of movies where the simple story was butchered. This was not one of them if you ask me.

Shane

3/17/2015 03:50:34 pm

I agree with Phil. At least the characters are doing things that make sense. They're not being forced.

Jon

3/16/2015 08:28:30 pm

Big Hero 6 basically gets a big 'meh' from me. Like Bryan says in his review, the story hits predictable beats, and while that isn't really the worst thing (there's only so many stories in the world), I wasn't swept up in the action or emotion enough to care. Something like Guardians of the Galaxy can have an identical plot to several other Marvel movies, but who cares when that movie's as fun as it is. I just watched The Road Warrior, and that's also a beat-by-beat hero story, but the world is so insane and over-the-top that I'm overtaken by it. Big Hero 6 gets the benefit of being animated and can create whatever world it wants. It takes some noble stabs, but overall, what it does has been done better by similar movies.

I think we can agree that the best thing Big Hero 6 does is Baymax. He's a design triumph, first and foremost, a robot specifically designed for health care that is also, as one of the characters says, a marshmallow. While there's certainly going to be a Baymax waddling around Disney World this summer, it makes sense in the movie for him to be shaped like that. An intuitive relationship between structure and function; that's some sweet, sweet biology for me. Directors Don Hall and Chris Williams have the good sense to leave the 'camera' (I don't fully understand animation directing) on Baymax as he wiggles his way through tight spaces, or methodically tapes up his leaks, strong gags all. The voice work is excellent from Scott Adsit, probably best known as Pete Hornberger from 30 Rock but also the voice of the terrible father on Moral Orel. Adsit's got a talent for animation, and he brings it here. The drunk/low-power Baymax was my favorite scene, and I lay the vast majority of it at Adsit's feet.

As for the rest, it struck me as very routine, albeit entertaining in a folding-laundry kind of way. I didn't find any of the non-Baymax characters particularly interesting. Hiro is a typical hero-lead, nothing more or less. Tadashi is pure support early on, a person whose only purpose is to prop up and/or scold the protagonist, such that I felt nothing at his comical, over-the-top death. Thinking about it now still makes me laugh. If Hiro had yelled "Noooooo," it would've cost the film at least a partial grade. To the film's credit, there was a slight course-correction when Baymax is showing Hiro trials and errors from Tadashi's work, so there's that. If the film included that kind of stuff before he died, I might've felt differently, but they didn't and I don't. The teammates (more on them later) are fine and have interesting powers, but it seemed really easy for these students to slip into the role of world-class, death-defying athletes. Wasabi was my favorite, purely based on how hard it was for him to cut a circle in that door. Circles are hard to draw, man, I get it.

What most bothered me about Big Hero 6 was how so many of the segments have been done better by recent Pixar or Dreamworks films, to the point where I began to suspect that the seven (!) credited writers were openly cribbing from other movies. The obvious comparison is The Incredibles, a movie that towers over this one in every possible way. The grief angle is pure Up. The flying scenes are dwarfed by similar scenes in both How to Train Your Dragon films. Even the throwaway joke of Fred's habit of yelling out his actions while he's doing them is straight out of Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs. Plus, the sacrifice-negating ending is straight out of Guardians of the Galaxy. There's so little originality to this movie (Baymax excepted), that all the pretty sunsets you can throw at me aren't going to convince me that you have a lot to add to movie animation.

This, and the next two paragraphs, are smaller, near-ridiculous gripes, but there were two shots that bugged the shit out of me. First, when Hiro is deciding whether to enter the science fair or continue with robot-fighting, there's a shot of him with the entry form in one hand and the robot in the other. I've been conditioned by video games to expect prompts to show up on screen at this point. Press A to go into academia, Press B to continue with your care-free life. This is so personal as to be meaningless, but it practically broke the movie for me 10 minutes in. Then, they did it again after the science fair, with the choice of the professor versus the tech firm. These were both such obvious choices that it was a waste of time to even include them as a source of conflict, and to frame them in such a binary way made me derisively laugh as much as a giant explosion immediately after Tadashi ran into a burning building.

Next dumb thing that raised my eyebrow is the way the two female team members were depicted. GoGo is repeatedly saying Woman Up, which strikes me as something cynical businesses would put on pink t-shirts as some kind of faux-empowerment slogan and charge $40 a pop. Honey Lemon goes the opposite way, with her power locat

Phil

3/17/2015 02:28:07 am

"Tadashi is pure support early on, a person whose only purpose is to prop up and/or scold the protagonist, such that I felt nothing at his comical, over-the-top death. Thinking about it now still makes me laugh."

DO YOU HAVE NO SOUL?!?!?!

Jon

3/17/2015 04:55:43 pm

He was such a red-shirt that it was just a matter of time. The movie had already taken a lot of time to show what a great big brother he was, but just in case we didn't get it, he's the kind of person who will run into a multi-story burning building to save his mentor that he's known for a couple years. If he stays alive, there's no emotional conflict. He was created to die.

Bobby

3/18/2015 04:57:10 am

Almost all characters who die... are created to do just that, whether it's with a quick appearance of a full on complex back story and growth... it's all in how the death is supposed to hit the viewers and other characters.

And I don't really see why his relationship with his mentor is called into question... we don't know exactly how many years they've known eachother... but for a kid without a father being able to grow up with and learn his passion from one of the best in the field, it's fair to understand why he'd see him as a father figure and rescue him, especially when everything we do learn about him shows he's the type who wants to help people in general, let alone one he clearly cares for above most others.

Bryan

3/18/2015 05:48:54 am

Bobby, I believe this is too much emotion for Jon.

Jon

3/18/2015 02:47:55 pm

It's fine if a character's purpose is to move the plot forward, but if that character makes no impression, it pulls the curtain back and I can see the gears of the movie working.

I don't have a problem with the Tadashi-mentor relationship. The movie loses me with the manner of Tadashi's death, and the depiction of him as a saint.

Gotta stick up for myself in the empathy department. I am routinely, deeply affected by movies, so if I wasn't by this one, it's not because I'm lacking something. I got a little teary just thinking about How To Train Your Dragon in relation to this. If Big Hero 6 blows all the emotional beats, it's its failure in relation to how I experience it.

Bryan

3/17/2015 03:12:36 am

It's a month or so since I've seen Guardians of the Galaxy and I can vaguely remember the story line. The characters in Guardians were AMAZING. The script was as "meh" as you can get.

Jon

3/17/2015 12:49:16 pm

We are of a mind. The script for Guardians was mostly run-of-the-mill, with the glowy-thing McGuffin and generic team assembly, but the characterization was so excellent, that I didn't care. Not the case with Big Hero 6, so the blandness of the story sticks out.

Shane

3/17/2015 03:49:49 pm

I'll agree even though Guardians was in my top 3 movies last year.

Jon

3/16/2015 08:29:27 pm

Next dumb thing that raised my eyebrow is the way the two female team members were depicted. GoGo is repeatedly saying Woman Up, which strikes me as something cynical businesses would put on pink t-shirts as some kind of faux-empowerment slogan and charge $40 a pop. Honey Lemon goes the opposite way, with her power located in a machine shaped like a purse, but she's smart and powerful so it's fine. It reeked of studio notes from Disney, a place rolling in Frozen dough and desperate to replicate it as easily as possible.

Last dumb thing: there was no title card for Big Hero 6 until the end, right? It's a weird choice that again took me out of the movie. I shouldn't be asking "Where's the title card?" every five minutes, and then after half an hour without it, think "Wow, there's really not going to be a title card, is there?" If I missed it, then these were wasted words, but I don't think I did, as I sped through the first several scenes to make sure I didn't miss it after the movie was over.

Big Hero 6 is.... fine. Baymax is a worthy creation, and for a $165 million budget, it appears all the money is on the screen. There weren't any outright bad scenes, even if I didn't buy into what was happening, but there weren't really any great ones either. If it shows up on cable, I might leave it on. I'll go with a C.

Bobby

3/18/2015 04:58:37 am

"There weren't any outright bad scenes"

Yet it gets a negative grade/review. Did Shane right this for you?

Bobby

3/18/2015 04:59:13 am

*write.

Fail.

Shane

3/18/2015 07:07:01 am

Nice.

Jon

3/18/2015 02:51:38 pm

The other half of that sentence is that there's no great scenes. C is not a bad grade. If we all remember that perfect chart Bryan made a few months ago, most of the movies I've rated are C+'s. A C is a shoulder shrug.

Bobby

3/18/2015 05:35:40 pm

A C, according to our sheet (and in general I'd think) is a non approval.

And having no bad scenes means no negative ones. No great scenes means that it can still have positive ones. The C grade didn't seem to reflect that when reading it.

Jon

3/18/2015 06:04:08 pm

My personal C, as described in the Ratings Systems tab, is as follows:

Things to like, but no strong feelings. Inoffensive is kindest adjective. General meh. Fatally flawed is another description.

Hiro the zero protagonist fits with fatally flawed, but 'general meh' is my two-word review.

Bobby

3/19/2015 10:07:57 am

Does anybody else not think 'generally meh' is not a negative review?

Jon

3/19/2015 10:29:03 am

Personal rating system, derived from letter grades through the AV Club, and star ratings through Letterboxd and Netflix.

A+, A, A- = 5 or 4.5 stars = Loved it
B+, B, B- = 4 or 3.5 stars = Really liked it.
C+, C, C- = 3 or 2.5 or 2 stars = Liked it.
D+, D, D- = 1.5 or 1 or .5 star = Didn't like it.
F = no stars = Hated it.

Phil

3/17/2015 02:21:41 am

Truth be told, “Big Hero 6” is a tough movie for me to review. I don’t watch a ton of kids movies, so I don’t have much of a frame of reference here. I have to say though, from a plotting standpoint, it doesn’t do anything terribly manipulative without earning it first, and everything in there is just done in a very smart way. I think the filmmakers were lucky to not have to force anything into a 90 minute timeframe, as giving the movie enough time to flesh out its story and characters wind up making it a big success.

The main thing that strikes me as impressive with a movie like this is that everyone’s motivations are more than “good vs evil.” Hiro’s brother Tadashi is given time to develop and the impact of his loss is felt by the audience (well, the portion of the audience with a soul - sorry Kissel). The “evil” professor Callaghan has very real and obvious motives as well. I thought it was very smart to make Hiro and Callaghan’s motives essentially the same – vengeance for a loved one – and then showing how different the outcomes can be thanks to the presence (or absence) of a close network of friends. In their first encounter, Hiro is very much willing to go to the same dark place as Callaghan. Unlike Callaghan, he has a close-knit group of friends that pull him out of it and show one of the old adages that “two wrongs don’t make a right.” It’s an old lesson told in a very effective way and given grounds in reality that anyone is capable of evil – it just takes good-hearted group of rationale people around us to not succumb to it. That, or a robot without the capacity to kill.

While Hiro’s friends certainly help, it’s ultimately the nurse robot Baymax that pulls him out of his spiral. Baymax is already in the pantheon of great Disney characters. The way he gingerly moves about the room when he is first activated, his need to deflate himself when stuck in the window, and of course, “Bah lah lah lah la,” he’s a laugh a minute whether you’re a kid or a jaded 30 year old. Again, back to reality, everything about Baymax makes sense. He’s there to help, and that’s all he’s capable of. His entire goal is to make “his patient” feel better, and his “motivations” are entirely driven by that.

Speaking of that, let’s jump to the ending, which was, in my opinion, extremely well done. This was a scene that could very easily have been reduced to a Deus Ex Machina of some sort, but that didn’t happen. Baymax saves Hiro using a function that has already proven useful several times, so we don’t end up with some sort of tacked-on power that only came in handy this one time. And then the final “I am satisfied with my care” has to hit you a little bit or you aren’t human.

Ultimately, I’m searching for a complaint, but I have none. This is an A+. Plot construction was great even if it was predictable, I enjoyed every performance (especially TJ Miller as Fred), and Baymax is an all-time great. I'm in for the sequel.

+ Plot is well-paced and provides tangible motivation and consequences
+ Baymax is a fantastic character
+ “Bah lah lah lah la”

Grade: A+

Jon

3/17/2015 04:58:31 pm

Getting the chip into Baymax's hand was a cheat. How did that happen? Not to mention it had been established that he becomes a killing machine without his green chip, but didn't here. Did I miss something?

Phil

3/18/2015 12:53:03 am

That's a fair point, and I don't have a great retort other than some exec probably made them change the ending. In the logic of that universe, you're probably correct.

Bryan

3/18/2015 01:02:16 am

Chip in the hand was the worst part of the movie. Could see it a mile away.

Shane

3/18/2015 03:48:37 am

I was hoping for the chip in the hand. And the decision makes sense.

The health chip is to make sure Baymax can keep his patients healthy. Baymax can't do that unless he exists. And Baymax exists in that chip. The Angry Baymax chip was programmed to keep Hiro alive through violence if need be. He only listened to Hiro. The two Baymaxes aren't opposing each other in their ultimate goal.

Bobby

3/18/2015 05:04:53 am

I'm questioning Jon's review, if he thought it was the absence of the green chip that made him an angry ass kicking machine (he never actually does kill, but would have on command due to the red chip and programming that forces him to obey Hiro, as Shane states).

But the two chips were used together, so it was never the lack of the green chip.

I did question how/when Baymax slipped the chip into his hand, but in the end.. it isn't important that we see it. It's clear they wanted us to discover the chip when Hiro did, so there's no reason to think Baymax couldn't have quickly slipped it into his hand before he executed his final process.

Blair

3/17/2015 02:15:12 pm

This film was incredibly fun to watch. I loved the blend of cultures in San Fransokyo. I thought the colors and everything about the art was superb.

I LOVED Baymax - every scene with him was special and I'll echo Phil's review that he totally makes sense - he functions to make his patients better and the last line totally got me...I AM human.

Only a couple things that I found bothersome.
1) Did I miss the connection between Abigail Callahan and Krei? How did that relationship form? I want a little more here...if I missed it, I blame it on a sick baby.
2) Seriously, the other heroes weren't the slightest bit pissed at Callahan!? No way. Let's be truthful and say that they would have been hurt, angry, etc when they take his mask off to at least SOME degree.
3) and that horrible song by Fall Out Boy!

And, for the record, I did not think it was Callahan, I predicted it was Krei's female assistant. So, if that makes me an idiot, then Kissel has given me another sad.

Overall, I thought it was great - a fun film about friendship, loss, and healing. I kind of want to give it an A, but I'll go with a B+++

Bryan

3/18/2015 02:16:00 am

"2) Seriously, the other heroes weren't the slightest bit pissed at Callahan!? No way. Let's be truthful and say that they would have been hurt, angry, etc when they take his mask off to at least SOME degree. "

I don't remember the scene incredibly well, but I was under the impression they were angry/mad/sad, but didn't want Baymax to kill him.

Shane

3/17/2015 03:49:11 pm

I do think you need to view kids movie a bit differently. Just like I don't expect a stoner comedy to get science right, a kid's movie doesn't have to appeal to adults. When a kids movie can do that, though, it hits that A threshold. With that, Big Hero 6 land firmly in the positive column, but has some flaws that knock it down.

Let's look at the characters. Hiro is pretty typical and someone to root for. Not terribly interesting, but what 13 year old kid is? He's inoffensive, but at least he's a good guy who we can relate to I suppose. The orphan trope is a bit stale, but whatever.

Tadahashi, however, did annoy me. I knew he was a goner because he was too dang vanilla. Even the videos later in the movie don't redeem his character's lack of depth.

The gang to me, while a bit typical, was fine. TJ Miller as Fred was pretty solid and the character, while goofy, lightened up a group that could have been pretty boring. Miller definitely steals the show and has a talent for timing and meandering sentences that land well. The Woman Up stuff didn't bother me because I know people like that. I actually liked that they had a counter to her with Genesis Rodriguez's Honey Lemon. I do think Rodriguez did good job with Honey Lemon, but Jamie Chung didn't wow me with her work, though I'm not sure the writers gave her much to do but be the feminist sporty chick. Damon Wayans Jr. does solid work as Wasabi and I want to like him simply because he's Damon Wayan's kid. There are so many Wayans.

Callaghan was OK as a villain. I definitely didn't find his reveal predictable. It would have been easier to go with the tycoon. One part really stick out at me though. In the end, he's not even happy to see his daughter. You had a chance for emotion and they blew it. Why even have the daughter alive if you're not going to use that. You could have had Baymax sacrifice himself in another way.

What saves a somewhat bland cast is Baymax though. Lots of great one liners for him. But really what nails his character are the physical jokes. I couldn't help but think of Chris Farley's way of consistently using his body on the screen to make you laugh. This is where I think the best writing went to. HIs dialogue was good, but the way he moved about was more impressive.

For the plot in general, the front 20 minutes was great. Of course the kid was going to beat the big guy and get away. What a rapscallion! But I don't think the back half was that predictable. It's a kids movie, so the good guys have to win. I would have liked to seen some more character development, though. You say the plot treated you like an idiot, but it avoided the easily done deus ex machina. While world building, instead of explaining every gadget, they just used them in natural ways. That's not treating you like an idiot.

But, it doesn't exactly do it all the way for me as an adult. It had enough laughs, but does lack some complexity that I'd like to see.

I'm willing to give a movie an extra point based on looks. This movie was gorgeous and I loved the city. The chase scene did bother me due to the lack of brightness of the city, though. But, damn, I wish I had seen this in 3D. The portal world must have been insane.

So, to summarize, some boring plot stuff and flat characters, but also some great laughs and 2 characters I enjoyed (Fred and Baymax). That's a B movie, but adding in the visuals, I'm kicking it up to a B+.

But wait, I'm not done. That song. Dear God, that fucking song. That might be the worst song selection for a movie ever. Not only is an objectively terrible song by an objectively awful band, it doesn't even remotely match the movie. We're in a futuristic mish-mash of San Francisco and Tokyo and you go Fall Out Boy? What the fuck? Someone should be fired and then drawn and quartered before being thrown into the ocean.

B

Jon

3/17/2015 04:45:15 pm

I totally forgot to mention that song, but yes, it was straight garbage. I support your's and Blair's bagging on it, and think it was definitely worth docking a partial grade.

Phil

3/18/2015 12:55:34 am

Oh man that song.... I might need to edit my grade just b/c of that....

Sean

10/12/2015 04:39:02 pm

When we were watching I asked Mindy if it was Adam Lambert. I'm glad it left an impression on you all too

Bryan

3/18/2015 01:12:22 am

If one song dings an entire movie, something is wrong with all of you.

PS what song are you talking about?

Bryan

3/18/2015 03:36:45 am

Found it. I would like to retract my last statement. IMorTAls!

Shane

3/18/2015 03:49:53 am

I've said a good score can increase a movie, but also take away. I think taking away is pretty hard. That song fucking does it.

Drew

3/17/2015 11:00:58 pm

Baymax makes the film and that is no secret. His interactions with Hiro are pretty funny. When Baymax picks up the cat and says "hairy baby," is tremendous line because the marshmallow robot knows nothing of animals.

The intrigue to Big Hero 6 is emotion. Hiro's brother dies, he lusts for revenge, Baymax leaves - loneliness lures its head again. You feel for his aunt who has his best interests at heart. All of those aspects and how intricate they are drawn makes Big Hero 6 successful.

Sure, we could figure out that Tadashi would die in the explosion and the head professor was behind it and how Baymax needed to leave and how the child would return somehow. Of course there is predictability. It is a child's movie! Did you really think the Genie would stay with Jafar and help him win? Was Hiccup not gong to figure out how to train his dragon? If predictability is the downfall for Big Hero 6, then the same standard needs to be held for other Disney films like Beauty and the Beast, How to Train Your Dragon, and Aladdin.

If predictability is your chief complaint of Big Hero 6, then its point is missed. Its draw is emotion but message is perseverance and persistence. How many times did Tadashi make a prototype of Baymax? Baymax's purpose is to revitalize a hydra - headed monster in that of the health care industry. If it did not become part of a high tech hero team, which I guess it could do at night, what would the industry's reaction be toward Baymax? At best, it would be mixed for whatever reasons the health care lobby has. Although emotionally raw, Hiro found another purpose for Baymax. Those examples shine throughout the film but need to be noticed.

The biggest negative was how they morphed into some brand of superheroes. This was in the A range for me until that happened because it means another one will follow. Big Hero 6 is a film that needs no sequel. This falls into the Pirates of the Caribbean and Back to the Future category. The first was solid but its following does not measure up. I do not see Big Hero 6 2.0 or Big Hero 7 being nearly as good as the first. Would it sell? Sure but its quality will be subpar.

It is successful with spot on comedy, good characters, displaying emotion and presenting an underlying theme, That is a recipe for a good film.

Grade: B+

Phil

3/18/2015 01:01:06 am

"This was in the A range for me until that happened because it means another one will follow."

It's fine to not like everyone becoming a super hero, but the potential of a sequel should have no bearing on the grade. Just my opinion there.

Bryan

3/18/2015 02:13:26 am

"When Baymax picks up the cat and says "hairy baby," is tremendous line because the marshmallow robot knows nothing of animals."

I love the literal explanation of Baymax's literal joke.

"The biggest negative was how they morphed into some brand of superheroes. This was in the A range for me until that happened because it means another one will follow. Big Hero 6 is a film that needs no sequel. This falls into the Pirates of the Caribbean and Back to the Future category. The first was solid but its following does not measure up. I do not see Big Hero 6 2.0 or Big Hero 7 being nearly as good as the first. Would it sell? Sure but its quality will be subpar."

You had me until "because." There could be no sequel. The sequel could be entirely different. The sequel could be of Toy Story quality.

Drew

3/18/2015 03:17:28 am

I love being taken out of context...

Bryan

3/18/2015 03:36:06 am

Please elaborate.

Drew

3/18/2015 06:41:07 am

Elaborate as to what taken out of context means or what I meant by that statement? I could be coy and go with the former but I will not and answer the latter part of my question, which is more likely to pertain to your statement than the former part of my question. :)

The statement "when Baymax picks up the cat and says 'hairy baby,' is [a] tremendous line because the marshmallow robot knows nothing of animals" supports the main idea of the paragraph, which was "Baymax makes the film and that is no secret." What you took out of context was supporting material of the claim. I did not explain the humor just to explain the humor, which is what your post suggested. I did that to illustrate how funny Baymax was in thinking a cat was a baby, which in turn illustrated how he made the film.

That was not included in the initial review because I thought the aforementioned information was understood.

Furthermore, if I "had you until 'because'" that could mean you did not read the counterpoints to your statements made after you stated that I "had you until 'because." Is that what you meant or were you giving counterpoint to my point? Just want to clarify.

Bryan

3/18/2015 06:52:07 am

Every time I read the first paragraph of your review, the inflection in my brain reading it makes me laugh every time. Like a super dry joke.

I'm with you on, "The biggest negative was how they morphed into some brand of superheroes. This was in the A range for me until that happened..."

I totally disagree with, "because it means another one will follow. Big Hero 6 is a film that needs no sequel."

Drew

3/18/2015 06:53:19 am

It's like a Princess Bride moment!

Phil

3/18/2015 01:11:50 am

I'm just going to throw out a general question to the group b/c I'm curious of your all's thoughts on this. I've seen a handful of you say the supporting characters were bland, uninteresting, boring, etc. Is this necessarily a bad thing? Tadashi is here merely to serve as motivation. The rest of Big Hero 6 is around mainly for comic relief, to serve as a support system for Hiro juxtaposed to Callaghan's lonely rage, and probably to sell toys. In my estimation, they served their purpose.

Does EVERY character have to be fully fleshed out? Let's think about this for a second in a sort of cost/benefit analysis. If we spend more time with Wasabi or Fred, we're spending less time with Baymax, less time on action sequences, or making a 145 minute movie targeted primarily at kids. To me, that's a no brainer. I'll take one A+, one B-, and four C-'s over six C+'s.

You can ask the question of whether or not 4 additional heros are needed, and that would be fair. Again, I go back to the support network thing, and each character was given enough to do in each action sequence to justify the inclusion.

Drew

3/18/2015 01:49:45 am

To be honest, the support group idea is not awful but those characters were kind of like Scooby-Doo.

In answer to your question, no. Not every character needs to be fleshed out but you just knew the stoner kid was like Bruce Wayne, in that he is an annoying, rich kid. Giving them some substance is great but knowing enough should not hurt the integrity of the film and Big Hero 6 pulls it off just fine.

Bryan

3/18/2015 02:30:12 am

I'm with you Phil. As stated, "Hiro and the supporting characters were all done well, but I can't remember much about them individually. I'm assuming it was supposed to be that way."

Jon and I argued at length over supporting characters in Calvary. He wanted a full arc of growth and development for everyone. In Calvary, Big Hero 6, and many other movies I believe there is a reason they are called "supporting." I don't need/want to know their back story or see their growth.

Phil

3/18/2015 03:07:48 am

Exactly. Otherwise, every movie would be 4 hours long.

I'm going to extend this one step further now with the following hypothesis: good, serialized TV has spoiled us for character development. Shows like The Sopranos and The Wire were forerunners of this, and now we get shows that have tons of characters, all with backstories and plot lines that we are aware of. Go look at a character mapping of "complicated" shows from the 70's and 80's like Dallas, and then look at one for Game of Thrones. It's incomprehensibly different.

It's like we're grading an essay as if it were a novel when comments like the supporting character comments are made. We're talking about two completely different things if you ask me.

Jon

3/18/2015 02:57:21 pm

Clarification on Calvary: a recurring criticism that I read was the the supporting characters were only one thing. I didn't feel that way.

Jon

3/18/2015 03:08:27 pm

In response to Phil's line about TV characterization, I think movie characterization is a different thing. We're about to watch Snowpiercer, and Allison Pill has a 5 minute scene in it that might make her the most interesting character in the whole movie. I don't remember her name, and none of her backstory is revealed, but the writing around her and her performance are so evocative of a variation on a recognizable person that I both know a lot about her and want to know more. Movies have more efficient characterization, while TV ladles it out bit by bit over years. I don't think either one is better than the other.

Phil

3/18/2015 05:00:25 pm

Gonna have to put a pin in the Alison Pill convo, b/c I do have thoughts there.

Bobby

3/18/2015 05:09:42 am

I'll probably talk more about it in my review, sometime this weekend, as I'm in arizona now and it can wait, but Aunt Cass was one of my favorite characters... and I wish we had a bit more of her and that she sticks around for more in the inevitable sequel.

Bobby

3/18/2015 05:37:31 pm

Ugh, Calvary.

Jon

3/18/2015 03:03:43 pm

Going back to Calvary, it's a lesser to nonexistent sin that the supporting characters aren't as complex, because the protagonist is so interesting. That's not the case here. There's some kind of relationship between how much the lead can support on their own and how interesting the supporting characters need to be. I didn't think Hiro could support much at all, so the rest of the cast is only going to be defined by their relationship to Hiro, they get blander as a result.

One way I like to think of effective supporting characters is "How many versions of this movie could exist in this world with these characters?" With Y Tu Mama Tambien, the answer is dozens upon dozens, and that was the main reason I liked it so much. Short Term 12 is in that ballpark, too. Both of those movies were less than 2 hours and had fully fleshed out secondary and tertiary characters. Big Hero 6, by comparison, can create whatever it wants by virtue of being animated, and still didn't feel like a place with a lot going on it.

Jon

3/18/2015 03:09:53 pm

*so IF the rest of the cast is only going to be defined by the relationship to Hiro, they get blander as a result.

Forgot to proofread, but at least I padded the comment count.

Shane

3/18/2015 03:56:03 am

It helps if they have some personality and their personalities stick with them throughout. Fred was an example of this. Wasabi kind of lost his quirks towards the end. The Woman Up woman was the opposite of Fred and didn't have any substance.

Imagine how much better this movie is if we open with Tadahashi's video reel as an opener. Getting to see he's not just a Red Shirt. He can be pretty vanilla, but we need to care about him if his death is really going to impact us. You start with that character development and we don't see him as merely a sacrificial lamb right away.

Bryan

3/18/2015 04:00:21 am

I thought maybe he'd enter the burning building and come out injured or something. I did not see the instant explosion happening.

Developing Tadahashi could take away from loving Baymax so much.

Jon

3/18/2015 02:55:55 pm

That opening would have been so much better. As is, Tadashi is defined through Hiro, who is generic as a protagonist. The movie's better if Tadashi's death means something on top of what it means for Hiro.

Bobby

3/18/2015 05:57:55 pm

The movie was... about Hiro, what should the events really mean beyond what they do to him?

Tadashi's death also meant something to the other nerd schoolers. Baymax did exactly what Tadashi would have done, in saving Hiro. Aunt Cass was affected by him..... What more would you actually want to see?

I suppose they could have let his death affect Callaghan in some way that changed how he reacted to some things... but his blind anger for the loss of his daughter overshadowed any possibility of that.

Jon

3/18/2015 06:13:00 pm

The other characters are likely upset about Tadashi's death, but their feelings are all funneled through Hiro. The form their grief takes is "How can we all make Hiro feel better?" That's not just Honey Lemon, or Wasabi, that's all of them together. So one way to interpret that is that Hiro is not just more important to the movie, but to all the characters in the movie, and Hiro's nowhere interesting enough to carry all that.

The movie being about Hiro is a choice. It could've been the same story from a wider perspective, or an entirely different perspective. The choice to make it all about Hiro lives or dies based on how much the viewer can connect with him, and I thought he was too generic to connect with.

Bryan

3/19/2015 02:52:25 am

I think this funnels back to the target audience. Can the 5 - 13 demographic better connect with Hiro? Absolutely.

Jon, what animated films do you enjoy for the sake of being fun movies?

Jon

3/19/2015 07:22:48 am

"Jon, what animated films do you enjoy for the sake of being fun movies?"

Excluding musicals from this conversation, more than half of Pixar's movies would fit into the category of great movies, regardless of who the target audience is. I'd put How to Train Your Dragon into that category, too. The string of great, animated movies has basically broken the genre for me.

I don't give an animated, G/PG rated any benefit of the doubt for being a movie aimed at kids. If Ratatouillie can be a masterpiece and be successful, then there's no reason to expect otherwise from every other movie marketed the same way.

As far as animated movies that are just fun movies, I think a lot of DreamWorks movies fall into that category. Despicable Me, Madagascar.

Bobby

3/19/2015 10:17:55 am

14 year old computer/tech geniuses that love bot fighting, choose education over money, and who lose their parents and then sibling (who is the only real major influence/mentor in their lives) and are actually prepared kill because of it are generic, eh? Seems like a good one to choose to put the movie/story around.

It makes sense that a young prodigy who has lost pretty much everything he's really cared for was the focal point for a group of uber-nerds who just lost one of their own to huddle around.

Bobby

3/18/2015 05:10:38 am

Which super hero sequel will you look forward to seeing more...

Incredibles or Big Hero 6?

Bryan

3/18/2015 06:26:22 am

Both should be fun. Are there sequels for animated movies which set a bad precedent? Toy Story trilogy is good. I haven't seen How to Train Your Dragon, but the second was nominated for an award.

Drew

3/18/2015 06:48:33 am

I did not like Toy Story 2 as much I liked the original. I found it drawn out and grasping for straws, even though RT scored it a 100% (with an audience score of 86%).

The first How to Train Your Dragon was fine but the mere fact there needed to be a second one defeats the purpose of a title called "How to Train Your Dragon." It implies that it could not be done correctly the first time and I am thrilled Neil Patrick Harris made that joke at the Oscars. A third one is set to release next year...oh my

Bobby

3/18/2015 07:21:12 am

Toy Story 2 was good.... something doesn't need to be as good as the first to still be enjoyable or even great. Toy Story 3 was better than 2, even.

HTTYD 2 was really good... although, the joke on the title has been oft used now.

Drew

3/18/2015 07:50:26 am

Bobby: "...something doesn't need to be as good as the first to still be enjoyable or even great.." I could not disagree anymore with that.

I mean, "enjoyable" perhaps but "great?" Please. If something is great, like The Godfather Part II, The Two Towers, The Dark Knight, or The Empire Strikes Back, it had to continue telling a compelling story. Hopefully, it can keep pace with, or possibly surpass, the first one but if it cannot, then the overall story falls flat and no one longer cares about the series, unless they are diehard fans. Prime examples of that are The Fast and the Furious, The Hangover, and Anchorman 2.

I like the joke.

Bobby

3/18/2015 02:02:56 pm

Let's say Movie was the best movie you've ever seen.. ever. A+++++++++++ beyond Blade Trilogy even.

Then Movie 2 comes out, and it's the second best movie you've ever seen, ever. It's not quite as good as the first, though. It's still great, right?

Being less than the original does not guarantee a movie is not great. ... it just simply means, it's not as good as the first.

Drew

3/19/2015 08:09:49 am

Bobby, are you challenging the old adage that sequels are not as good as the original? Despite the few times it has been upended, it is an accurate statement. Why is it accurate? Same characters trying to do something new but cannot really convince the audience of the new thing. Why do they have a hard time buying into the "new thing?" Because production is rushed due to...money (ding ding ding!) Why is that a big deal? The company wants to capitalize on film's popularity and therefore, a rushed, terrible sequel is made. In addition to that, the original film's director and/or producer could have been replaced with a different one, who is not as good.

So give me an exhaustive list of sequels that were just as good, if not better, than the original. Do not mention the ones that part of a continual story like Star Wars, LOTR, Godfather, Dark Knight, etc. Why are they exempt? They tell a continual story and fall outside of the definition.

Also, boo Iowa State...

Bryan

3/19/2015 08:30:09 am

Which sequels do not tell a continual story? Isn't that why they're called sequels?

Sequel: a published, broadcast, or recorded work that continues the story or develops the theme of an earlier one.

Bobby

3/19/2015 10:31:26 am

No, I'm not. Show me where I ever implied a challenge to that old adage, Drew. Where are you trying to take this discussion, or what prompted you there?

I simply stated that sequels can still be great.. even if they aren't as good (or even nearly as good) as the first. Most of my points, scenarios, etc have even presented with the sequel not being as good as the first... but, as i've said, that does not guarantee the movie isn't great, nor does it even have to suggest such.

How long must a company wait to release a sequel in order for them not to be rushing it? Or is it more likely that most sequels aren't as good because the primary and best story for the characters has already been told? That doesn't mean there still are great stories for them... but the story they were initially created for is already exhausted. So a general decline in quality makes sense for most sequels.

Drew

3/19/2015 03:11:29 pm

Bobby, when you wrote "...something doesn't need to be as good as the first to still be enjoyable or even great..." That very statement eludes to a challenge toward the conventional concerning sequels. If that is not what you meant, perhaps you can elaborate so there is no misconception.

Drew

3/19/2015 03:20:14 pm

Bryan, please tell me what continuing story line Revenge of the Nerds 2 had from the first. Same thing with Toy Story 2. How about Ace Ventura 2? Highlander 2? Finally, Ghostbusters 2.

Bryan

3/19/2015 04:18:05 pm

Toy Story 2 seems like an easy one - Andy has toys, the toys come to life when he's not around. What a fun story. From wiki, "Woody prepares to go to cowboy camp with Andy,"

Ghostbusters, "After saving New York City from the demi-god Gozer, the Ghostbusters—Egon Spengler, Ray Stantz, Peter Venkman, and Winston Zeddemore—have been sued for the property damage they caused, and barred from investigating the supernatural, forcing them out of business."

Drew

3/19/2015 05:19:36 pm

Please answer the question that I asked. That directive was "please tell me what continuing story line" happens in those films. In other words, other than repetition of characters, how are the first and second films connected? After all, if a sequel, as you put it, "continues the story or develops the theme of an earlier one," I simply ask you to explain said connection; however, not the synopsis of the films, which is what you gave.

Jon

3/19/2015 05:33:18 pm

If Godfather Part II gets a pass, should I assume that Part III also gets one? If not, why not?

On the Toy Story sequels, the first one (my least favorite, btw) takes place in a smaller world, and the sequels add more to it and builds on the characters. The plot of each is self-contained, which in my mind, is the best way to run a franchise. I like the Marvel movies, but I'm occasionally annoyed by their habit of functioning individually as a build-up to a future, giant battle. No one in Toy Story 2 makes an aside comment about the horror of day care centers, and the movies are better for it.

Bobby

3/19/2015 07:34:25 pm

I'm not sure where your misconception is, Drew.

The statement... "...something doesn't need to be as good as the first to still be enjoyable or even great..." feels very self explanatory... and I've said quite a bit in the comments to help.

If a movie is great, and the sequel is not quite as good, it can still be great. The first can get a 99%, and the second a 98%. Both are great, the second just isn't as good. And that in no way conflicts with any adage you've mentioned.

If there is a direct question you have that can clear something up, please ask. But i feel like what I've said is pretty straight forward without implying anything beyond it.

Bryan

3/20/2015 02:20:03 am

I'm not sure what we're talking about anymore, but a thought I had this morning... I don't care if a sequel is coming or not, and I don't think that should have any effect on the current grade. I haven't seen quite a few of the sequels mentioned here because they're garbage. Are Ace Ventura or Dumb and Dumber less funny because of their awful sequels?

The sequelness of Big Hero 6 is baked into the story. If the directors pulled punches to save them for a sequel then they are hurting the grade of the movie. If they can pull punches and still win an award and the admiration of children everywhere, then they're making the Disney Corporation incredibly happy.

Drew

3/20/2015 03:23:15 am

Bryan, what is discussed is how sequels are not as good as the original. Then, Bobby challenged that idea by stating they may not be good but can still be great and gave a unique scenario for backup. What started all of that was my reasoning for grading Big Hero 6 a B+ and not an A- because I could sense a terrible sequel on the horizon.

Jon, The Godfather as a series is immune to the rule because all three films have a continual theme, which is the Corleone family and survival. Is Godfather III as good as Godfather II or the first? That is a clear no but does it diminish the series? Absolutely not. While Godfather III is not the best series finale, it certainly is not Superman III or Batman and Robin. Also, explain to me how Toy Story 2 "adds more to it [the series] and builds on the characters." What more did we know about Woody and Buzz? What did Jessie add other than a female's presence and perspective?

Bobby, your examples are unique. The 99% and 98% films are rare. What you suggest is that if a sequel is enjoyable, then it is fine. I do not subscribe to that. I saw How to Train Your Dragon and thought it was alright and for a children's/date film, it is good. In that realm, it reigns. I have not watched its sequel because I have no desire to do so. My thinking is since RT gave it high praise, it is graded for what it is. The reason I mention this is that if I watch HTTYD 2 and tell you, "it was not as good as the first," your reply would be "but did you enjoy it?" That is one of two things. First, it is in and of itself an implied challenge that sequels are not as good as originals. Or second, it is an implication that of ignoring and/or not caring about said adage.

Bryan

3/20/2015 07:08:43 am

So knowing a sequel is coming creates a grade ceiling?

If you had said the super hero part was dumb and I felt the directors did x, y, and z at the end so I'm lowering my grade. That would make sense to me. I just don't understand what sequels have to do with the movie at hand.

Drew

3/20/2015 08:18:23 am

I did not say that a sequel has a grade ceiling per se. I must admit, however, that notion is eluded.

The reason the sequel has a part of this film's grade is that it is heavily hinted and [to me] it hurt the story and took away from its main message. Now, a superhero team formed and the premise of the next film will be based on the team.

I will state this. If the years go by and a sequel is not made, I will admit my mistake and reconsider its grade.

Bobby

3/21/2015 12:14:27 pm

I'm not even sure what you're trying to say now, Drew.

The point of movies, is entertainment... to enjoy them. Yet, if a movie is enjoyable but is a sequel, that's not good?

And I don't at all see how a movie being open to a sequel can determine it's grade at all. Even if a terrible sequel is made, it doesn't change what the first movie is in the slightest.

Most Disney (non-pixar division) sequels are considered to be complete rubbish...and most fairy tale type stories are open to sequels. But those horrible, often straight to video, sequels don't take anything away from the first one.

You said you couldn't disagree with a statement more, but then you went and listed a few great sequels yourself... (although you say the fall out of the definition, of what... sequels?) Nobody has said that it's common place, but you've come across with a stance of all sequels are worse than the first, cannot be great, and the mere thought of their existence makes the original a worse movie. I'm rather sure that's not what you mean...

Bottom line, a sequel does not have to be as good as the original movie to still be good, or even great, and enjoyable. Which is what people are generally looking for in movies they watch.

Drew

3/21/2015 01:39:16 pm

Well of course you don't know what I am saying because you refuse to try.

Your argument is rather simplistic. You stated, "The point of movies, is entertainment... to enjoy them. Yet, if a movie is enjoyable but is a sequel, that's not good?" With a standard of "did you enjoy the film?" how could any movie be lower than an A? Since I enjoyed the Hangover 2, it is clearly an A film. Ugh...

It is conventional wisdom that a sequel is not as good as the original. I did not create this. It seems, as though, this discussion introduced you to it. I took that from this statement from your most recent post, "Nobody has said that it's common place, but you've come across with a stance of all sequels are worse than the first..." Here is some info from Metacritic that is almost four years old that discusses this.

Bobby: You said you couldn't disagree with a statement more, but then you went and listed a few great sequels yourself... (although you say the fall out of the definition, of what... sequels?)

----- I discussed this to the point of ad nauseum.

Bobby

3/23/2015 09:05:13 am

Nobody said enjoyable = great, or that enjoyable = A, etc.
My exact words were "something doesn't need to be as good as the first to still be enjoyable or even great..." the key word being 'even' implying that enjoyable is not as good as great. Point is, sequels aren't bad, just cause they're sequels.

But you apparently agree with me. A sequel can be enjoy, good, or even great, and still not be as good as the first.

High five!

Drew

3/23/2015 09:58:09 am

Of course, I do. The standard is now "did you enjoy the film?" Because I did, it's an A film. Go sequels as long as they are enjoyed! Woohoo!

Drew

3/18/2015 06:41:47 am

Neither.

Bobby

3/19/2015 10:21:55 am

You missed my jab at Marvel, which is fair cause it wasn't clear cut.

It's not so much in the Avengers, but the fact that they're pulling out nearly every superhero they can now and making movies out of them. I don't blame them, as they're riding the train of success as far as they can. They're running out of buff white guys named Chris to cast, though. Hell, they already doubled Chris Evans up in two Marvel super hero movie roles... oops. Of course that's being corrected with a F4 reboot anyway.

Jon

3/19/2015 10:32:45 am

They're getting more diverse with Black Panther and Captain Marvel, so that's something. As long as Marvel-Universe movies (post Iron Man) remain as good to great as I think they've been (Thor and Iron Man 2 bottom out at a C), then I'm happy to keep watching them.

Bobby

3/19/2015 10:38:17 am

Well right, they've been called out, so they had to get more diverse... especially if they're gonna keep dishing out movies. It's good to see, but i wouldn't say it's a pat on the back for Marvel Studios.

I'll likely watch most/all of then, just because superhero movies are generally amusing and I think they give us a feeling of youth via comic book worlds.

Bobby

3/19/2015 10:42:28 am

And that totally didn't post where i wanted it, these should have been below, not under the 'Neither' comment.

Boo.

Jon

3/18/2015 03:13:58 pm

There's no way I can answer this without being completely dismissive to Big Hero 6. That's like asking which I'm more excited for: The Avengers sequel or Pitch Perfect 2.

Bobby

3/18/2015 05:39:13 pm

Pitch Perfect 2... and 3, and 4 and 42.

Marvel money grabs... meeeeh.

Jon

3/18/2015 06:16:51 pm

Pitch Perfect made 650% of its budget. The Avengers made a little more than that. In a way, all sequels are money grabs, but The Avengers no more so than Pitch Perfect.

Bryan

3/19/2015 02:58:54 am

Wait wait wait! How is a sequel any more of a money grab than the original?

Pitch Perfect studio is Universal, who is part of Comcast.
Avengers is part of Marvel, who is part of Disney Company.

Disney is worth $183,000,000,000
Comcast is worth $150,000,000,000

They aren't releasing these films on a worldwide scale for fun.

Bobby

3/26/2015 07:36:43 am

I figure I should at least post something before I fall behind again... and I've already seen this three times.

The animation is fantastic in Big Hero 6... and the art in general is top of the line. It's one of the best looking animated features we've seen to date and is a pleasure to watch just on the visuals alone.

Sure, there are a lot of already-been-done character and story types going on here, but they don't completely keep it from being a fun adventure. I liked Hiro, and think he was fine as a centerpiece for all of the attention. And I'm good with how Tadashi was presented to us, including his death and the way it brought the rest of the crew together. Of course, it's all about Baymax, though. Sure, he's essentially a Robocop type in which Tadashi sort of lives on through a robot that can be programmed, etc... but he's hilarious and huggable. And everybody laughed at the fist bump ba lalalala. Everybody. As I stated in a comment, I do wish we had more Aunt Cass. She was such a real character She's endlessly supportive of her nephews, and tries her best to keep it up even though it all takes a toll. She's a lot bigger influence on the two than was directly shown.. and I hope we see more of her relationship with Hiro in the sequel.

We're being flooded with superhero movies these days, and coming up with new ideas for them isn't going to be easy. Big Hero 6 stands out with Pixar's obviously influence on Walt Disney's studio. Everything seems to be covered above somewhere or another.. so I'll leave it short here... A- and looking forward to the sequel(s), especially with what kind of programming Baymax may have to endure and the personalities that will come with it.

Tom

5/10/2015 08:24:24 am

While this movie was very entertaining it suffered from some serious flaws. The good: funny robot exciting fight scenes, good heart. The bad: characters were introduced with certain attributes (OCPD; girly girl etc) then these attributes were completely irrelevant to the rest of the movie. There was no tie in later with their power suits, and there was no evolution of the characters. The plot as mentioned was very predictable (not terribly uncommon in a children's movie). The most glaring flaw is that the kid creates what is arguably the ultimate technology. a technology which could completely change human life forever and it is essentially forgotten about by everyone at the convention save for the bad guy.

C+ mainly for the comedy

Sean

10/12/2015 10:56:11 am

A more interesting superhero origin story than Batman, Spiderman, Superman, X-Men, TMNT, can't really think of others because I'm not that guy but sure.

Baymax was every bit the cute dumb lovable robot that Wall-e was and then some. Part of that was his huggable marshmallowy shell but part is because he had a better vocabulary.

A-, I'm happy to be able to throw this into the rotation in my household.

Big Hero 6

Leave a Reply.

Authors

Categories

Archives