Pixar Animation Studios

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

I'm not saying these sequels are going to be bad, I'm sure I will see them and love them. I just hope that Pixar doesn't lose sight of what made them so good; making great original stories.

 

 

But they haven't. Brave came out last year. The Good Dinosaur and Inside Out are coming soon as well. It's too early to say that they will completely stop original stories.

EDIT: The Incredibles 2 will not happen until Brad Bird finishes with his current works.

Edited April 2, 2013 by Ming Ming Shana

[\gunther]

Keep in mind that this is titled 'Finding Dory', not 'Finding Nemo 2'. I get the impression that this is going to be a side story having little focus on Marlin and Nemo. That sounds like the more likely and smart route.

 

Also, everyone citing Cars 2 as proof that Pixar movies starring comic relief don't work... can you honestly tell me that Dory is as good of a character as Larry the Cable Guy pretending to be a shit stained truck?

 

Are you serious? Like---are you serious? What was wrong with that film exactly? I watched that film like 30 times, never get bored of it and if there are flaws in that film I would like to know. D=

I've probably heard dozens of people echo that opinion. They basically say what this thread is saying about Finding Dory: Pointless, adding on to a story that doesn't need adding on, etc. People also think it's vastly overshadowed by the other two. I have a friend who aggressively hates on the sequel. 

 

I honestly don't think that people have seen it in a while. It bloody holds up well.

[DarkLight]

I'm cautiously optimistic about this. On one hand I like Dory and find her a much better comic relief character than Mater ever was. On the other hand, there's no way of knowing how well her characterization will be or what the plot will be about besides Dory going missing.

 

 

I'm just going to wait for some more news and a non-teaser trailer before I say this is a bad idea.

[SIXTH-RATE SOMA]

Keep in mind that this is titled 'Finding Dory', not 'Finding Nemo 2'. I get the impression that this is going to be a side story having little focus on Marlin and Nemo. That sounds like the more likely and smart route.

 

Also, everyone citing Cars 2 as proof that Pixar movies starring comic relief don't work... can you honestly tell me that Dory is as good of a character as Larry the Cable Guy pretending to be a shit stained truck?

 

Believe it or not, Mater was actually a pretty touching character in the original Cars, thanks to the Our Town sequence. The film gives enough hints that the once optimistic young Mater took the bypass really, really hard, and it really helps to make him a more sympathetic character. I may still not like Cars all that much on the whole, but don't be insulting the film for things it addresses.

 

I've probably heard dozens of people echo that opinion. They basically say what this thread is saying about Finding Dory: Pointless, adding on to a story that doesn't need adding on, etc. People also think it's vastly overshadowed by the other two. I have a friend who aggressively hates on the sequel. 

 

I must live under a rock, because I've never heard anyone say these things about Toy Story 2. I've heard more people hate on 3 for rehashing some of 2's plot points than I've heard hate for 2.

Edited April 2, 2013 by Sixth-Rate Soma

[Pelly <3's U]

Now it seems like a lot of their upcoming movies are sequels and prequels (Monsters University, Finding Dory, even some rumors of Toy Story 4), and honestly I would rather have them stick to their original works. Movies like Finding Nemo seem to me like they found their natural end point. The plot always finishesin a satisfying way with nothing that remains to be told and even if the sequel is decent, it's still unecessary.

 

See now I don't buy this reasoning, because by that same logic both Toy Story sequels weren't really necessary either. Toy Story by itself is a /beautifully/ contained movie, and it especially shows by how concise it is (I'm always surprised by how short it is when watching).

 

If anything the joke sequel hook at the end made it seem even more self-contained.

 

That didn't stop the sequels from being amazing movies in their own right.

 

Finding Nemo had one of the best cast of characters that I've seen in a movie. Literally the entire ensemble cast is a joy of colorful personalities that I would love to see more of. I for one always thought Finding Nemo, Monsters Inc, and The Incredibles were all movies that were crying out for sequels....and 2/3 isn't bad for me. 

 

Actually right now there seems to be a great blend new and revisiting old stories. We've got 3 new movies and 2 ones expanding some great universes....I don't see much to complain about.

[Your Vest Friend]

I'm personally kind of cautious about this news. Dory was a neat character, but she always seemed like she was specifically made to be a supporter, I'm a little suspicious that she's a tad too gimmicky to be able to hold up a film focused on her. 

[pppp]

Actually right now there seems to be a great blend new and revisiting old stories. We've got 3 new movies and 2 ones expanding some great universes....I don't see much to complain about.

 

 

Thank you! I mean the movie will only come out in 5 years. We'll have other stuff inbetween.

[Nepenthe]

I think you guys are making too big a deal out of this. We had 2 Pixar sequels in a row(TS3 and Cars 2), then an original one(Brave), this year we have a prequel, which is a first for Pixar, and after that we have 3 original movies in a row before this one. We are getting just as much original stuff as sequels.

Dreamworks is gonna make 4 more Kung-Fu Panda movies and i don't see anyone mad about it.

Having original ideas for a movie is extremely hard, there's only so much you can come up with. I think the sequels are for them to have something to do while they wait for an original idea.

The difference between DreamWorks and Pixar is that they have stated and implied two different modus operandis. One studio has been franchising films since 2001 based only on financial performance. Another has the main figureheads stating they would not unless the story warranted it. Why was Toy Story franchised? Most likely to fill out their contractual obligations to Disney so they could obtain studio independence. Politics were abound about that situation, and Disney's still undergoing them. There are different contexts to the studios. Saying "Well, DreamWorks does it" completely ignores everything about the studios and how they've chosen to operate.

[Sean]

Dory was awesome, I still haven't gotten excited over Monsters University but somehow I'm looking way more forward to this. Just as long as she's the main character, since Nemo wasn't in the first film.

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

I've probably heard dozens of people echo that opinion. They basically say what this thread is saying about Finding Dory: Pointless, adding on to a story that doesn't need adding on, etc. People also think it's vastly overshadowed by the other two. I have a friend who aggressively hates on the sequel. 

 

I honestly don't think that people have seen it in a while. It bloody holds up well.

 

But...that isn't enough for people to hate sequels, especially when they turn out good in the end. Toy Story 2 proved not to be pointless. And Toy Story was always open to a sequel, for example how Andy grows up and if he will he abandon his toys. 

 

If it was A Bug's Life, then you have a strong point. That film needs no sequel because there is absolutely nothing in it to expand on, that would make it interesting. Hopper's gone. Dead. The grasshoppers realize that they are outnumbered and the ants no longer fear them. Flik and Atta are the leaders of the anthill.

 

And please ask your friend on why he hates the sequel so much. Why. Is it because they changed Woody's and/or Buzz's behavior slightly? Is it because Woody's arm was broken almost throughout? Is it because he hates the new cast (Jessie and Bullseye?) Sorry, I just got to know. 

[- Eternal Paradox -]

I wish Pixar would go easy on their trend of sequels and prequels.

 

Between two phenomenal Toy Story sequels and one awful Cars sequel, Pixar actually has a good track record with creating sequels. But these are the people that were pumping out original concepts and movies year after year with people falling in love with them.

Now it seems like a lot of their upcoming movies are sequels and prequels (Monsters University, Finding Dory, even some rumors of Toy Story 4), and honestly I would rather have them stick to their original works. Movies like Finding Nemo seem to me like they found their natural end point. The plot always finishes in a satisfying way with nothing that remains to be told and even if the sequel is decent, it's still unecessary.

I'm not saying these sequels are going to be bad, I'm sure I will see them and love them. I just hope that Pixar doesn't lose sight of what made them so good; making great original stories.

 

It's not entirely Pixar's fault. The production of orginal content has ceased for a lot of movies makers and game developers. Lots of the films released last year were either sequels (Dark Night rises, Bourne Leagcy), or adaptantions (Pirates, Brave). And there's a good reason for this. We've (or, the UK at least) just went through a financcal crisis, and as such companies don't want to take unessiscary risks. Creating new films or game franchises is incredibly risky as you don't know if the audience will even like it, so it's much easier and safer for companies to go "Oh, Finding Nemo sold well, why don't you do a sequel for that?". Not to say Pixar isn't planning orginal films, they're just getting pushed back in development in favour for more sequels. Hopefully, when companies are more finannacy sure of themselves, they'll be willing to take more risks, but until them... eh, more sequels.

Also, (unrealated to the post above) what's with all the hate for Cars? Have I been living under a rock or something? The first film was a success, wasn't it? Disney were still selling Cars merch when Toy Story 3 came out. It was one of their biggest sellers. Then it had a subpar sequel and now everybody seems to hate the franchise...? Why is that?

[Sean]

Cars is one of Disney's most profitable (if not the most) franchise among little kids, since kids like racecars or something. Among older audiences it's definitely the weakest received film of Pixar's lot... until Cars 2 came along which everyone agreed was just terrible and absolutely nothing more than a non-disguised cash-grab.

[Nepenthe]

Brave was not an adaptation of anything. And Pixar has the clout to risk on original content because they have a good standing with the public. No one else but Pixar would make a movie where an 80 year old man who cannot be realistically merchandised to further recoup revenue would be the main character. People have also always had a problem with Cars because it's one of their weaker films structurally. I would also imagine the original's success owes itself to all the goodwill Pixar gained during that time. "A film about living cars is no different than one about living toys. Pixar can do an excellent film about anything." That's what got me to the theater, at least.

[Soniman]

Hey Pixar, remember Incredibles!?!?!?

 

REMEMBER!?!?!?

 

Why can't you make a sequel to THAT?

Edited April 2, 2013 by Soniman

[Nepenthe]

Hey Pixar remember Incredibles!?!?!?

 

REMEMBER!?!?!?

 

Why can't you make a sequel to THAT?

No Brad Bird, no dice, essentially.

[Emperor Robrainiac]

Hey Pixar, remember Incredibles!?!?!?

 

REMEMBER!?!?!?

 

Why can't you make a sequel to THAT?

 

 

I know I've said I didn't want a sequel to the Incredibles... But seeing as how Pixar really is going this direction as of recently, I figure I'd only want one if Brad Bird was returning to work on it, and from what others have said in the topic, There probably wont be a sequel if Brad Bird is not involved.

 

Seeing as how he's got other projects, It's probably not going to happen any time soon. Maybe in the future, since it could happen.

 

Makes more sense than the Finding Nemo sequel anyway. Still not happy with the news, but It's too early to judge at this point.

Edited April 2, 2013 by MAYHEM!

[pppp]

Ah screw it. Disney Animation is better than Pixar now anyways. Can't wait for Frozen

[Pelly <3's U]

Whoa, I never thought I'd live to see the day someone was actually praising Disney's glory over the fall of the once mighty Pixar.

 

What next, people will be calling DreamWorks the new Pix....

 

 

....

[pppp]

Whoa, I never thought I'd live to see the day someone was actually praising Disney's glory over the fall of the once mighty Pixar.

 

What next, people will be calling DreamWorks the new Pix....

 

 

....

 

Actually aside from the mess that was Rise of the Guardians, DreamWorks has been doing very well. Kung-Fu Panda 2 and Puss in Boots were awesome and The Croods was heartfelt, funny and surprisingly smart with the themes it handled.

[Sean]

The thought of Disney being better than Pixar these days is one I've entertained in the past, but I can't bring myself to believe that to be the case yet. Stuff like Tangled and Wreck-It Ralph were good, but there's an inherent heart to Pixar's films that I don't believe has diminished. It's true that I've become less excited for these films (I think the last one I was extremely hyped for was Toy Story 3; I actually skipped out on Brave in theaters because I wanted to see it but felt like it wasn't an essential theatrical experience), but I think Pixar continues to try making their films far more accessable than Disney does, their cash cow franchise (Cars) notwithstanding.

[pppp]

The thought of Disney being better than Pixar these days is one I've entertained in the past, but I can't bring myself to believe that to be the case yet. Stuff like Tangled and Wreck-It Ralph were good, but there's an inherent heart to Pixar's films that I don't believe has diminished. It's true that I've become less excited for these films (I think the last one I was extremely hyped for was Toy Story 3; I actually skipped out on Brave in theaters because I wanted to see it but felt like it wasn't an essential theatrical experience), but I think Pixar continues to try making their films far more accessable than Disney does, their cash cow franchise (Cars) notwithstanding.

 

Sean, you clearly haven't seen Winnie the Pooh. That movie is absolutely wonderful. It's pure Disney magic if I've ever seen it. I challenge anyone to find a flaw in that movie.

Edited April 2, 2013 by pppp

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

If Cars merchandise continues to sell well as years go by, I will expect a Cars 3. Cars 2 is the worst Pixar film but it never got close to being bombed, in fact broke Pixar's international box office records.

 

EDIT: Oh wait. I forgot about Planes. @.@

Edited April 2, 2013 by Ming Ming Shana

[DarkLight]

Winnie the Pooh was a tad short for a theatrical release. But that's more of nitpick than anything.

Edited April 2, 2013 by DarkLight

[Nepenthe]

Brave is also a pretty good film. I like the mother-daughter development throughout the film, and frankly, none of Disney's films as of late can hold a candle to the sheer cinematographic and character animation quality found in Brave. Before we start declaring Pixar has entered an irrecoverable state or that Disney is better, let's see The Good Dinosaur and Inside Out.

[Sean]

Brave is also a pretty good film. I like the mother-daughter development throughout the film, and frankly, none of Disney's films as of late can hold a candle to the sheer cinematographic and character animation quality found in Brave. Before we start declaring Pixar has entered an irrecoverable state or that Disney is better, let's see The Good Dinosaur and Inside Out.

 

I have yet to see Brave but I honestly don't doubt this to be the case, the mother/daughter relationship you're referring to. Tangled seemed like it tried to set up... some kind of bond between Rapunzel and the evil mother (it's obvious the mom loves herself more, but it's pretty inconsistent on whether she actually does care about her "daughter" to some degree or if she merely is using her as a means for an end), but it turned out to not amount to anything and the mother was dispatched in a rather generic Disney-like way. It would have been a great opportunity to instill depth into her; their dynamic just strikes me as so fucking odd and in the end I felt like there was some missed opportunity. She took care of her for fifteen years, and considering their interactions early in the movie, I have a hard time buying that she honestly felt nothing towards her.