Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Koray Savas

The Pixar Thread

Recommended Posts

All these new movies, yet no The Incredibles 2?

Good. The first one is brilliant. There's no need to tell the story again.

:P

I see no problem with telling a new story with the characters we came to love in the first film. As Bob Zemeckis said, that's what people go to a sequel for--to see the characters again in a new story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All these new movies, yet no The Incredibles 2?

Good. The first one is brilliant. There's no need to tell the story again.

:confused:

I see no problem with telling a new story with the characters we came to love in the first film. As Bob Zemeckis said, that's what people go to a sequel for--to see the characters again in a new story.

I wouldn't trust anything that is said regarding sequels by the man who made Back to the Future Part II. :P

Although I would love an Incredibles 2, and they have a great opportunity. I'm sure we'll see it eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wouldn't trust anything that is said regarding sequels by the man who made Back to the Future Part II.

What about the man who made Back to the Future Part III? (I know, depending on who you talk to, that's better or worse.) Really, the problems they dealt with in making Part II have been disclosed, the major ones being that A) they wrote themselves into a jam with the end of Part I, and B) Zemeckis was having to split time editing Part II with time shooting Part III, with the immense majority of the time going to shooting Part III. Could Part II have been better? Yeah, and Part III was an improvement over Part II, IMO.

Anyway, I am looking forward to what they have come up with for Toy Story 3. And I agree: I just can't see Disney not at least fighting for an Incredibles 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pixar has always been against sequels. The pressure of Disney will get us an Incredibles 2.

I hope!

I wouldn't trust anything that is said regarding sequels by the man who made Back to the Future Part II.

What about the man who made Back to the Future Part III? (I know, depending on who you talk to, that's better or worse.) Really, the problems they dealt with in making Part II have been disclosed, the major ones being that A) they wrote themselves into a jam with the end of Part I, and B) Zemeckis was having to split time editing Part II with time shooting Part III, with the immense majority of the time going to shooting Part III. Could Part II have been better? Yeah, and Part III was an improvement over Part II, IMO.

Anyway, I am looking forward to what they have come up with for Toy Story 3. And I agree: I just can't see Disney not at least fighting for an Incredibles 2.

Part III was definetly better than II, but I still don't think either of them came close to touching the orignal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But then again, it's pretty hard for anything to come close to touching the original... :P

EDIT: @ Koray: You're thinking of Part III, aren't you? The premise and pacing of Part III were much closer to Part I, which is one of the reasons I like it; it has more breathing room, and is less chaotic.

And...no, a Part IV is definitely not in order.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think a Part IV is in order!

At least we'd get Silvestri's score...

The premise and pacing of Part III were much closer to Part I, which is one of the reasons I like it; it has more breathing room, and is less chaotic.

Yeah, II was much too complex. Too much going on at once. I agree. III was a much simpler idea, and it worked much better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a lot worse movies than Part II, but I watch it right after watching Part I and it's kind of like, "....Oh." It's not just the pacing, but for me, the acting also seems a little more over-the-top than in the first. The characters seemed more real most of the time in the first one--and I think the pacing might have contributed to that as well. I don't sense that issue in Part III.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm looking forward to Toy Story 3, that should be good.

What the hell is up with all the Tinker Bell crap?

It's about money isn't it - they just keep making them until the cow dries up.

Toy Story 3 could be good. I was a bit cautious of this one since it was first announced as a possibility some years back, but they must have some good ideas because Pixar would never have agreed to do it if it was just Disney wanting a bit more cash from the franchise.

It's been said before, but there's a world of difference between Pixar and Disney. The latter just keeps pumping out any old straight to video crap, whereas even though the quality has varied a little recently, Pixar's output is far more consistent, and they generally don't need A-listers to make a movie that does well at the box office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disney is supposed to have done away with movie to DVD sequels, so you won't be seeing Bambi III or Lion King V. But they will still make them with some of their characters.

Part of the new deal with Pixar put Disney's animation studio under control of one of the head honchos from Pixar, can't remember which one. Disney desperately wants to return their animation dept to the glory days and continue with traditional hand drawn films.

that being said, Cars 2?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find all of this disconcerning. Are they desparately trying to break their streak? I mean, they should consider themselves lucky that the world didn't notice that Cars was garbage compared to the other Pixar films...10 movies in 5 years has got to mean that we're gonna be seeing some serious crap amongst them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
None of their films are bad, and but I've yet to see a great pixar movie.

Ratatouille is not a great Pixar movie, or animated movie, or children's movie. It is, however, a great movie.

Ted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
None of their films are bad, and but I've yet to see a great pixar movie.

Ratatouille is not a great Pixar movie, or animated movie, or children's movie. It is, however, a great movie.

Ted

It is. But a very flawed one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
None of their films are bad, and but I've yet to see a great pixar movie.

Ratatouille is not a great Pixar movie, or animated movie, or children's movie. It is, however, a great movie.

Ted

It is. But a very flawed one.

Eh. I don't like talking about flaws. We're all flawed people, right? As Pauline Kael said, "Great movies are rarely perfect movies." I would add that they shouldn't aspire to be.

Ted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
None of their films are bad, and but I've yet to see a great pixar movie.

Ratatouille is not a great Pixar movie, or animated movie, or children's movie. It is, however, a great movie.

Ted

It is. But a very flawed one.

Eh. I don't like talking about flaws. We're all flawed people, right? As Pauline Kael said, "Great movies are rarely perfect movies." I would add that they shouldn't aspire to be.

Ted

Perfection is quite irrelelvant to the matter. When a film with that many characters only has two presented in a satisfying fashion, I find it to be a consistantly dissapointing film, along with it being a consistantly admirable one. The exhiliration of the inventiveness and freshness of the film is marred in my eyes.

And Kael's statement seems to me quite a puzzling one...one of her buzz statements that does not strike me as particularly thought out (as was raised in the thread a couple of days ago....what the hell is a perfect movie?). But, then again, she made a career of challenging and infuriating, making a statement and standing by it, with no possiblity of rethinking it....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To speak of flaws is to acknowledge some system by which one can rate or rank something. It presupposes the notion of perfection. After all, perfection means without flaws. Kaels quote makes perfect sense.

Ted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To speak of flaws is to acknowledge some system by which one can rate or rank something. It presupposes the notion of perfection. After all, perfection means without flaws. Kaels quote makes perfect sense.

Ted

Kael's statement implies that some movies are perfect, an implication with which one might disagree if he were to posit perfection as asymptotic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wouldn't trust anything that is said regarding sequels by the man who made Back to the Future Part II. :lol:

But Part II is brilliant. The only movie to make a point of telling exactly the same story as the original all over again, only multiple times at once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To speak of flaws is to acknowledge some system by which one can rate or rank something. It presupposes the notion of perfection. After all, perfection means without flaws. Kaels quote makes perfect sense.

Ted

Kael's statement implies that some movies are perfect, an implication with which one might disagree if he were to posit perfection as asymptotic.

Yes, I was confusing my own follow-up to Kael's comment with the comment itself. The "rarely" is the giveaway there. I guess I was using the quote against its user's intent!

Ted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To speak of flaws is to acknowledge some system by which one can rate or rank something. It presupposes the notion of perfection. After all, perfection means without flaws. Kaels quote makes perfect sense.

Ted

I wrote some kind of response below, when I realized we're really speaking on different planes here. You talk of flaws as if they are not a big deal...and I am in agreement, in a general sense. One can find problems with every film. However, my problems with Ratatouille are very different. It is a movie that is consistantly harmed for me. I've seen it four times, and every time, I'm mood swinging between love and dissapointment. We obviously experienced the film very differantly. I'd love to say that it's flaws are irrelelvent, it is such a great movie....but when I am as depressed by it as I ganuinely am, I find it hard to brush away the concept of "flaws" with ease.

(Below is a small part of what I initially wrote. Really, just an extension of what I was saying in the "perfect" film thread.)

Kael's quote does not make sense because perfection is not defined. She speaks as if there is some common standard of what a perfect film is...when there is not. And your addition that perfection is not to be aspired to...equally unclear. What is this perfection? There is no formula, no set rules, no standards to be reached. Perfection is not a term that is relevant in film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clarify, out of the entire list, only these are Pixar's:

Wall·E (June 27th, 2008)

Up (May 29th, 2009)

Toy Story (re-release in 3D, October 2nd, 2009)

Toy Story 2 (re-release in 3D, February 12th, 2010)

Toy Story 3 (June 18th, 2010)

Newt (Summer 2011)

The Bear and the Bow (Christmas 2011)

Cars 2 (Summer 2012)

So that's five new movies over the next five years.

Business as usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...