The Pixar Thread

[Koray Savas 2,254]

Disney/Pixar To Release 10 Animated Films Through 2012

All these new movies, yet no The Incredibles 2?

[Marian Schedenig 9,042]

Worse: No Brad Bird mentions at all.

[Trent Hoyt 13]

Meh, I'm only interested in the Pixar movies. It will be very cool to see Toy Story 1&2 in 3d.

[King Mark 3,713]

I only see a few of them

Wall-E looks cool

Was bored to death by Cars

Can't stand talking penguins

[Jacob 0]

Cars 2?

[Red 75]

Talk about overkill. I'm a big fan of Pixar, but this could lead to some bad films.

[Trent Hoyt 13]

Pixar is still releasing one movie per year, its Disney Animation thats pumping up the output.

[Henry B 51]

The Princess and the Frog and Toy Story 3 sound interesting.

[indy4 155]

I think these could be good.

[Docteur Qui 1,573]

All these new movies, yet no The Incredibles 2?

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

[Trent Hoyt 13]

You know I would really like to see Pixar try a good ole fashion Menken musical.

[Delorean90 47]

All these new movies, yet no The Incredibles 2?

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

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.

[indy4 155]

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.

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

[Trent Hoyt 13]

Pixar has always been against sequels. The pressure of Disney will get us an Incredibles 2.

[Delorean90 47]

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.

[indy4 155]

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.

[Koray Savas 2,254]

Maybe because Part II was exactly the same as Part I except in the future

I think a Part IV is in order!

[Delorean90 47]

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

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.

[indy4 155]

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.

[Koray Savas 2,254]

Part IV!!

McFly and Doc need to go back in time and avoid getting Parkinson's disease!

[Hlao-roo 389]

Part IV!!

McFly and Doc need to go back in time and avoid getting Parkinson's disease!

Har?

[Ray Barnsbury 8]

I'm most interested in the return to traditionally animated musicals, like The Princess and the Frog.

[Trent B 340]

I'm looking forward to Toy Story 3, that should be good.

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

[Ray Barnsbury 8]

Joel McNeely's gotta get work somehow.

[The Train Station 8,673]

I rather like Back to the Future Part II. The stakes were high, it was thrilling and full of surprises.

[Delorean90 47]

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.

[The Train Station 8,673]

I've never seen one single Pixar movie. I'm not likely to see any of these coming up.

[Richard P 4,189]

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.

[Luke Skywalker 1,939]

Worse: No Brad Bird mentions at all.

that means Giacchino is not a given

And direct to DVD movies does not sound good...

[Delorean90 47]

I've never seen one single Pixar movie. I'm not likely to see any of these coming up.

Man, you need to rent Toy Story and The Incredibles, posthaste.

[The Train Station 8,673]

No hurry.

[JoeinAR 1,953]

Thats 10 movie tickets I won't have to buy.

[indy4 155]

I've never seen one single Pixar movie. I'm not likely to see any of these coming up.

Man, you need to rent Toy Story and The Incredibles, posthaste.

And Finding Nemo.

[Romão 2,319]

None of their films are bad, and but I've yet to see a great pixar movie.

[Ollie 1,136]

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?

[Morlock 11]

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.

[tpigeon 3]

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

[Ollie 1,136]

Not all of them are Pixar films. Only 4 or 5 of them are. Pixar releases one film a year. The rest are under Disney's animation.

[Morlock 11]

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.

[Ollie 1,136]

Worse: No Brad Bird mentions at all.

I think he's planning /working on a live action film, probably busy with that.

[tpigeon 3]

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

[Romão 2,319]

I must say, I still haven't seen Ratatouille, though.

[Morlock 11]

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....

[tpigeon 3]

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

[Hlao-roo 389]

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.

[Marian Schedenig 9,042]

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

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.

[tpigeon 3]

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

[Morlock 11]

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.

[Mr. Breathmask 566]

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.

[Richard P 4,189]

Hmm. So that wasn't a joke made by Mark on page 1.

I enjoyed Cars but not as much as the rest of Pixar's output. They must have some good ideas, or Lassetter's being very pushy.