Pixar movies

[Insider2000]

Truest thing said in the thread so far. The Dog is one of the greatest animated characters to come along in the last few decades.

[youtube]3U_hqEkk674[/youtube]

Oh my God.....

Where's Mary Ann?

Fucking loved that cartoon!

[Tahkyn]

Been thinkling about this in light of Pixar's upcoming release schedule. It just feels like they're low on ideas and lacking that ambitious spark they one had. I mean, until recently the only sequel they had done was Toy Story 2, a rare exception. And now we have had Toy Story 3 come out, and soon to be released....

Cars 2
Brave
Monsters Inc. 2


Come on Pixar, you're better than this!

So that means in the next two or three years only one film, Brave, is going to be original, no wait, it's a frickin Disney princess mould story. Now I would have thought Pixar could be a little more creative with the first film to feature a femal lead but they went with princess.

Newt is shelved for Monsters Inc. 2. What the hell Pixar? You shelved an original product for another rehash? What has become of you?

Okay so I'm ranting a bit, but I'm a real big fan of Pixar, who have until recently shied away from the sequel with rare exception. For the first time in recent memory I'm not anticipating this years Pixar film. At all. It's Cars 2, by the way. I wonder who thought that making a sequel to one of the more mediocre films in their back catalogue was a good idea.

Okay, so yeah, I think they've lost their mojo. Big time. Thoughts?

[Cyber-Robin]

Toy Story 2 and 3 were very good films. If these other two are of similar quality then I have no beef.

[Kaiolino]

What the hell is this.

[Captain Hypersock]

I'm sure you can decide on lost mojo once you see these movies you're talking about.

[Thousand Lion-chan]

So you basically think that all sequels inherently suck? lol

[city_lights31]

I don't think you can say they have lost their mojo until they actually start making bad films. Toy Story 3 was a rousing success. As was Up. As was Wall*E. I agree that I would like to see more original products from them and that the thought of Pixar reverting into a more Dreamworks-esque company (who bank on their sequels and marketability constantly) is a sad one indeed. But so long as they maintain the otherworldly quality control that they have always had (even Ghibli can't stand up to them here) I really don't see how we avid Pixar enthusiasts can complain to heavily. Cars was probably their second weakest effort (A Bug's Life being the weakest) but the trailer for the sequel looks fun. Perhaps not inspired but fun (much like the original). As far as Monsters Inc goes - well in my eyes the original is probably the most overlooked film in their catalogue (oddly enough it lived in the shadow of Shrek as they debuted on the same year) so I am rather happy that we will get another M.Inc.

All in all I would say that we can't damn them before they stumble. They are coming off of three master class animation products - they deserve to make a fun pointless flick like Cars 2. However I do agree that I am nowhere near as excited to see C2 as I have been in recent years for their upcoming films.

[RobbyBevard]

First.
Newt was shelved because it was having story problems. Its great that they're willing to kill a project that far into development rather than release something sub-par.

Second.
Pixar is 11 for 11, and both Toy Story 2 and 3 are among the rare sequels better than the film that came before. Toy Story 3 is one of the first great 3's in movie history, period.

There is absolutely no reason to doubt them. They're allowed 3 or 4 total flops in a row before you can even begin to start speculating on it, but their mantra is story first, and the same people that have done the other movies that are great, are doing these movies.

And hey, bring on the sequals. They'll make them gillions of dollars, which then lets them make riskier movies like Ratatoulle, Wall-E, or Up. They never would have gotten away with a movie about cooking, an all silent movie, or a movie about an old man if they hadn't built the clout and the trust. (Monsters Inc is rumored to be a prequel, if that matters any.)

Third.
Cars is the hardest to take of their works because of the world it inhabits is kind of freaky, but its still an incredibly solid movie with great characterization, (and character growth) voice talent, music, visuals, and moments of true beauty and heart, I get choked up at the ending every time. I have no idea what the hell Cars 2 is doing with the spy thing, but I'm going to see it in theaters anyway. Pixar has earned that. (Also, Cars made like a billion dollars in merchandising, so there's your answer to that question.)

Fourth.
How the hell can you judge Brave when the ONLY thing we know about it at this point is that its Pixar taking on the fairy tale genre? We have a one sentance summary, there isn't even any promo art yet. Tangled was a Princess movie, and it was fantastic. Fox did Anastasia, and it was a Princess movie, but nothing like a Disney movie. Enchantd was a Princess movie, and it was a total love letter to the genre and it was a lot of fun. Miyazaki does the Princess genre all the time, and those are nothing like Disney princess movies. (Unless you want to tell me Nausicaa and Princess Mononoke are films that match the tone of Cinderella.)

[RobbyBevard]

Taboo (ala the Onion) posted this in the Disney thread. For posterity it should probably be shared here too.

I've Got You Dumb Motherfuckers Eating Right Out Of My Hand
By John Lasseter
Chief Creative Officer, Pixar

When we released the first Toy Story movie back in 1995, my colleagues and I were nervous about the response from critics and audiences. Sure, we knew we had crafted a brilliant, earnest film that intelligently explored the human condition—a story that resonated with both children and adults alike—but we didn't know for sure if moviegoers would come out in big numbers or not. Well, fast-forward 15 years, 11 movies, and $6 billion later, and I can tell you with full confidence that I've got you stupid fucking sons of bitches exactly where I want you.

I mean, Jesus Christ, we've got you dummies eating up this works-of-cinematic-beauty shit like your miserable little lives depended on it.

Yes, after the success of our first few movies we had a hunch you'd continue to enjoy the wonderfully designed animation and our smart, lyrical writing, but I didn't think we'd create a horde of drooling morons ready to drop everything just to watch a fucking rat cook dinner. Time and time again, though, there you chumps are, lined up around the block with your stupid little kids, eager to have your stupid little hearts filled with whimsy.

Admit it: You numb-nuts are addicted to our genuine, three-dimensional characters. And you just can't get enough of our ability to make an idiot robot that can barely even talk feel relatable. It's okay to say you love it.

It's truly pathetic, but it's okay.

Let me share a little anecdote with you. Three years ago, I was watching an early edit of the movie Up, and I swear to God I only had to watch five minutes of the thing before I turned to Andrew Stanton and said, "Boy, the sheep are gonna flock to this." And I said this while that old fart's house was still on the ground. Up had everything you nimrods have come to expect from Pixar: an endearing main character, that follow-your-dreams bullshit, and that razor-sharp humor garbage we can basically barf out anytime we need a hefty payday.

Admittedly, not everything in that movie was perfect. Were the talking dogs a cheap gag? Absolutely. Did it matter? No way. We're fucking Pixar! We've built enough credibility that we don't have to worry about talking dogs ruining a movie, because we own the audience, we own the critics, and when we say "Jump," the jack-offs who give out Academy Awards say, "How high? Best Picture high enough?"

Come to think of it, you're like a bunch of talking dogs that rush to their water bowls every time we refill it with timeless narratives and indelible characters, aren't you? Here, boy! Sit. Stay. Roll over. Feel more of an emotional connection with a cartoon fish than anything else in your own empty life. Good boy. Good.

Pixar is bulletproof, assholes. We can put out any old piece of shit that perfectly examines universal themes of love and friendship and just walk away with record box-office numbers. In fact, I think I'll have my award-winning design team get cracking on an anthropomorphic piece of shit right now. Yes. Shit. I'm talking actual human feces here, folks. We'll give it eyes and limbs, and—I don't know—call it Danny Caca. Brad Bird can make a story about how it got lost on its way to the sewage treatment facility. Its best friends are a used sewage-logged tampon and a hypodermic needle. Then we'll just sit back and watch the receipts come in.

Yeah, it'll have heart and depth, but still, it's going to be a talking piece of shit. Kids won't flush for years because of it.

So here's what we got coming out soon: Cars 2, Brave (I actually have no clue what that is, but I'm sure our little toady at The New York Times A.O. Scott will say it fits perfectly into Pixar's grand tradition of excellence), and Monsters, Inc. 2. I see we have a couple sequels in there, but I'm willing to bet you dunderheads are excited as hell for them because Pixar has that rare, we-don't-do-sequels-unless-we-genuinely-have-a-good-story-to-tell integrity thing that you just absolutely love and respect and that can't be found anywhere else in Hollywood. Hell, it's like it's 100 degrees out and we're the only ones selling snow cones.

So, enjoy the movies, dipshits. And remember, you've got a friend in us.

[Thousand Lion-chan]

I've Got You Dumb Motherfuckers Eating Right Out Of My Hand
By John Lasseter
Chief Creative Officer, Pixar

When we released the first Toy Story movie back in 1995, my colleagues and I were nervous about the response from critics and audiences. Sure, we knew we had crafted a brilliant, earnest film that intelligently explored the human condition—a story that resonated with both children and adults alike—but we didn't know for sure if moviegoers would come out in big numbers or not. Well, fast-forward 15 years, 11 movies, and $6 billion later, and I can tell you with full confidence that I've got you stupid fucking sons of bitches exactly where I want you.

I mean, Jesus Christ, we've got you dummies eating up this works-of-cinematic-beauty shit like your miserable little lives depended on it.

Yes, after the success of our first few movies we had a hunch you'd continue to enjoy the wonderfully designed animation and our smart, lyrical writing, but I didn't think we'd create a horde of drooling morons ready to drop everything just to watch a fucking rat cook dinner. Time and time again, though, there you chumps are, lined up around the block with your stupid little kids, eager to have your stupid little hearts filled with whimsy.

Admit it: You numb-nuts are addicted to our genuine, three-dimensional characters. And you just can't get enough of our ability to make an idiot robot that can barely even talk feel relatable. It's okay to say you love it.

It's truly pathetic, but it's okay.

Let me share a little anecdote with you. Three years ago, I was watching an early edit of the movie Up, and I swear to God I only had to watch five minutes of the thing before I turned to Andrew Stanton and said, "Boy, the sheep are gonna flock to this." And I said this while that old fart's house was still on the ground. Up had everything you nimrods have come to expect from Pixar: an endearing main character, that follow-your-dreams bullshit, and that razor-sharp humor garbage we can basically barf out anytime we need a hefty payday.

Admittedly, not everything in that movie was perfect. Were the talking dogs a cheap gag? Absolutely. Did it matter? No way. We're fucking Pixar! We've built enough credibility that we don't have to worry about talking dogs ruining a movie, because we own the audience, we own the critics, and when we say "Jump," the jack-offs who give out Academy Awards say, "How high? Best Picture high enough?"

Come to think of it, you're like a bunch of talking dogs that rush to their water bowls every time we refill it with timeless narratives and indelible characters, aren't you? Here, boy! Sit. Stay. Roll over. Feel more of an emotional connection with a cartoon fish than anything else in your own empty life. Good boy. Good.

Pixar is bulletproof, assholes. We can put out any old piece of shit that perfectly examines universal themes of love and friendship and just walk away with record box-office numbers. In fact, I think I'll have my award-winning design team get cracking on an anthropomorphic piece of shit right now. Yes. Shit. I'm talking actual human feces here, folks. We'll give it eyes and limbs, and—I don't know—call it Danny Caca. Brad Bird can make a story about how it got lost on its way to the sewage treatment facility. Its best friends are a used sewage-logged tampon and a hypodermic needle. Then we'll just sit back and watch the receipts come in.

Yeah, it'll have heart and depth, but still, it's going to be a talking piece of shit. Kids won't flush for years because of it.

So here's what we got coming out soon: Cars 2, Brave (I actually have no clue what that is, but I'm sure our little toady at The New York Times A.O. Scott will say it fits perfectly into Pixar's grand tradition of excellence), and Monsters, Inc. 2. I see we have a couple sequels in there, but I'm willing to bet you dunderheads are excited as hell for them because Pixar has that rare, we-don't-do-sequels-unless-we-genuinely-have-a-good-story-to-tell integrity thing that you just absolutely love and respect and that can't be found anywhere else in Hollywood. Hell, it's like it's 100 degrees out and we're the only ones selling snow cones.

So, enjoy the movies, dipshits. And remember, you've got a friend in us.

Beautiful :,)

First.
Newt was shelved because it was having story problems. Its great that they're willing to kill a project that far into development rather than release something sub-par.

Second.
Pixar is 11 for 11, and both Toy Story 2 and 3 are among the rare sequels better than the film that came before. Toy Story 3 is one of the first great 3's in movie history, period.

There is absolutely no reason to doubt them. They're allowed 3 or 4 total flops in a row before you can even begin to start speculating on it, but their mantra is story first, and the same people that have done the other movies that are great, are doing these movies.

And hey, bring on the sequals. They'll make them gillions of dollars, which then lets them make riskier movies like Ratatoulle, Wall-E, or Up. They never would have gotten away with a movie about cooking, an all silent movie, or a movie about an old man if they hadn't built the clout and the trust. (Monsters Inc is rumored to be a prequel, if that matters any.)

Third.
Cars is the hardest to take of their works because of the world it inhabits is kind of freaky, but its still an incredibly solid movie with great characterization, (and character growth) voice talent, music, visuals, and moments of true beauty and heart, I get choked up at the ending every time. I have no idea what the hell Cars 2 is doing with the spy thing, but I'm going to see it in theaters anyway. Pixar has earned that. (Also, Cars made like a billion dollars in merchandising, so there's your answer to that question.)

Fourth.
How the hell can you judge Brave when the ONLY thing we know about it at this point is that its Pixar taking on the fairy tale genre? We have a one sentance summary, there isn't even any promo art yet. Tangled was a Princess movie, and it was fantastic. Fox did Anastasia, and it was a Princess movie, but nothing like a Disney movie. Enchantd was a Princess movie, and it was a total love letter to the genre and it was a lot of fun. Miyazaki does the Princess genre all the time, and those are nothing like Disney princess movies. (Unless you want to tell me Nausicaa and Princess Mononoke are films that match the tone of Cinderella.)

Also pretty awesome.

[city_lights31]

I always knew Lasseter was a cold mofo. I would like to hear what he has to say about Miyazaki in a similar context, you know off the record.

[Bill]

Has Pixar ever made a bad film?

[taboo]

Come on Pixar, you're better than this!

So that means in the next two or three years only one film, Brave, is going to be original, no wait, it's a frickin Disney princess mould story. Now I would have thought Pixar could be a little more creative with the first film to feature a femal lead but they went with princess.

a princess who is supposedly responsible for her patents death and learns how to be a badass to make up for it (so Ive heard). A PIXAR take on a story with a princess

Newt is shelved for Monsters Inc. 2. What the hell Pixar? You shelved an original product for another rehash? What has become of you?

newt was shelved for story problems, but most likely because of similarities between itself and bluesky's Rio

[Demon Rin]

Second.
Pixar is 11 for 11, and both Toy Story 2 and 3 are among the rare sequels better than the film that came before. Toy Story 3 is one of the first great 3's in movie history, period.

That's a matter of opinion.

I think they're 10 for 11.

Third.
Cars is the hardest to take of their works because of the world it inhabits is kind of freaky...

And, you know, the whole plot is lifted point-by-point from another film without deviating at all from the original film's plot.
There's that too...

But Cars 2 looks completely original this time, which is Ironic since it's a sequel. I actually like all the upcoming movies look good, ESPECIALLY Monsters Inc. 2... The last one REALLY left me wanting more.

[taboo]

I was rewatching my plethora of behind the scenes junk on my Incredibles and Wall-e DVDs, and I just want to say two things

brad bird is incredible

violet's voice actress is ridicuawesome



[YouTube]4FRb3bH3iB0[/YouTube]

[Conekiller]

violet's voice actress is ridicuawesome

I disagree. From her segment she came across as someone with very little imagination/ suspension of disbeleif. It frequently annoys me when actors can't wrap their heads around the movie genre they're in. She was all bent out of shape by having to say "the remote controlls the robot". The whole feature left me with a sour taste in my mouth.

[taboo]

lol she's not an actor

she's a historian, someone who doesn't have to have 'suspension of disbeleif'

[Conekiller]

I know. It was just her attitude about the movie that grated on me. I dont see why pixar would want to showcase some boring lady who is all " superheroes?! Whats up with that, sure whstever, ill be in your weird nerd movie" (not an actual quote ^__-}

[RobbyBevard]

And, you know, the whole plot is lifted point-by-point from another film without deviating at all from the original film's plot.
There's that too...

Beyond the JOKE about it, its NOT a scene for scene remake of Doc Hollywood anymore than Avatar is a remake of Dances with Wolves.

Its about a race car that needs to learn to slow down.

That had memorable characters, great visuals, music, character growth and development. There was nothing *wrong* with the movie, beyond the disconnect people have with the car world, and that it was Nascar oriented. Its a totally different genre for some folks, but its not bad on the creative or production level in any way.

I know. It was just her attitude about the movie that grated on me. I dont see why pixar would want to showcase some boring lady who is all " superheroes?! Whats up with that, sure whstever, ill be in your weird nerd movie" (not an actual quote ^__-}

Same reason any competent voice director picks someone to do something. Because Sarah Vowell has an awesome DISTINCT voice well suited for the character.

Also, she's not boring. She tells great stories.

[Darkstorm]

brad bird is incredible

You know, I don't know exactly what an "executive consultant" does.

But I do know that it was pretty much the time Bird stopped doing it for The Simpsons that the show started dropping in quality.