Yep, it's true. Toy Story 3 is already in the planning and staffing stage, without Pixar. CNN article here.
The short of it is this: Pixar and Disney will end their business relationship after Cars comes out next year, but Disney will retain the rights to all movies produced by Pixar so far. This means that Disney will have the rights to sequels of all Pixar movies up to and including Cars. I personally always speculated that this would rule out any chance of a sequel to any Pixar film, since I'm not sure how you could make a quality sequel to any Pixar film without any of the key people who made the original. But I guess I was wrong.
Anyone else think this seems like abad idea? Can Disney really expect to replace Pixar and still make a movie on the same level?
Seriously, why would Pixar want Disney to produce their films. It's good enough that can produce it. I mean, almost all the kids will think Disney ACTUALLY MADE the film! That's stupid
Tons of people in America actually thought that Disney MADE Spirited Away!! wtf
Its no suprise. It is a bad idea. Di$ney i$ all about one thing nowaday$, and that thing i$n't putting out quality film$. Thanks Eisner, you suck!
I self-published a book on the fundamentals of drawing from life.
That's not their objective. Quite frankly, I don't think they care about making a quality movie anymore. They just put out what will make them lot's of money. Toy Story will fetch a bunch, so they'll do it. I wouldn't be suprised if they put out a 4, 5 and 6.Can Disney really expect to replace Pixar and still make a movie on the same level?
Personally, Disney disgusts me. When this comes out I am not going to see it. Pixar is better off without them.
the first 2 were rather good (thanks Pixar) 3 will do ok just because people will have liked the first 2 but then they will go strait to dvd and be like the rest of the crap Disney likes to push
Think you got mad photoshop skills? It could win you a car @ www.hhrya.com
I wonder if they will get Tom Hanks and Tim Allen back for #3, and all the rest of the voice talent...
"He turned and looked. A giant yellow duck was trying to force itself into the diner."
Denart said:This is how companies, and even individuals, steal credit away from those who deserve true recognition. By putting a name, that has very little to do with anything, on the overall product. And many people, in some cases, can't know any better as to knowing who made what. All they can do is believe what they are told.Seriously, why would Pixar want Disney to produce their films. It's good enough that can produce it. I mean, almost all the kids will think Disney ACTUALLY MADE the film! That's stupid
disney has gone too far...
yeah they do call films made by other people their own...
Do you know the muffinman?
Originally Posted by creatix
Once you understand what the word "stupid" means - age is no longer a valid excuse for being that way.
For all of their fancy ass animation that Disney might want to throw at this, it's still ultimately a great story that will make or break the movie. If somehow those greedy leeches at Disney can come up with a hot story, they just might do okay. Personally I think Pixar set the bar so damn high I think any slip-ups on Disney's part is just going to make them look that much more pathetic than they are now.
And I also know geeks like myself will probably boycott this movie just because we know it's not a Pixar flick.
Pixar rules...but I still have a spot in my heart for Disney...even if they do suck now.
I hope they can make quality stuff. SB Dave is right...it's all about the story. There are getting to be lots of people that can animate in 3d. I don't think it's impossible for Disney to put together a solid team to do the work. Animators jump back & forth between companies a lot anyways don't they? might even get some of the original folks back(if they aren't bitter towards Disney like a lot of people seem to be).
Hoping for them to fail seems like a waste.
Encouragement keeps me swimming , even in the undertow of disappointment.
This is going to flop for one simple reason. It's not being made by Pixar. It won't have that unique pixar style and charm. This is why Pixar is completely incapable of making a bad film. They're artists and storytellers first and 3-D animators second. I believe that's what comes across in their movies the most. They're not just making 3-D animated films for the sake of doing so like other studios have. They have cool and genuine ideas.
...It's too bad Disney can't just remake another obscure Japanese movie and change the character's names like they did with Atlantis and The Lion King.
Last edited by N D Hill; November 27th, 2004 at 03:16 PM.
motherfucks!Originally Posted by Exo
I would love to shove that into the faces of little kids so they can see what their beloved Disney really is!
Prime example of primitive animation with superb writing and storytelling making it big would be The Simpsons.
Prime example of slick animation and lousy storytelling would be any of the last Disney animate features.
Which one would you much rather watch?
I know I'd much rather watch Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa & Maggie over Atlantis any day of the week.
Yes, Pixar has definately set the bar high for Disney; a feat that I doubt very much they can handle. Sorry, Disney. I love you. I always have. But Eisner needs to die a slow and painful death, mush in the same way he's been killing you.
The reason that Pixar doesn't own the rights to their stories anymore was part of the deal with breaking up with the Mouse House. Steve Jobs (not the best guy, but better than some *cough*Eisner*cough*) tried to retain the rights, but it was either keep them and give Disney a large portion of the profits (I think it was like 50-60%, but don't quote me on that) on anything that they make, or just leave everything and start fresh. So, yeah, more Pixar movies without Pixar. I think I read, though, that Tom Hanks isn't so sure about making Toy Story 3 because of that fact. But, I'm sure that if Disney flashes enough $$, he'll come around. A guy's gotta make a living, right?