Disney/Pixar Thread

[ANJLOVER14]

^ Still, the rating of approval for audiences is only about 69%, so it's still the lowest rated Pixar movie. But, I'll probably still see it. I liked the original Cars, so maybe I'll enjoy Cars 2 somewhat.

[SuperShawn]

, it's all about selling merchandise.

 

That's all I could think when they announced making a sequel around their weakest film to date. The bad reviews have come at no surprise, however neither have the large box office numbers which will fuel the need to continue this less then stellar franchise. Either way cars 2 will be the first pixar film I do not see in theaters.

[mcjaco]

Went and saw it for my nephew's 6th birthday.

 

I am not a hige fan of the original Cars, as I thought it was pretty weak, but in the demographic they're shooting for it seems to be a huge hit. We had kids showing up for Cars 2 in Lightning McQueen gear left and right.

 

I thought it was OK. Honestly, it's the first movie I've seen in 3D, so that kept my attention. My nephew loved it. He was on the edge of his seat the and ducking and bobbing through the race scenes, and think Mater is hilarious.

[skitt2010]

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/news/a327023/pixar-making-toy-story-4-says-tom-hanks.html - nuff said!!

[XII]

NO!!!!!!!! The first three were really good, but I just can't see a fourth movie being made without totally killing the trilogy. It ended too good with the 3rd one.

[the ghost]

I'll believe TS4 when I see it. Anyone seen the brave trailer yet? I'm too lazy to post it, but its gorgeous and it looks like Pixar is trying something new as based on what I saw it appears it's not going to be as "comedic" but be more of a legit princess film. This is a step in a cool new direction as all the Disney princess movies are awesome!

[mcjaco]

^ The Brave trailer was pure eye candy.

[Sheep-O-Matic]

I can't believe I'm saying this, but it looks like I'm going to skip out on Cars 2. It's a merchandising gimmick. I guess I'll just redbox it when it's on dvd... I will post a review here if I do end up seeing it... (someone would have to pay for my ticket, because I'm not spending money to see this in theaters).

 

In other news:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_uG4mi17Ao

 

This looks very interesting.

 

RE: TS4... not a good idea if Pixar is seriously considering... TS3 was enough. Perfect ending. Period.

[the ghost]

I thought it was OK.

Theres my review... not terrible but don't think you're missing something awesome if you don't see it.

[PoisonedPirate]

I'm really enjoyed Cars 1 and even though I know it only got a sequel because of the merchandise I'm really looking forward to Cars 2. Also the cameo from Lewis Hamilton is a plus for me.

 

I don't think Toy Story needs another film. The last one ended perfectly and I think any additions would ruin the series.

 

Pixar should focus more of original films rather than sequels.

[andre8]

I'm going to watch Cars 2 tomorrow, and I hope it's not as bad as everyone says it is.

 

I don't think Toy Story really needs another sequel. I was thinking it could fit as a little mini TV show.

[braztaz]

I have absolutely no interest in seeing Cars 2. First Pixar film I've skipped out on.

[Sheep-O-Matic]

As they said on Cartoon Networks [Adult Swim]

 

Wall-E = Amazing

 

Up = Amazing

 

Toy Story 1 = Amazing

 

Toy Story 2 = Amazing

 

Toy Story 3 = Amazing

 

Cars 2 = WTF

 

I still haven't seen the movie, but that made me LOL

[Jds03]

^ for this brief moment, i actually have more respect for adult swim as an animation source than i do for Disney/Pixar.

[Sheep-O-Matic]

^ Same here... for the moment...

 

Anyway, I have applied for job at Pixar a few times. Sadly, no feedback. I have six film ideas for them; one out of those six is a sequel (A Bug's Life 2). The other five are fresh and original. One is a fairy tale type of movie, two of my other film ideas take place in our time, another film idea takes place in Spain, and the one I've been recently brainstorming on takes place in the future (like Wall-E).

 

I know, I know. "A Bug's Life 2"? Really? Well, I say YES if there's a good story behind it; and I have a very good story. In fact, I already sent thestory in to Pixar, but they still haven't replied... However, I wouldn't be surprised if the film actually come to be in real life... That might be a law suit... I already lost one of my ideas that I submitted to Dreamworks. Look up a movie titled "Turbo". That was MY idea that I told them about (different title of course), but they rejected it, and I just found out it'll come out in 2014.

[Sheep-O-Matic]

I just saw Cars 2. Here's my review.

 

This was Pixar's most unnecessary sequel yet. The story has nothing to do with the first one, the characters aren't the same, and the story is focused on Mater for some reason.

 

My review kind of goes around the mind boggling questions such as:

 

Why do cars eat icecream?

Why do cars have to sleep or go to the bathroom?

How did Mater write a goodbye note on paper?

Why do cars have teeth and tongues?

Who's building all these cars?

How can a car be agile?

Who is driving these cars?

 

Nah, I'll stick to the basics...

 

It was nice to see Lightning McQueen again, but after about 30 minutes into the film, he goes back into jerk-mode again, but not at all as bad as in the first movie. Of course, Lightning changes back to "nice car" mode in the end (bipolar jerk ). Surprisingly, Mater didn't get on my nerves as much as I thought he would (him being the main character and all). Although there were a few "let's feel bad for the dumb redneck tow-truck" moments that seemed a bit passive.

 

Some of the voice acting was a bit lackluster on Owen Wilson's part. It was like he rushed through his lines and said they were "perfect" after the first take. Another voice that bothered me was Fillmore's. They didn't even try to match up his voice to the original, having him sound like Danny DeVito in his last spill of dialog.

 

The story was a huge let-down. Usually Pixar films tend to give an "ultimate message", but there is no message here. Just guns blazing and cars exploding... Yes, folks, quite a few cars DIED in this film, and I felt that was a bit too much for the kids. The jokes were pretty bad... nothing memorable... all except the hideous Chevron car encounter when Mater travels through the slummy markets of Paris... (I don't know if that encounter was supposed to be funny, but personally, it freaked me out). Over all, the story felt like an hour and a half long Mater's Tall Tales episode... I was sort of waiting for the movie to end with all of the Radiator Springs locals gathered around Mater, and Mater saying something like: "Yep, and that's what happened"... which this moment actually DID happen towards the end, only this Mater Tall Tale actually happened... yeeeaaah...

 

The movie isn't terrible, but it feels like a huge step backwards for Pixar. You'll sit through it, but it's like "Meh, Pixar has done better"... And that disappoints me. After Toy Story 3, I expected Pixar to do something phenomenal... or at least something fresh, new, and original. I'm all for sequels, but this was by far the worst Pixar sequel, mostly because it's unnecessary. There just wasn't a story that needed to be told. Please, do NOT totally avoid this movie. It's definitely worth a rent.

 

I was wondering why I got a bit nauseous when I saw that spiffy Disney logo on the screen... Apparently, Disney has Pixar by the balls. Clearly, the main point of this movie was to sell merchandise. That's right, Disney, make billions off of those bed sets and beach towels and toys! After all, that's the only thing that matters when making an animated film, right? Even if it means putting a slight damper on the Pixar name. Who cares?

Edited July 27, 2011 by Sheep-O-Matic

[BeemerBoy]

I just saw Cars 2. Here's my review.

 

My review kind of goes around the mind boggling questions such as:

 

Why do cars eat icecream?

Why do cars have to sleep or go to the bathroom?

How did Mater write a goodbye not on paper?

Why do cars have teeth and tongues?

Who's building all these cars?

How can a car be agile?

Who is driving these cars?

Why do these concepts continue to confuse you?? I'll give you the answer.........BECAUSE THEY ARE CARTOONS.

 

And considering you're someone who admittedly enjoys Cartoon Network, I'll start with a simple one for ya. How are fries, shakes, and wads of meat able to walk, talk, and live as domesticated entities? How is a coyote able to construct elaborate traps in an attempt to capture a roadrunner? How does a radioactive spider allow a human being to spin webs and fight crime?

 

 

How? The same way cars sleep, write a goodbye note on paper, drive themselves, crap, or anything else you can think of. Seriously, why do you continue to dissect these films as though they're full of some secrets of the unknown world? They are FREAKIN' CARTOONS, and ANYONE can make ANYTHING they want happen in them. It's really just that simple. If you don't care for the storyline, that's one thing, but how is the overall medium so confusing to you?

 

That's what truly boggles the mind. [/end rant]

[Sheep-O-Matic]

First of all, I am NOT fond of Cartoon Network at all.

 

Secondly, you took those questions way too seriously. Calm down.

This is Pixar. They are known to bring life and personality to inanimate objects, but there used to be a boundary. Tell me the times you've seen Woody or Buzz eat something. Or a time where Wall-E had to use a restroom. NEVER.

I know the Cars franchise is heavily geared toward kids, but they shouldn't lie to them. I wouldn't be surprised if a kid smeared ice cream all over the front of his dad's Dodge Durango after seeing this movie.

 

I know IT'S A CARTOON but that should be no excuse for Pixar to lose their logic. But like I said, my review goes completely AROUND those questions; so make like an elderly person with Alzheimer's and forget about it.

 

Subject Change Power! Activate!

 

I am really hoping that Pixar redeems themselves with Brave (although it looks more like something Dreamworks would come up with).

[BeemerBoy]

But like I said, my review goes completely AROUND those questions;

Yet you still posted them, thus, once again in this thread, not helping your cause one bit.

 

I know the Cars franchise is heavily geared toward kids, but they shouldn't lie to them.

Yes, when will those bastards at Pixar stop trying to corrupt our youth with this false automotive propoganda?!?!

 

Anyway, I have applied for job at Pixar a few times. Sadly, no feedback.

Stick by the phone. I'm sure it'll happen any day now.

 

 

I'm out of this thread and off to launch my home by helium balloons.

[Sheep-O-Matic]

When Mater sung the All State commercial song in the movie, that's when I knew any sense of artistic integrity was stripped from the film.

 

Oh, wow. I actually forgot about that part... It was actually the State Farm Insurance song. I agree with you though; artistic integrity stripped.

[A.J.]

Sure, most of the films Pixar Animation Studios have produced have been absolutely fantastic (Wall-E is my all time favorite film ... IN THE WORLD), but let's not forget what the bottom line goal is - earn as much green (and other multicolored) stuff as possible.

 

I bet that they made Cars 2 because they knew they could turn an outrageous profit on it - not necessarily on the film itself, but the merchandise surrounding it.

 

I'm looking forward to Brave coming around next year, because it's a film that hasn't been spun off from a previous franchise.

[Real]

I loved Cars 2. But I also absolutely love cars and I even more love road racing. So there were so many awesome cameo's that it just made the movie for it. It was a little odd (sorta like Cars meet James Bond feel) but other than that, Lewis Hamilton, Jeff Gordon and the other huge list of cameo's made it awesome.

 

One of my fave parts of the first is when Schumi comes to Guido and Luigi's tire shop and they both pass out. SO awesome.

[Team Thriller]

People are blaming Pixar for making Cars 2 just for profit.

We have to remember that they are under Disney and have to do whatever Disney tells them too.

I bet Cars 2 was an act of Disney telling Pixar to make a movie for advertising. I bet Pixar wouldn't have done it otherwise.

 

---James

[Evanaj15]

Speaking of which, i hate how Disney thinks they can tell people what to do. If it wasn't for those people like Anne Sweeny, who helped come up with what's on Disney Channel , Mickey Mouse cartoons would be all the rage. Here's a similar link to a thread on MiceChat.

 

http://micechat.com/forums/teen-scene/153874-i-hate-disney-because-disney-channel.html

 

I agree with the fact that Disney told Pixar to make Cars 2. I think that they thought it would be just like "Toy Story 3".

[gisco]

^ & ^^ You guys are clueless about business.

 

Cars 2 would have been made with or without Disney because Cars was a huge success. The goal of the company is to make money because the company is owned by stockholders and they want a return on their investment. If the company doesn't make money, the value of the company goes down and the Board of Directors would probably be replaced. So If the choice is to spend millions on something that is proven or go with something that is totally new, which has a better chance at returning their investment and making the company more valuable?

Edited October 17, 2011 by gisco