Slashdot Mirror
Disney to Make Toy Story 3 Without Pixar
rdurell writes "CNN is reporting that Disney has begun the process of setting up a new CGI studio with the goal of making Toy Story 3. Pixar has balked at the idea of another sequel thus far though Disney does own the rights to the franchise. Does this truly spell the end of the Disney-Pixar relationship? Can both Disney and Pixar live without the other?" We covered the Disney/Pixar breakup in January.
Disney has repeatedly fucked Pixar over. A toy story 3 without Pixar will suck, though it may not flop with Disneys brand recognition. Ive been waiting years for Pixar to sever ties with Disney.
That's like making shit without an anus hole!!!!
Further, the new season of Family Guy will be written by the folks from "Will and Grace."
Just a couple more changes that will bring you sequels just as good as the originals.
P.S. - Disney hasn't done anything original on their own in YEARS (nay, DECADES).
God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
Pixar has outgrown Disney. The question is, can Disney survive without Pixar? I hearby predict the quality of the storyline for Toy Story 3 will be vastly inferior to the first two Toy Story movies.
Pixar films have a very unique style to them that IMO Disney won't be able to copy. Between having some of the best artists and best programmers in the world I think Disney is SOL. They just got too greedy and now Pixar going to hammer them.
"And a voice was screaming: 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'" - HST
Thats not news. Cars was always intended to be the last movie the two studios did together. That was announced, I believe, last year?
/. seems to think people with a four-digit UID and excellent karma need to "sit in the timeout corner."
And Disney indicated at the time they intended to build their own CGI studio to compete with Pixar.
(Posted anonymously because
Pixar's realized it doesn't need Disney (all they've done lately is act as distributers). Disney killed their golden goose in an effort to grab a little more profit for themselved.
the characters will have a black outline?
and that there will be hidden words and suggestions about sex in the movie?
and that it quickly becomes a direct to video failure. C'mon Disney, is mining existing properties all that you have left in you? What happened to creativity anyhow?
Lasers Controlled Games!
there's no way that people will really sit for this. I figure by the time this is released, there will be a big stink in the public (read: non-geek) sector about Pixar going solo, and people will just see this as more Disney Sequel-itis (see Little Mermaid 2, Cinderella 2, Lion King 2).
somewhere, right now, Roy Disney is laughing.
I'm sure it'll be a heart-warming family story, with both Buzz AND Woody having 2 funny sidekicks each!
(The story will actually just be a recycled Hansel and Gretel story)
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
*Sigh*. Disney will ruin it--I don't think anything decent has come out of Disney in the past five or ten years, aside from the Pixar stuff. Does anyone know if Disney owns the rights to The Incredibles sequel? That would be really unfortunate...
Perhaps Pixar can buy the rights back.
Toy Story 1 and 2 are my favourite Full CG Cartoons.
On one hand, I would love to see another iteration of the story. On the other hand, Disney has the habit (since about 95) of turning everything to crud.
I don't think they can pull off what made the first two so magical and special.
Karma: Can only be portioned out by the Cosmos.
With Eisner intending to step down, Disney may have a chance to get back to the role they played of wholesome fun. Right now they are cliched and trite. They went from inspiring imagination to the poster children of proving that trademarks don't spark innovation.
I don't recall Walt ever drawing Mickey Mouse as a dirty dirty whore, but that's what he's become, pimped out around the world.
Never confuse volume with power.
Disney's old movies were such a success, though it does bring back bad memories of watching the Little Mermaid without end for weeks at a time...but now the market's moved on. Pixar's got the bases covered as far as audience goes, and Disney's only hope is to completely reinvent itself...good luck...
Pixar will go on to do great things. Disney should have stuck with them. Pixar was fresh blood for Disney and they just gave that up. What were they thinking.
I am Lord Snowbeam. Heed my call!
Disney is in the process of setting up a digital animation facility in Glendale -- not far from the digs of its bitter rival DreamWorks Animation. Mickey Mouse wouldn't stoop so low as to try to hire talent away from his competitor, would he? Unfortunately, Eisner is not Mickey Mouse...
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
without having to keep their stuff as purely kid-friendly and cutesy as Disney requires. The Incredibles was a step in the more-adult direction, but without Disney, they could do whatever their creative minds come up with, even if it is far edgier than a Disney cartoon.
Of course, I speak as an adult fan of their work, not as a stockholder, nor as a 5 year old hoping for stuff my prudish parents will take me to.
As Skinner would say, though, "Prove me wrong, kids! Prove me wrong."
Do not touch -Willie
...um er ...
When will Disney get a clue. They just make crap these days.
This also smells a bit like a dupe.
Oh yeah. um .. first boast or post ... I feel kinda dirty saying that.
Bitter and proud of it.
I really don't care if Pixar or Disney get along.
But I beg of You, please, PLEASE!
Don't let the same people who brought us Cinderella II: Now it's just for 2 year olds, Little Mermaid II: The Sea Shells got Bigger and the Story got Dumber, Lion King 1 1/2: The Pointless Version, and Pocohontas II: We Just Can't Take Historical Innacuracy with a Native American Pamela Anderson Clone Far Enough make "Toy Story 3".
I don't think it if I had to suffer my children asking me for another movie where Andy loses his Woody again, and the kids take a trip to Neverland Ranch to find it.
Oh, and thanks for Metroid Prime II.
Amen.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
The interesting question for the next 5 years: Now that PIXR is free from the creative and financial shackles of DIS, will they be able to get their movies shown?
Or will DIS be able to use its distribution muscle to keep it out of theaters long enough to starve PIXR of revenue, and to serve as a warning to current "partners" that You Don't Fuck With The Mouse.
Can Pixar survive without Disney? Absolutely, their movies pretty much market themselves these days. Can Disney movies survive without Pixar? Only if they get out of their post-95 crap slump.
If you have to ask, you'll never know.
Disney could hire a great crew, and make a great "looking" film, but it would lack the substance and all the Pixary goodness that makes their films, well, a Pixar film.
"This is you left and that's your left. This is your right and that's your right. You're gonna die!
This .
Fellowship 9/11
Then, after Toy Story 3, they will launch Toy Story: The Series, daily on the Disney Channel. Of course, it will be hastily put together and have completely flat graphics created as cheaply as possibly. They'll also be releasing direct-to-video sequals until people are so tired of it that the brand is useless. Then they'll wait 5 years and "rerelease" the original toy story to theaters, and come up with a "new" DVD set containing the original and all sequals. Of course, they'll do this just in time for the holidays and get all new Toy Story toys, books, ice cream, cereal, shoes, clothing, etc. Only then, after this dies down, will they consider the franchise "milked." If you don't like the way Disney operates, you're not alone
Will Disney be getting back into 2D animation again? After the debacle with Treasure Planet it seems to me that they have decided to forgo the idea of continuing the 2D flms. If they are going to focus their efforts on 3D it does make sense to sever ties with Pixar. If their future is in 3D then they need to increase their in-house experience in this realm. It seems a shame to stop the 2D stuff, but kids obviously prefer the 3D stuff. Disney is not about making art, and they know it, they are an entertainment company that churns out the stuff that sells. I don't think the Toy Story 3 will be any less of a hit without Pixar. I, for one, do not understand why Pixar is given such a vaunted status. The origibal Toy Story was something new and they deserved praise, but ever since they have just been re-jigging the formula.
Pixar knew going in that Disney would have own the material and have the right to do sequels without them, and they must have known when they decided to split up that Disney would set up their own shop and exercise that right. This is hardly surprising.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
Just like the Aladin sequel did without Robin Williams as the genie.
Should read:
I'd rather have someone respond than be modded up.
My guess is that the writers are given much more freedom and control at Pixar than at Disney. So maybe if Disney learned something from the experience, they can do it. But most likely not.
I am hoping that, with Disney out of the picture Pixar may create more mature movies. I love what they have done so far but, I feel Pixar has so much more potential.
UNIX/Linux Consulting
Pixar is full of some of the coolest kindest and most creative people on the plannet. Disney just ships it out, they dont impact the warm fuzzy feel that is distinctive to pixar movies.
...when they lose their ability to write amazing stories, and not a moment before. As long as they continue to focus on doing good honest work, they can animate their pictures using tape, pipe-cleaners and cardboard cutouts and I'll atill pay 10 bucks to watch.
Disney is a joke because they have completely forgotten that simple inventive storytelling are more important than the visual imagery, the happy meal tie-ins, and the franschise rights all put together.
I really hope this backfires if they decide to go through with it.
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
Disney, though... I don't know. Their homegrown films haven't been so great lately. They can reissue DVDs of their back catalogue, they can keep milking the Mouse [2], but with Pixar and Dreamworks producing material as good as they have been, Disney have got to raise the bar. Toy Story 3 is a risky move. Obviously, Marketing will insist on it, but if Toy Story 3 sucks, Disney have a big problem. Toy Story 3 has to be better than either of the first two if Disney want to stay in this game.
[1]: in case you're wondering: IMHO the best in the world is still Miyazaki. I haven't yet seen The Incredibles or Hauru no Ugoku Shiro, thougo.
[2]: did anyone ever actually find Mickey Mouse funny? I always preferred Bugs and Daffy. It's a bit like Charlie Chaplin vs Laurel and Hardy, I suppose.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Pixar does NOT need Disney. Maybe they're not really equipped to distribute their own movies, but they could certainly either become equipped or find somebody else who is. They have enough name recognition of their own that they don't need Disney anymore.
Disney, on the other hand ... what's the last movie they did by themselves? Operation Dumbo Drop? Pocahantas II?
Nope, plenty of big time distributors where trying to swone Pixar. They won't miss Disney a bit.
It is, of course, too early to completely write of Toy Story 3 as crap just yet. Disney has pulled amazing things out of their hat before - just look at "The Little Mermaid", "Beauty and the Beast" and "The Lion King" after what was a very serious slump indeed. Then again, we really are into seriously derivative work here - spinning a part 3 to what is someone elses work doesn't exactly represent the spark of originality that is often required for "new beginnings".
The reality is, however, that this could be the end of Disney as the great purveyor of animated feature films. They were king for a long time, but there is very serious competition in the field now (Dreamworks SKG, Pixar, Studio Ghibli), and all of Disney's "recent successes" have been acting as a distributor for someone elses film. If Disney is to continue to command any respect in the animated feature film arena it is going to need to produce it's own high quality work very soon (as everyone else is gaining enoug status to not require Disney as a distributor anymore).
Realistically Toy Story 3 would be the last real chance for Disney to prove itself. All their hand animated fare has been drivel of late, and they are deperately in need of a fresh approach. A CGI film might be the way. If Toy Story 3 sinks though, I suspect it will be the end of Disney as a serious player in animated feature films. They may surprise me, but I don't think they have anything else left in them, and the competition is just too strong.
My bet: Goodbye Disney animation.
Jedidiah.
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
One of the big reasons why Disney was wrong to start making sequels for every - and I do mean every - movie thwy ever made was that it was a short-term fix. It brought in high returns briefly, but now kids don't know the difference between Brother Bear (supposedly a Disney "Classic") and Return to the Fourth Version of the Lion King 1.3.2. I think it's called "brand dillution" or something like that.
Pixar should be kicking and screaming, though they know there's nothing they can do, because this could hurt their brand as well.
I'd rather have someone respond than be modded up.
Good luck.
Man I hate it when this story comes up. Everyone here seems to forget that they are well above the age of Disney's core audience. Yes *you* will have no interest in anything Disney does after Pixar leaves. However the under 10 (and mostly under 5) year old children that are thier core audience will continue to love Disney.
Everyone is upset that Disney just turns out sequels (although I personally think it sucks) little kids don't care. They just want cartoons and toys. Toy Story 3 probably won't be as good as the first two without Pixar, but its still going to due well because kids won't know the difference.
I'm sure Pixar will be fine without Disney, I just hope they can get a better deal with someone so they can afford to put out films more often.
"Luke, I am your node.parent();"
pixas doesn't need disney, disney desparately needs pixas. only way for disney to produce a good movie is if they get someone who knows how to make films and care about quality. that means eisner needs to get kicked out along with the other dead wood at disney. until the execs change, disney has no hope of producing any animation worth a lick.
I was working at the biggest computer graphics lab in the world, NY Institute of Technology, when Disney became king of that hill with their Tron studio. We responded by first applauding, then porting their techniques to the new toys in our labs: 6502 PCs. This kind of competition advances the state of the art by huge leaps. And the tech can become exploited on PCs very quickly after the initial R&D is paid. May they get at each other's throats ASAP!
--
make install -not war
...I thank you for your concern about this wonderful Company founded by my father and uncle...
So does this like mean his mother married her own brother or something??
Your hybrid is not saving the environment. Its purpose is to make you feel good about buying something.
He learned when he was let go from Apple all these years
ago. Eisner will soon learn that lesson. And if not he will when Pixar buys
Disney in 10 years and fires him. Eisner was playing out of his league when dealing with steve.
The funny thing is when Pixar came out everyone thought it
was the animation cgi that made them special. But that is not the case
anyone with the cash can do that now and they do. But pixar actually
seems to have writers come up with interesting characters and stories.
Disney was lampooned years ago buy the WB's Animaniacs with "just the same old heroin" and yet disney has
recycled the same plot since then again, and again, and again.
The Pixar exec to the Disney exec:
"The Almightly says I'll get through this one, but he's pretty sure, you're f**ked."
Disney thinks they can do it on their own? Fine. Let them.
From what I've seen in the Pixar/Disney joint productions, I can see that most of the creativity and vision has come from the Pixar side of the fence and not the Disney side of the fence.
Pixar shows they have their own style which is distinctly different from the shallow and distorted vision that is Disney.
Three cheers to Pixar and best wishes to them in their future growth and expansion. I look forward to more movies from them. I seriously hope that they retained rights to a sequal for the Incredibles... it was great.
As for Disney, I hope they start doing something they should have been doing from the start: Be original. If Walt were still around, Disney wouldn't be the stagnant pit of rehashes that it is today.
I'm just glad I don't own stock in Disney. I would be wondering WTF did they let Pixar go and I would be wondering how I'm going to convert my Disney shares to Pixar shares.
Winged Power Photography
You were a good act, but the new management will not know how to make proper use of you.
I see great ugliness in your future. Bad songs, adorable kid side-kicks, B-list actors supplying your voices, and TOY STORY 2 1/2, in which your badly rendered future selves travel back in time and bastardize your second adventure in the interest of reviving flagging DVD sales.
We should have known the franchise was in trouble when Disney allowed images of the valiant space ranger to be stamped on disposable training pants.
Farewell.
Stefan
TOY STORY 3 to SUCK
You know it's true.
You can't take the sky from me...
The main characters are a talking dreidl and yo-yo that go back in time for some reason. Sounds like that Disney magic is same as it ever was.
Sure they're just different medium, but how long has it been since we've seen a 2-D blockbuster?
The Iron Giant is an awesome movie, and Lilo & Stitch was pretty good, but I don't think either of them has the status that Pixar's movies, or Shrek, or the upcoming one about robots hold.
I guess we just have to wait for Netcraft to confirm it, but I think that the days of blockbuster 2-D animation are over.
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
Pixar loses the Disney marketing muscle. They also lose Disney's corporate arrogance and inertia, so that may be a net gain. The challenge for Pixar is to maintain their goodwill with the MOPS crowd while also doing projects that appeal to the rest of us.
Disney loses the creative talent behind the films. It will take them a while to become competitive, if they indeed can. There's a certain feel to a place like Pixar that finds its way into their work, and you can't manufacture that.
Whether Pixar can maintain a family-friendly line or not remains to be seen. I think they know where their bread is buttered, but who could blame them for wanting to branch out a little?
sigs, as if you care.
Will the original voice talent stand for this? Could you see Tom Hanks voicing Woody again if the script sucked? I don't think so. In fact, I would be willing to bet that most of those actors will hold out.
It sure would suck for disney to find other vocals here...
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
Interesting post. Hmmm. I see you've made up a new word 'swone.' Please define?
Thx
Make that: ... studio head dick, Cook, has signaled ...
Without Pixar, it's gonna suck. Plain and simple. Disney has continued to fuck Pixar over so I'm sure there's no love lost there.......
I dont beleive you proove it.
Can't wait to see the parody trailers for this new feature, demonstrating Disney's "amazing" new CG skill set.
RP
I have a funny feeling that Toy Story 3 may be for the Toy Story movies as Eye of the Beholder 3 was for that game series.
For those who didn't play those games, SSI dropped Westwood Studios (of Legend of Kyranda, Command and Conquer fame) after 2 great titles and opted to do the third installment themselves. And it basically sucked.
But we'll see. Disney can draw from a lot of talent if it really wants to.
A preposition is a terrible thing to end a sentence with.
So now we know. Steve Jobs secretly posts to /. as Zebbers.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
This is a key point: even steamboat willie (AKA Mickey) was borrowed from Buster Keaton. Nothing wrong with that per se, as Larry Lessig points out in Free Culture , that's just the nature of cultural production, and should be encouraged.
However, what Disney's been particularly guilty of last few decades, excepting Lilo and a few others, is regurgitation, not simply borrowing or being inspired by other stories. Their stories are sappy, flat, and smell bad, and, as a parent of culturally vulnerable cartoon consumers, demonically cross-marketed. They exploit the audience, who are mostly kids.
Damn those pesky terrorists
I also hope that Pixar doesn't have to turn over any models, animations, textures, code, etc. I would guess that if their contract doesn't demand that they do so then they won't have to.
Lasers Controlled Games!
I am an Apple/Pixar fan.
...
I would love to see Pixar side-step all the normal distribution channels, and use a video version of iTunes (or whatever it'll be called by that time) to sell and distribute their movies. The one Mr S. Jobs is one of the few people with enough brass to actually do something like that, and he's the CEO of both companies. Alas, I dream
You know it's all over for Disney when even Mattel is making better movies than they are now. (Actually, these movies quite remind me of the old Disney movies, only using CGI.)
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Consider for a moment; they have a tremendous amount of catch-up to do, in terms of software and 3D animation know-how. Would they be able to produce something straight from cold that was a barnstorming success? I doubt it.
So instead they are starting off by attempting to reverse engineer an animated movie that was state of the art 10 years ago (probably 11 years by the time they make it).
They can tool-up, do their homework and create an apprentice-piece that people will pay to watch - it probably won't be great, but it will pay for itself, and the Disney R&D.
usuall yonec an worl out whart theymesn.
Without question Pixar can do fine on their own without Disney's help distributing. The real question is, can Disney survive without Pixar? As my magic-8 ball says, "Outlook not so good."
Pixar's done enough impressive work over the course of the last 5 or 6 years to estabilish a firm role as #1 in the animated film niche. Their track record is near flawless, with each film building on and improving the underlying technologies used to create each flick. Honestly, who here doesn't dream of running through Pixar's renderfarms like a kid in a candystore? Point is, every movie pretty much kicks ass at the box office. And that's what counts from a business perspective.
Disney, on the otherhand, might take a huge hit. Their only real role with these movies has been to distribute the films, and each time Pixar releases a new feature they become less and less dependent on Disney's reputation as a backer to ensure success. What else has Disney done lately? Yeah they pull in boatloads of money through merchandising via Disneyworld, toys, and shit like that. Depending on Mickey Mouse dolls for income though isn't a strong business model. And with each crappy film that tanks, I bet Michael Eisner's feeling better and better about jumping ship in a year.
But then again, I'm too lazy to quote numbers and statistics to back up anything I've said. In reality I've just never been impressed with Disney, even as a child, and wouldn't mind seeing them sweat a bit when Pixar high tails it.
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for SEGA. ..."
Princess and the Pauper: 5 stars
Lion King 1 1/2: 3.5 stars
according to amazon.com ratings
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Didn't like the first one, didn't like the second, won't see the third. I'm currently boycotting disney and viacom, how about you?
I'm kind of tired of these 3d-animated-child-movies. Maybe I'm just getting old. I haven't seen one I thought was any good...
If you don't want someone to copy something, don't give it to anyone.
Where's your usual link to his insightful blog?
Timothy ruining weekends, and now Michael fucking up the rest of the week. Yay for Slashdot.
If they want to beat Pixar, then they'll need to concentrate on hiring decent writers first, and CGI second.
The cake is a pie
Disney has a Mickey Christmas DVD out now that uses CG for all of the Disney characters is this the first CG DVD for Disney? Is this why the let go of that one animation studio? I don't think they can do big screen CG to compete with Pixar but they can make a bundle on straight to DVD market. Look it all of the great new CG talent out there...
Onward to the Aether Sphere!
Never mind the thinly-veiled hatespeach against lawyers and social security!
Done!
I'm no Randian, but I certainly never mind hatespeach [sic] against lawyers and social security.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
What I'd really enjoy seeing is Pixar Licensing all the traditional Mickey Mouse era characters and seeing what they would develop as far as storylines, the character CG treatments, etc...
Take that Disney, Pixar could make brand new Mickey Mouse movies that would become as classic and timeless as Toy Story and make Billions more with the franchise than you ever could!
pixar can live without disney, they're firing on all cylinders... as for disney i can't think of the last hit they made on their own... probably fantasia
Get your torrents...
I think its more of a quality issue right now with Disney and that its managment is being ethnocentric to the idea od having the Japanease go into their market with animation. The animation in japan is far superior in quality and in story with many things that have been tabooed by western culture. If disney wants to stay in the game they need to hire people from Japan and in korea who are excellent in making a movie in a very tight timeline with little or no pay. They produce some of the finist works in both visual and audio representations. If disney loses pixar it can spell the end of the american animation domaninance that we seen for the past 70 years.
Have you seen the previews for 'The Polar Express'? Definitely not a pixar creation. It seems they are simply using motion capture. Realistic Rendering alone does not make a good movie, and pixar knows this.
Does disney know this? I doubt it. Pixar are masters of their art, and the sooner they are free of disney, the better. I don't think that disney alone can understand how best to use computer rendering the way pixar has (look at luxor jr, knick knack, for the birds, red's dream, tin toy, or any of the other pixar shorts for example)
Sadly, Disney went they way of many talented and innovative companies that installed "real" management. They tanked. But those earnings statements sure look good, and you can bet they have a strong strategic vision. I'm sure Disney will setup a M$ Animation Studio and the results will be just as good as Pixar. Somehow I think that Walt Disney would not have approved of his company's course in the last 15 years. Pixar, a real innovator, will clean their clock.
an ill wind that blows no good
"What happened to creativity anyhow"
The name's Eisner, Michael Eisner.
I used to work for Disney. I called it creative purgatory. The company is so inbred that there is little hope for change without a radical shake up. I think realistically the only way of fixing the company is for a hostile take over that would allow for changing most of the executive staff and eventually most of the surpervisers. The inbreding goes all the way from top to bottom. We used to call them second and third generation as in the family had worked for Disney that many generations. Even worse now is it's all Eisner's cronies and their friends. Most have no creative ability. Creative people are often seen as a threat and tend not to do well. Personally I quit and you couldn't pay me enough to go back. The joke is if Walt were alive I'd have stayed with the company for life. They're ruined the best company in Hollywood and the box office reflects the disaster it's become.
Most of their shorts are there.
On the positive side, at least Debian will have some new names from which to select :)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Am I the only one here who believes Disney will probably do a decent job? Just because they relied on Pixar to make their movies for a while does not mean they cannot 1) hire some other company or 2) hire talent that is just as creative as the people in Pixar.... or do we believe that Pixar is the start and finish of animated movies?
Give them a chance to screw up before you rag on them - Disney didn't get to where it is today without being creative, entertaining and of high quality.
And remember, companies end relationships with each other all the time - this does not mean the relationship failed - it just means that the companies want to move on in different directions.
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
Here's a funny thing to think about . . .
So Disney owns the characters in Toy Story - their likeness, etc.
Did Disney buy the models?
Are they able to get the wireframe models with all animation handles, etc and just drop em into their modeling program?
Or does Disney actually have to re-model the characters??
I'll bet you that Pixar retain ownership of the models and that Disney has to re-create them.
How hard is that to do?
Is Disney gonna end up with some bizarre Frankenstein model of Buzz Lightyear?
Plus Disney's gotta re-create shaders, cloth and hair systems, etc.
Haha!
If it sucks, Disney will pull the theatrical release and just make it a direct-to-video release, where parents will buy it by the millions and it will mostly avoid the sting of the critics.
Disney has a history of follwing up acclaimed movies by releasing horrible animated sequels direct to video (e.g., Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin), so nobody will really pay it any mind if it blows chunks.
Pixar, on the other hand, doesn't have that same luxury. The public expects Pixar films to rock our world, and a misstep by Pixar could be devestating. And based on the trailer, it looks like Cars is going to be the first bomb to come out of their studios. It sucks for Pixar that they are going to exit the Disney relationship on such a low note.
I'm pretty sure there already is a cartoon - a cell animation one, not 3d.
Yep they did but not all of their cartoons sucked. They've done mediocre cartoons without the big screen voices.
Also keep in mind much of the creative, and directorial staff at pixar are x-disney people. I recall reading a Time magazine article on how Steve Jobs has snagged many of disneys key creative players.
And you call yourselves geeks. I expected the slashdot crowd to be more concerned about the next "sequel" to the Pixar Renderman software than the demonstration and advertising files that they show to promote it. :-)
Actually, I have to wonder that if Pixar has the right of first refusal to do the sequels why they don't just make a really crappy wireframe version of the film. Something that no one could possibly sell as anything resembling the previous work (even straight to video). "Oh no! the Superman doll suddenly can't turn off his X-ray vision! Everything is but contours and outlines!" Try to get anyone to buy this one Disney.
I've heard the pixar people are worked hard and don't make that great of pay (part of your pay is the fact you work for Pixar?). So Disney could probably flash the cash and come up with a good staff of animation artists.
Then work them hard and lower their pay like all evil corporations do.
If you can't beat them, lure away their talent.
Southeastern Virginia REPRESENT!
Eisner is a punk.
Play Command HQ online
Personally, I'd rather be trying to replace Disney than Pixar. Of course, now that they're publically traded, Pixar will go through their own Disneyfication over the years with roughly the same result.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
I'm afraid Disney films are now flopping, due to name recognition. Disney has laid some real goose-eggs in the past few years:
Need examples? How about "Treasure Planet"? "80 Days"? "The Alamo"? "The Ladykillers"? "Raising Helen"?
Oh, you want animated movies that were flops? There sure were those as well...
Or do you mean the brand recognition of Toy Story, which is probably better than Disney right now?
Pixar doesn't need Disney. Disney needs to keep Pixar, but can't continue to squander resources on fat executive salaries and dumb decisions and still let Pixar keep what they are due.
Maybe Disney will make a direct-to-video movie, like they did for The Lion King, Lilo & Stitch, etc... I rate that as highly likely. They'll make the movie on a budget, it'll suck, test audiences will tell them so, and it'll end up being a big direct-to-DVD money maker for them, but hardly ever see the light of a theater, if at all.
That's my half-assed prediction, anyway. I'm going to do my best to avoid letting my son see any Disney-only Toy Story movie, lest the first two be ruined for him.
Disney will undoubtably produce very a very lackluster TS3. Artwork is only one component, the writing and fresh perspective within Pixar is what has made these films one hit after another.
My major gripe with Disney is all the characters are identifiable, recycled from all their other films. It's tired, so very tired and this is why even the finest animation artists can't save them. Disney needs to clean out their writers and start again. Scary? Certainly, but they're not raking in enough at the box office to afford going in the current direction much longer. Most of their profit is coming from the theme parks. Not ecouraging, considering their considerable assets.
When I went to see Incredibles, I was assaulted with the trailers for the next several Disney films coming up. Not one looked interesting, aside from the trailer from Cars (Pixar's last contractual obligation.)
Dreamworks and Pixar are kicking butt while Disney withers away, afraid to change and dying because of that fear.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Disney hasnt made a good film since uh.. Pixars last film ;)
:)
Lets look at the history.
Pixar: Toy Story 1 - Smash success!
Disney: NOTHING!
Pixar: A Bug's Life - Smash success!
Disney: Tarzan - SUCESS!
Pixar: Toy Story 2 - SMASH SUCCESS!
Disney: NOTHING!
Pixar: MONSTERS INC - SMASH SUCCESS!
Disney: NOTHING!
Pixar: Finding Nemo - SMASH SUCCESS!
Disney: NOTHING
Pixar: The Incredibles - SMASH SUCCESS!
Disney: NOTHING.
Now every period between a pixar film is rougly 2 years or so... You do the math. DISNEY has done NOTHING successfull. You could toss in Lilo and Stitch but.. who cares.
Btw disney has made some good 2d animated films over that period of time however they all flopped at the box office despite being entertaining.
Its only natural that Disney is lame enough to try and rape Pixar of its signature characters.
BTW John Lassetter left Disney because it was boring and lame. I'm talking about when he went and joined up with Ed Catmull and formed pixar with Lucas.
Tim Burton left Disney because it was boring and lame...
Disney fired its entire animation division because it felt they were boring and lame.
Its not the artists... ITS THE FUCKING COMPANY
Disney is a mess.... and i have family members who work for disney, and i'm a character animator myself.... Present day DISNEY is the joke of the industry while the old legendary wisemen of Disney remain legends.
DISNEY has just become as lame as Dreamworks/PDI. JUST like dreamworks PDI.. DISNEY CAN NOT COME UP WITH NEW IDEAS!!!!@#!@#!@ They copy pixar just like dreamworks and PDI.. although in this case.. they own Toystory so they only need to rape it.
I hope Tom Hanks and Tim Allen refuse to do this film.
Disney has begun the process of setting up a new CGI studio
And they already have the computers to do it.
Saw the trailer, and wasn't at all impressed. Considering how cool and amazing the trailers for, well, all of Pixar's movies has been, this one seems dumb.
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
Appolgies if this has already been posted:
l e.php?a rticleID=340
STUDIOS SUE PIXAR, DEMAND BAD MOVIE
http://www.datelinehollywood.com/showartic
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
This is SLDT, not YHOO.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
The only glitch in this scheme is Steve Jobs. Most of us know a little about Apple's history and know how bullheaded Jobs can be. Disney better be prepared to bite the bullet and go all the way with this ruse because I tend to doubt that Pixar will budge one inch under Jobs--no matter how much Disney is set to ruin Toy Story.
--Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
Ouch. I just feel bad for pixar.
They have created basically five potentially very solid franchises, the creative work they put into it etc etc. And then disney get's to take all the properties and do what they want with them.
Somone has got to be kicking themselves for agreeing to one of those contract terms. With their own creative properties pixar would be worth a fortune.
What a shame.
they're setting up their own cg studio...
they think they can get another toy story out of some other team...
guy kawasaki said it a long time ago; (paraphrasing now) you don't put a bunch of programmers in a building, let them ride skateboards and wear bedroom slippers, feed them all the free juice their kidneys can stand and expect to get another macintosh. it won't happen. ditto this.
hell, dreamworks has been trying to clone pixar for how many years (bug's life/ants, monsters/shrek, nemo/sharktale) and they still don't get it. you just don't put big names in your voice talent stable and think that makes up for lousy animation and thin stories.
paraphrasing another really creative guy, you can either build a better mousetrap, or build a mediocre mousetrap and market the hell out of it.
i'll take disney originals (emperor, lilo) and original fox (ice age, robots) over dreamworks rehash any day.
they're doing it because even a mediocre sequel makes 80% of the original gross. if they had a soft spot in their hearts for woody and buzz, they'd walk on their lips to emeryville and hand this back to them, extend the deal and realize they have a chance to stop pissing off the people who made them what they used to be.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
As far as a "bricks and mortar" studio, they've been down this road before...
Anybody remember this (pretty cool-looking) Disney flick?
Dinosaur
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0130623/
No, it wasn't a Pixar film...
The Secret Lab was credited at the end... But that's not the whole story...
Disney has had a CG team at Feature Animation for some time.... But Disney proper has also farmed a lot of work out (around the world) for their various needs, and as such, has relationships with studios and individual artists, making an endeavor such as a divorce from Pixar a viable proposition.
I hate to cite AICN, but this is a pretty good read, and it jives with what I'd heard at the time:
http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=12700
Dinosaur credits:
http://www.dinosaur.org/disneydinosaur.htm
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0130623/fullcredits
Anyone out there closer to the source care to shed more light?
There's an old saying in animation:
"Everyone works for Disney at least once."
Keanu Reeves announced today that he himself will write, direct, produce, film and star in the Matrix Reloaded 2: Electric Boogaloo, despite legal threats from the Wachowski brothers. All roles will be played by him and will feature another hot scene between Neo (Reeves) and Trinity (Reeves) in a cave (Reeves). There will be no stunt or special effects work, everything you see will be real, or will it?, except the spoons.
R(k)
I have no idea what people have seen in Lilo and Stitch... to me it was extremely formulaic and had no real likeable characters... odd, as a lot of people seem to like it.
But then I really liked the Emperor's New Groove, and most didn't... so what do I know?
It's hard to understand any more what Pixar gets from the Disney connection. Pixar has the talent, the storys, the technology. Disney has . . . name branding?
Indeed, as others have mentioned, Pixar loses more if Disney makes a crappy movie (likely) because people will think it's Pixar's product.
Can someone geekier than me please explain the, no doubt complex, relationship between Toy Story and Debian?
I really, really hope that Disney ruins the Toy Story franchise. If they can pull it off I'll have to rethink my entire philosophy towards Disney. Ahh what am I thinking, of course they'll screw it up!
Apparently now, on top of Disney's taking over of the Toy Story franchise, a bunch of studios are suing Pixar for consistently making high-quality films. Allegedly, Steve Jobs and Pixar could've bribed these studios by sending them each a free iPod Photo.
Just chuck this in...
Final Fantasy. What you are talking about hit me so hard while watching that movie. The characters looks so human, but just minor movements or expressions wouldn't be quite right. And that really got under my skin for some reason.
It was quite a technical achievement to make humans so close to reality, but that article is right... human copies have to be Perfect or Cartoonish. Almost Perfect is creepy for some reason.
You heard very wrong.
I worked for Pixar a few years ago and I can say that the pay was nothing to laugh at. Infact they pay quite well and provide a very comfotable place to work. Hell the place breeds creativity.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Keanu Reeves announced today that he himself will write, direct, produce, film and star in the Matrix Reloaded 2: Electric Boogaloo
Matrix Reloaded 2 was 'Revolutions', surely? (*)
In which context the joke falls flat; the article is meant to be about Disney making Toy Story without Pixar, and the result presumably sucking.
Now, frankly, it's hard to see how your proposed film could be any worse than Revolutions.
Yeah, Reloaded had major flaws relative to the original, and was a bit light (or garbled) plot-wise, but it was *entertaining* (after the first 40 or so minutes).... Revolutions was just dull, grey, tedious. Killed off my interest in the films.
Proposal; we burn all copies of 'Matrix Revolutions', pretend it never existed, and withhold funding for Andy Wachowski's sex-change op (or was it the other one? I forget), until someone produces a decent Matrix sequel.
And I'd put more money on Keanu Reeves doing it than the Wachowski's themselves.
(*) Okay; the Matrix sequels were a single storyline in two parts, as much so as "Kill Bill", despite not being marketed as such. But the fact remains that the first part (Reloaded) was decent, and the second part (Revolutions) was awful.
No, Disney has done NOTHING for any of the Pixar movies except distribute them.
And take enough of the government-granted rights under the distribution contract to make them more owned by Disney than by Pixar in spirit.
Weren't we flooded with marketing hype some time ago about video cards that could render Toy Story in real-time? Goodbye, Pixar, hello $10/hour high-school student with a GeForce 6800 Ultra.
(Yes, that's a joke.)
steve
Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
Debian Sarge cannot be released prior to Toy Story 3: They are running out of names.
Life is just nature's way of keeping meat fresh.
Some friends of mine who work for Disney recently got to go to a meeting with Michael Eisner and Bob Iger (head of ABC -- Michael's apprentice). Eisner and Iger went on about what was coming down the pipe -- Toy Story 3, Bugs Life 2, Incredibles 2...the list goes on and on. They'll be making a lot of sequels without Pixar, if Pixar doesn't decide that they like Iger more than Eisner. A lady stood up during the Q&A and asked what Michael thought of the Walt quote about why he didn't make sequels: "Because you can't top a pig with a pig." Michael said he'd heard a lot of Walt quotes, but not that one, and went on about how these things were good for business. He was also asked who his successor would be, and he said he didn't know, but he was pretty sure it was someone in the room (wink wink...Iger standing behind him). Disney is a company bowing to the pressures of the marketplace. They're making tons of derivitive stuff because it sells well. When they finally piss off the Disney maniacs out there, and they stop buying Disney videos because they realize that Cinderella 2 through 14 really were crap, that's when it'll stop making money. To further torture all the Classic Disney fans out there, did you know they're making Bambi 2? What the hell? Bambi finally learns how to operate a machine gun and goes looking for the hunter who took out his mom....
But this won't be Disney's first shot at a 3D CGI movie. "Chicken Little" is all Disney 3D CGI "straight from the cold" and is due out Summer 2003.
Who says Pixar, as an animation company needs to make movies that are family oriented or even family appropriate. Now we can see Pixar's industry leading skills, software and experience come into it's own in other genres than the disney cloud. Hell now without the binds of Disney they can do whatever the hell the want to. Who says we even need to compare Pixar with Disney?
I'm sure Pixar can figure out how to steal public domain folktales, add in a bunch of "cute" talking inanimate objects miss the whole point of the story, without any help from Disney. Unless they've patented the process, that is.
That will be 2005, not 2003.
Disney was holding Pixar down, Pixar did the work, while Disney got the glory.
Even Disney can't match the boundless creative talent at Pixar, I say it's a good thing they got rid of Disney.
Organize the boycott now.. Make it clear that no one will watch a crappy wannabe version of Toy Story.. If they still go ahead w/ this, when people follow through and *not* pay to see it, Pixar gains against the Mega-corp Disney... Anyone having an upper hand over any of these Mega-corps like WallMart, Disney, Viacom, etc. is a "Good Thing".
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Pixar was in the middle of developing a shoddy direct-to-video Toy Story 2 when they realized such a thing would damage their reputation. John Lasseter specifically said, "We didn't want to be known as a studio that did great stuff and crap -- we want it all to be great."
They pushed to make Toy Story 2 a theatrical release, tossed out the stuff they had done so far, retooled the story from the beginning, worked themselves to deliver a quality product, and the rest is history.
Too bad any Disney-produced Toy Story 3 won't have half the love and care that Pixar gave to their movies.
--R.J.
Electric-Escape.net
- Buzz
- Rex
- Bo
- Hamm
- Slink
- Potato
- Woody
- Sarge
- Etch
- Mickey
- Simba
- Pooh
Though I guess Lilo could be an interesting twist!Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
- Pixar could remain involved just enough to meet contractual obligations and force quality as high as possible.
-
Failing that, get things snarled up into such a hairball of licensing and permissions that TS3 never sees release (take a page from Heavy Metal's legal hassles, Pixar). Better yet, have a long chain of entanglements, so Disney gets a clue after the first or second years-long delay.
-
Do something that Disney can't countenance: kill off a few TS1 characters, march off into politically-charged topics (Disney avoids controversy at all costs), etc.
-
Join in, create a compelling set of new characters, then refuse to license 'em. Make a character or two *more* compelling than Buzz Lightyear. Create prequels and sequels to box Disney in utterly (so their only option is to pull some sort of Highlander-3 'oops, pretend like 2 never happened' shizzle).
-
Most importantly, find the legal looopholes needed to put a twilight on this arrangement: get Disney's ugly freakin' paws off the TS character set forever, no matter the cost.
-
I'd suggest buying out this contract clause, but frankly the market will ignore crap for free. Why bother.
Wow, I only thought I despised Disney before hearing about this. How much lower can they go?What, like more sex and graphic violence and other "adult" situations? No thanks. Pixar has a great thing going now -- they produce quality movies that the entire family can enjoy together. And they do it without either pandering to kids or boring grown-ups. What would "more adult" Pixar movie bring, other than the novelty factor of CGI blood-n-gore-and-sex? Fortunately, Lasseter and Jobs realize this, and have already committed Pixar to producing family-friendly movies for the long-term future. And a lot of us would rather have The Incredibles over Kill Bill any day of the week.
--R.J.
Electric-Escape.net
Er...Pixar aren't the worst...but they don't pay well compared to related companies, even with bonuses. They do have a nice environment though and they look after their staff.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
Oldschool PC Gamers will know of what I speak when I say, "Think Star Control 3."
Think Star Control 3.
You're not an oldschool PC Gamer? Short version: Star Control was the brainchild of Fred Ford and Paul Reiche III, who made a bunch of other great games (such as Archon) in the early days of VGA games on the PC featuring 2-player 2D battles with various ships/creatures. Star Control was a surprise hit. Then, they teamed up with Starflight creator Greg Johnson to create one of the greatest PC games ever, Star Control 2. Publisher Accolade booted the original developers to make more money off the franchise with Star Control 3, which had none of Ford/Reiche3's combat elements or Johnson's space-RPG elements -- the very things that made the franchise great in the first place. The game bombed critically and financially.
And Toy Story 3 will suck, too.
The press around The Incredibles is when I knew Disney had lost their "Family Film" mind share.
For my family, Disney lost its "family" image the moment it started advertising Kill Bill Vol. 1.
is this the first CG DVD for Disney?
You mean other than Dinosaur ?
Which means that they'll have plenty of funds to pursue their evil agenda :(
did anyone ever actually find Mickey Mouse funny? I always preferred Bugs and Daffy.
I have the theory that the difference between Disney and Warner cartoons is kinda like the difference between TSR and WW roleplaying games:
In Disney cartoons, the main protagonsists are sachrine sweet and always good. A bit like the old TSR dictate that player characters must always be of good alignment.
In Warner Bros. cartoons, the protagonists are always in some way evil or bad. They pull awful, dangerous pranks on each other, they try to kill each other (Bugs/Daffy/Elmer/Wile E Coyote/Roadrunner/Sylvester/Tweety Pie/etc...), sexually molest/rape (Pepe LePew, Foghorn Leghorn), financially ruin, or just plain brain-fuck with anyone within range (Michigan J Frog, Foghorn Leghorn). WW characters were typically monsters (Vampires, werewolves, etc...) that had to kill to survive.
For many people evil was just more fun to watch.
Sara
Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
Chuck: "I'm going to Pixarland!"
"And a voice was screaming: 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'" - HST
Does this mean that Debian will be changing their naming scheme?
They had a top-notch 3D shop. The Secret Lab. You know, the people that did Dinosaur, the digital dogs in 102 Dalmatians, and lots of other VFX and animation for Disney's features. They shut the division down a couple of years ago. Now they're starting over again.
WOW. think about that... Disney can just demand the hand-over of the 3D models, and then their animators can make a perfect sequel. I wonder if Disney has any rights to use Renderman (Pixar's proprietary renderer).
The Incredibles has really good hair and cloth dynamics, but Toy Story doesn't need that. All the major systems have hair and cloth now anyway, although some of them don't work too well.
The Polar Express is struggling with the "it almost looks human, but not quite" problem. But that's more of a style issue; it wasn't supposed to be photorealistic. (Actually, the Polar Express suffers from "everybody is played by Tom Hanks having an ego trip", but that's not a technical problem.)
I really love Pixar and their movies. (alot better than the Dreamworks stuff).
But in the last year or so I've been really into Studio Ghibli's stuff (Miyazaki) like Spirited Away aswell as all the earlier films. This is stuff that shows the potential of animated films. I saw My Neighbour Totoro the other day and I thought it was absolutely amazing (I'm a 23 y/o male fyi).
Anyway, I read some comments that Pixar can be more creative now and that got me hoping that they can expand their subject matter to the more imaginative stuff that Miyazaki comes up with.
That would be great.
PS: AFAIK Disney have the distribution rights to most of Ghibli's films in the US and probably other english speaking countries which is a bit sad, they're doing redubs with popular western actors, not sure if they're good or not, I prefer to hear the japanese even though can't understand a word.
Yes, but they redeemed themselves 100% for that in the movie based solely on the line "SHE BIT MY HEAD"...
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
"rogue pieces done in a rogue studio"
Did they develop weapons of mass destruction?
(Knowing Disney, I'd be more surprised if they didn't...)
"1) Disney has been (and still is) a good partner for us. They bring a HEAP of talent to the table. Not to mention unparalleled experience in marketing animated features. (If Pixar hadn't teamed up with disney, no one would have even seen Toy Story.)
2) The main reason for the disagreement is Pixar's desire to own the rights to it's characters. Disney currently owns the rights and is loathe to give 'em up. Thus, the standoff."
I know that part of the bad blood is about Toy Story 2. Disney would not allow them to include this in their original 6 picture deal, since it was a sequel. Eisner is leaving Disney at the end of 2006. I have heard/read before that both companies are waiting for this to see if a deal can be struck, it seems Jobs and Eisner don't get along too well.
US Forest Service Travel Warning
The last two years have seen unprecedented growth in bear populations in the Rocky Mountain region. As Spring approaches, tourists are advised to wear small bells attached to their clothing, as this will frighten away most bears.
Tourists are also cautioned to watch the ground on the trail for bear droppings. Be particularly alert for the presence of Grizzly bear droppings, which are easily recognized because they usually contain small bells.
If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
In order to prove that Toy Story was just a matter of technology Disney bought Dream Quest, spent a bunch more money and time to make the one movie, and then eliminated it all after that piece of crap bombed.
After factoring all that, I hear some internal estimates put the cost of Dinosaur at $1 Billion.
Just because you have all the tools doesn't mean you can make a house. And it seems some people don't recall why Dinosaur failed.
Ok, so we're basically all in agreement that pixar is what's keeping disney afloat, but honestly, what sets them apart from any other highend studio, other than that amazing name recognition that came from being spawned from Disney in the first place? I think with Disney's assets, they should be able to get top notch production work. The look may differ slightly seeing as renderman, as well as marionette and their 3rd piece of software (the name escaped me) is proprietary software designed by pixar, thus, the liscences are retained by pixar. So in the end, I doubt there will be much mixing and mingling between Disney and Pixar from here on out, but there will be a new "3rd party" if you will, in the big screen 3d wars of Disney, and Dreamworks. Who knows, maybe severing the ties of disney will allow pixar to put their talents to some more adult features (not that kind of adult you pervs) overall, good things will come from all, there's no doubt in my mind.
we milk the same tired concepts to death
our movies have little to no plot, dialog or character development
cliches are us
now make the product porn, and the weaknesses are now strengths
all the tired material before can be leveraged in new exiting ways. Ariel and Pocahontas in hot girl-girl action!
lowered client expectations. porn with a plot or character development. hah!
built in titles to develop; Sex Toy Story 3, Beauty and the Beast, etc.
theme parks you dont mind standing in line
...
and lastly
an excuse to execute those STUPID ANNOYING characters.
So Toystory 3 will be a musical?
-=sig=-
I saw Vint Cerf speak one time, using PowerPoint, and he apologized, saying:
Power Corrupts
PowerPoint Corrupts Absolutely
Six score characters.
Brevity being wit's soul
I have enough space.
Pixar has left Disney enough new MickeyMouse style franchises (Nemo, Woody, etc...) to last them 10 years of Imagineering and consumer exploitation. Disney doesn't need Pixar in order to capture downstream franchising profit streams. Just ask Winnie the Pooh!
To go along with Disneys other high-quality efforts and assuming that Tom Hanks and Tim Allen wouldn't touch this sequel with a 10 foot pole, here are my substitute recommendations:
Woody - Fred Savage
Buzz - Tom Arnold
Mr. Potatohead - Sinbad
Slinky-dog - Stephen Baldwin
Rex - Gilbert Gottfried
Ham - Leonardo DiCaprio
With this cast Disney is sure to capture all the brilliance and wonder from the first two movies and might even top their latest box office smash "Home on the Range".
search slashdot; I'm too lazy:
article on how people identify with cartoons more than "realistic" stuff.
Maybe not a great actress, but she did pretty decent job writing and directing that movie with Bill Murray, "Lost in Translation".
Pixar had a contract with disney to make 6 movies.
This was the deal, this is why they were with disney. This is also why Katzenberg was trying to get dreamworks to turn out Antz, which was competition for Pixar's Bugs Life. I guess Dreamworks gave up with fighting them.. But I think Warner Brothers was stupid to realease a movie with Tom Hanks in it that is computer generated and sucks compared to Pixar movies. That being the polar express.. I knew it would suck because they used motion suits to speed it along and the motion sucked. I think WB is jealous of Pixar's success too.. I think all the studios do not want the competition.. Maybe some are inspired.. But I think the competition is due to jealousy. However Disney had rights to Toy Story because in the beginning, Pixar didn't have the technology or know how to make Toy Story go. And they had been working on Toy Story four years before it was released, and in that time they hired and fired people, working on a shoestring budget, with only 50 people to their organization
asdie from the freelance hires. So it doesn't suprise me that Disney would try to milk the market while they still have it.. And they don't have to be good natured to satisfy Pixar anymore..
Just say no to license servers!!
I agree. The writers are excellent. Of course, it's nice to have world class CGI, too.
Anyway, since it's pretty clear that Disney and Pixar will soon be parting ways. I've been thinking that Pixar should consider putting out a 2D animated movie. I think they could pull it off well. It would be a great way to put Disney behind them. Plus, they would gain the recognition they deserve for their capabilities outside of 3D graphics.
Pixar has a bright future without Disney. Pixar may not have all of the financial resources to go wild, but they will still continue to make great product. As for Disney, they can try to ply us with Toy Story 3 (and probably ruin any redeeming qualities left). Disney has made bad pictures before. In the late 60's and early 70's, they were really starting to tank. Eisner was brought in to shake things up. He did for a while and things improved. Eisner has been in for a long time now. He was radical and things went well. Now he's become comfortable, predictable, --boring. Disney needs Pixar much more than Pixar needs Disney.
No, I don't see it. The creative spark must come from fresh people, fresh minds and people who know a good idea when they see one, and are not threatened by it. I don't see Disney doing that. They are too interested in the stock options. The shareholders don't want to be ruffled. The theme park business, hotels, merchandising, and lawyers with the copyright(c)(tm)(R) will see to it along with the now crochety top management that any creative idea is either killed, squelched or summarily dismissed long before it ever has a chance to grow. There are a lot of distrubtors out there already competing with Disney. Finding one to distrubute a Pixar film won't be hard. Finding a good movie coming out of Disney will be a lot harder.
It's easy to say Disney won't pull this off without Pixar. I'm just going to wait and see, they might actually be able to make it work. Always time to say told you so! later.
Sample this!
2004-02-17 20:34:37 Disney decides to make Toy Story 3 without Pixar (Index,Movies) (rejected)
Looks like Pixar isn't the only one who has been rejected...
Disney is doing some kind of 3D holiday crap, which while of course lacking in the usual Disney ways and milking their older characters, does not look like a total pile of 3D crap.
:P
Man... I think I enjoyed Disney the most around, say.. beauty and the beast. Hell, most things up through Lion King, excepting it of course.
I really, Really, Really miss Gargoyles, too... and Darkwing Duck
And I mourn Saturday Morning Cartoons...
Disney have progressively lost their magic, preferring the sequel route to making money than actually coming up with ideas.
It's not like they ever came up with many of the ideas anyway, some of their greatest works are based upon famous stories and bedtime stories.
I can understand Pixar's opinion on this, they're highly creative people who want to keep creating new characters and stories. Not rehashing old ones.
> the writing in any movie is far more important than the visuals
If I could get just one message to Hollywood, that would be it. First you need a story - after that, you can add explosions, big name actors, special effects, whatever. But, if you don't have a great story - you don't have a great movie.
Look at the movie "Life is Beautiful" totally low budget, no big special effects or anything like that. But it was a great movie because it had a great story.
Hollywood needs to get a clue. Spend one tenth as much on writing as on special effects, and movies will be so much better.
eom.
I used to look forward to the beginning of the movie with the jumping desk-lamp... *jumpy, jumpy, jumpy* *CRUNCH*
*sniff, sniff* I'm gonna miss the lil guy...
-- Game Developers: Stop porting badly-textured games from crappy console systems!
With pixar seperating from disney, they will be free to persue more cash-generating scripts ... like porn ...
other vocals = direct to video! ... it's all win-win for Disney!
Emperors New Groove was decent. No singing (well except the "theme song guy").
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
I dont think it was against Social Security, it was against Insurance companies.
The kind people who are not doctors who say that you can or can not have a life saving operation.
Maybe you should actually watch the fucking movie.