Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Pixar's Next Three Films Will Be Sequels

Posted by kdawson on from the low-hanging-fruit-is-the-first-to-rot dept.

brumgrunt writes "Should we be worried? As Pixar, with Up, once more proves itself to be home to some of the most original and daring blockbusters on the planet, the news that its next three films are likely to be sequels — with the confirmation of Monsters, Inc. 2 — gives cause for concern. Are commercial pressures catching up with one of our most inventive movie companies?"

18 of 379 comments (clear)

  1. No by oldhack · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You shouldn't worry. Shut up and get a life.

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    1. Re:No by nomadic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Definitely, what's the worst thing that happens? They run their franchises into the ground, ruin the good name of their company, and make horrible movies? That's going to cause you personal WORRY? You are waaaay too emotionally invested in this.

    2. Re:No by Gerzel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sounds like Disney to me.

    3. Re:No by MsGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Incredibles was the only Fantastic Four movie to do the Fantastic Four justice. Funny old world, isn't it?

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
    4. Re:No by xeoron · · Score: 5, Informative

      If I remember correctly, Pixar would have made more sequels, sooner, but due to their former contract with Disney, and Disney's policies on sequels, which was video release only. Though since Toy Story 2 was good enough for the theater, they were fine with distributing it, but refused to let that release count towards their X number of films left until their contract expired. Pixar was itching to complete that contract they had made, considering Disney got a large chunk of the ticket sales, along with keeping all merchandising profits (this may have included video sales too). Disney viewed Pixar deal with them too profitable to let that film count, while Pixar made it clear that they would only focus on the end game for a new and far better distributing and merchandising contract with someone. End game ended up with a shake-up at Disney, Steve Jobs becoming majority share holder of Disney via a Pixar buyout and Pixar taking over the direction of Disney's digital films, along with guiding them in restarting hand drawn films. Pixar, always planned on making sequels, they just needed time to get to a better place... now that they are controlling Disney is ways, maybe that is not a bad thing.

      Personally, I would have hoped that besides another Toy Story film (which was part of the buyout deal with Pixar doing it and Disney pulling the plug on the one they were working on), they would next create another tale in the universe of The Incredibles for a sequel.

    5. Re:No by The+J+Kid · · Score: 5, Funny

      Steve Jobs becoming majority share holder of Disney

      No, no, no! He is the *largest* (single) shareholder! A stake of around 7% from what I last heard...a majority shareholder would have > 50%+1!

      How can you fudge numbers up like that - this is slashdot dammit!

      --
      Moderation: +4. Modded 70% Funny and 30% Overrated. 100% Saturated.
  2. Nothing to worry about by lyinhart · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Assuming Pixar's "competition" will continue to be such "gems" as Madagascar 2, Ice Age 2 or whatever Shrek sequel is coming down the pipeline, there's nothing to worry about. Now if John Lasseter leaves, then we might be able to talk about Pixar going downhill.

    --
    Freedom is drinking a beer in the park when you're supposed to be at work.
    1. Re:Nothing to worry about by piojo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Now if John Lasseter leaves, then we might be able to talk about Pixar going downhill.

      And that's not even a sure thing, considering how much he cares about mentoring younger directors.

      --
      A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
  3. Bullshit by piojo · · Score: 5, Informative

    The next three films are likely to be sequels? The article doesn't even make that claim. The person who wrote the summary likely thinks tha Pixar just "pops out" these films. In fact, they usually take about 4 years.

    --
    A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
  4. Re:well, the economy does suck by antiaktiv · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As far as safe bets go, a Pixar film is a safer bet than a sequel. Have they ever failed?

    The headline is wrong, by the way. There will be non-sequels in between.

  5. Baseless Speculation by jarbrewer · · Score: 5, Informative
    A quick google search of Pixar's production schedule might have told the poster, or even the editor, that 2 of Pixar's next 3 movies are in fact new franchises.

    Sigh.

  6. Flatly Untrue by Snowspinner · · Score: 5, Informative

    First of all, Pixar has two announced films not mentioned here - The Bear and the Bow and Newt - both of which are original properties. Bear and the Bow is slated to share 2011 with Cars 2, and Newt is set for 2012.

    Second of all, the suggestion that the "most likely" date for Monsters Inc 2 is 2012 is tenuous at best. The only time in the last decade Pixar has had a director do two films with only three years in between is when Brad Bird did Ratatouille three years after The Incredibles, and that was him coming on a film in mid-production. If Docter is directing it, it would be surprising to see it before 2013.

    This story, in other words, is nonsense - the only actual content to it is that there's a sequel to Monsters Inc.

    --
    Philip Sandifer's academic website
  7. Re:already happening by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Your numbers are swapped for Finding Nemo. Also the profits aren't as slim as they seem.. Finding Nemo made $864 million worldwide. Yeah their profits are falling (coincidence probably) but those are profits. If you're making money ahead of inflation then you're alive.

  8. Re:Blame Disney by Enderandrew · · Score: 5, Informative

    Disney isn't calling the shots. Part of the deal between Disney and Pixar was junking the low-quality Toy Story 3 that Disney had in production. Pixar said regardless of how much money was already invested in it, they wanted it thrown out the window. In turn, Pixar agreed to make their own version up to their standards. And you know what, the Toy Story 3 teaser definitely has Pixar charm. Disney sequels are terrible. All Pixar has done is CONSISTENTLY put out high quality films.

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
  9. Re:already happening by Kumiorava · · Score: 5, Informative

    Finding Nemo worldwide revenue $864 mil.
    Cars worldwide revenue $461 mil.
    Monsters, Inc worldwide revenue $525 mil.
    The Incredibles worldwide revenue $631 mil.
    Ratatouille worldwide revenue $621 mil.
    Wall-E worldwide revenue $534 mil.
    Up worldwide revenue (not launched internationally) 149 mil.

    I don't see Pixar being in trouble at all, this is very solid business and seems to me very predictable above $500mil. per movie business. All figures from wikipedia.

  10. Re:Good by shawb · · Score: 5, Funny

    When was the last time you got an Anthony Hopkins figure with a cheeseburger and fries?

    I'd expect an Anthony Hopkins figure to be served with some fava beans and a nice chianti.

    --
    I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
  11. Re:But the trend is there by Kopiok · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You clearly have not seen Up.

  12. Re:But the trend is there by gbarules2999 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Or Wall-E or Ratatouille, for that matter.